Assassination attempt on Trump (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    all this conspiracy stuff just cracks me up...
    if it was a conspiracy to eliminate Trump politically through whatever govt entity, FBI, CIA, SS etc, why would they use 20 year old with an AR from that far away? wouldn't it make since to use someone more experienced and have better equipment?
    but i guess that just shows you how idiotic the conspiracy people are.. idiots to the core..
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Do you still think the guy who tried to assassinate Trump was an American Patriot?
    Click to expand...
    he may have thought he was..
    let me use MAGA reasoning:
    maybe he was such a Patriot, he only attempted to assassinate Trump because he knew if he wounded but not killed Trump, he knew that it would help Trump politically and he was willing to die for that cause..

    Am i doing it right?
     
    Incumbent said:
    What does taking down “big pharma”, NIH, and FDA mean to you?
    Click to expand...
    There are many ways to do it. To start he could...

    Big pharma needs to stop sponsoring news shows and charging us $12,000 for a drug that you can get in Canada for $2,000. They need less influence on our government.

    The NIH needs to be reigned in and have much more oversight and gain of function needs to be permanently banned.

    He could replace the head of the FDA with someone who isn't so close to big pharma.

    The people who complain about Chevron Deference being overturned and saying these agencies will lose power but they don't ever mention how the head of many of these agencies come from the very companies that they are regulating.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    There are many ways to do it. To start he could...

    Big pharma needs to stop sponsoring news shows and charging us $12,000 for a drug that you can get in Canada for $2,000. They need less influence on our government.

    The NIH needs to be reigned in and have much more oversight and gain of function needs to be permanently banned.

    He could replace the head of the FDA with someone who isn't so close to big pharma.

    The people who complain about Chevron Deference being overturned and saying these agencies will lose power but they don't ever mention how the head of many of these agencies come from the very companies that they are regulating.
    Click to expand...

    So you support a stronger regulatory climate like I do, even if we might have disagreements about what that needs to involve.

    Prescription drug costs are a problem - I’ve experienced it first hand - and so I’m glad to see attention on that issue and government efforts to start taking that on.
     
    Incumbent said:
    So you support a stronger regulatory climate like I do, even if we might have disagreements about what that needs to involve.

    Prescription drug costs are a problem - I’ve experienced it first hand - and so I’m glad to see attention on that issue and government efforts to start taking that on.
    Click to expand...
    a president should really try to pass some sort of adorable care act to help people... na people will probably say it's unconstitutional....
     
    Incumbent said:
    So you support a stronger regulatory climate like I do, even if we might have disagreements about what that needs to involve.

    Prescription drug costs are a problem - I’ve experienced it first hand - and so I’m glad to see attention on that issue and government efforts to start taking that on.
    Click to expand...
    Yes I do support more regulations in certain areas and especially for big pharma.

    But regulations also don't need harm legitimate businesses who aren't trying to screw us like big pharma and many big companies do.
     
    el caliente said:
    I honestly don’t believe Trump is going to push Project 2025. I believe that some of his advisors and some of his supporters support Project 2025, however given the platform that was agreed upon yesterday, I don’t 2025 will get the traction that fear mongers feel it will.
    Click to expand...

    I honestly don't understand how educating voters about the detail of Project 2025, the people who put it together, their relationship and closeness to Trump, and the potential for the damage it could do to America if different parts of it were implemented, can be in any way considered "fear mongering". It wasn't Democrats who put that policy document together, it was top Trump advisors, many of who still wield significant power within his circle of influence. It's that both sides mindset you have that blinds you to some of these realities.

    el caliente said:
    I’m not voting for Trump (or Biden), so pardon me if I don’t care to dig deeper into the 2025 boogeyman.

    I also don’t care to engage further in the Hitler/Trump comparisons when the only parallel is their bombastic comportment.
    Click to expand...

    That's your choice, but I think turning a blind eye to it is a dangerous. Those aren't the only parallels, just the ones you wish to ignore. If you truly wished to understand it, there are plenty of factual resource by people who have deeply studied them to inform you.
     
    Last edited:
    SaintForLife said:
    There are many ways to do it. To start he could...

    Big pharma needs to stop sponsoring news shows and charging us $12,000 for a drug that you can get in Canada for $2,000. They need less influence on our government.

    The NIH needs to be reigned in and have much more oversight and gain of function needs to be permanently banned.

    He could replace the head of the FDA with someone who isn't so close to big pharma.

    The people who complain about Chevron Deference being overturned and saying these agencies will lose power but they don't ever mention how the head of many of these agencies come from the very companies that they are regulating.
    Click to expand...

    Those are good points, but as his last Administration proved, Trump has exactly zero interest or ability to make any of that happen. He's the slimiest thing in the 'swamp'.

    His choice to head the Department of Energy had NO IDEA what the damn thing even did. No clue that it's the organization tasked with tracking nuclear material worldwide.

    Simply destroying things, as RFK would do to the FDA is not a fix. It just leaves the public even more at the mercy of whatever industry was supposed to be regulated.
     
    SaintForLife said:
    Yes I do support more regulations in certain areas and especially for big pharma.

    But regulations also don't need harm legitimate businesses who aren't trying to screw us like big pharma and many big companies do.
    Click to expand...

    I can generally agree with this, though we’re possibly still viewing it with different outcomes. (Or maybe not.)

    I wouldn’t draw a line defined as legitimate (not entirely sure what that means). I want all businesses to be held to standards that protect workers, the environment, reinvest into wages and benefits, rather than syphon absurdly disproportionate amounts into the hands of a very few.

    Conflicts of interest, as you pointed out, are a frequent concern.
     


    CNN anchor Kate Bolduan was visibly stunned and desperately tried to combat Mills' statements.

    Mills made it *very* clear that he was simply examining all options for what may have happened.

    Let me say that again: Mills made it very clear that he was not asserting the incident was a setup but said it should be considered during an investigation.

    Cory Mills served in the U.S. Army as a member of the 82nd Airborne Division and Joint Special Operations Command.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom