93
Republican candidate Nikki Haley was targeted in second swatting attempt
(www.reuters.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2024
93 points (95.1% liked)
politics
19104 readers
3570 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Where in the world did I say someone should be judged?
Are you suggesting that Trump hasn't explicitly endorsed violence?
Did you forget that his supporters tried to hang Mike Pence? This is a pattern, and eventually the one trying desperately not to see the pattern is the one going out on a limb.
You're taking something a Trump voter did and using that action to judge Trump. This is, in general, not something that I endorse unless the person being followed (Trump in this case) encourages the behavior. Although Trump has encouraged violence in the past, I'm not sure if he's extended that encouragement to Haley? I don't follow this that closely. I suppose it's valid to blame him for generally encouraging violent actions, though... one more immoral act for the pile!
I'm not. I'm saying the Party should stop shoveling his shit, because he's shown time and time again that as soon as you turn against him, his minions will feel compelled to eliminate you.
Like this Senator, members of Congress and law enforcement, these journalists, Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris, Mike Pence, this Congresswoman, this other Congresswoman, the first Congresswoman again and also Obama, one more Congresswoman, members of Congress from California, Michigan, and New Jersey, a college professor, multiple members of Congress, this Congressman, a Senator and that same Congressman, GOP election officials, this Congresswoman, this Congressman, this District Attorney, these judges, this other District Attorney, this other judge, this other judge, and so on ad nauseum...
Trump literally said, "IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I'M COMING AFTER YOU!"
In June of 2023, Trump shared what he claimed to be Barack Obama’s home address on Truth Social. Hours later, a man armed with two guns and 400 rounds of ammo was arrested while seeking out ways to breach Obama’s private residence.
What more evidence do you need?
Um....WHAT?? So a mob boss gives orders for his crew to murder dozens of members of a rival family, but because he hasn't asked them specifically to murder the 25-year old nephew, we shouldn't make the connection to the boss when the nephew's body suddenly shows up in a canal?
You missed my point entirely. I'm not defending Rump. I'm saying we should use the things he's actually done-- like those you listed-- as our ammunition.
Which I just did. He doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt in Haley's circumstance, because in short order I'll be able to add "man arrested and charged for swatting Presidential candidate" to the list.
That's not what you did, but whatever. I'm not going to waste both of our time arguing about this.
The Republican Party should distance themselves from a man who clearly has a dangerous following and who has shown no scruples in encouraging them to embrace violence.
Anything else you're claiming I'm saying, or that you're finding between the lines, is a misrepresentation of what I'm actually writing in plain English.
Now that I agree with.
It's literally a paraphrase of the first comment I wrote in this thread.
Look we don't really need a devil's advocate for a guy that makes biblical Satan seem pretty chill. I get you like being contrarian but there's better places to put that energy than the flaming shit pile that is Trump and his rabid followers.
I'm not doing this to defend Trump, I'm doing it to ensure our side is bulletproof from any accusations of mischaracterization, as good practice. We have plenty of ammunition to use, and we should use it. We don't need to make any stretches to win.
They don't fucking care how bulletproof our arguments are. In this thread, you have accomplished nothing but to piss off everybody you claim to be allied with. Are you proud of yourself?
I'm aware that they don't care. We should still care, because if we intend to stand for the truth then we should make good on that promise.
Check my post history, I'm not pretending. I don't really care if I make people a little annoyed, because my goal is to ensure any arguments they make are consistent, which is basically guaranteed to make some people mad.
I mean no not really, this thread was a disaster. My argument was poorly chosen and I don't think most people got the point even if it hadn't been. We did get a massive list of Trump's minions attacking people out of it at least, but that's not really on me.