“I just hope we get fair treatment,” Trump said at an Iowa rally Friday. “Because if we don’t, our country’s in big, big trouble. Does everybody understand what I’m saying?”
That's the part right there. We say he says the quiet part out loud, but he doesn't. He says what used to be the quiet part out loud. Now the "quiet part" is calling for an outright government coup. We thought it was hyperbole prior to 1/6 and it wasn't. He's saying worse now.
Yeah, the "Does everybody understand what I’m saying?" part is a dog whistle and he's not even subtle about it. It's deliberately inserted to make it clear that the prior statement was a threat, and to encourage his supporters to carry out that threat if it comes to it.
Remember what he said ~~on 1/6?~~ to the proud boys at a debate? "Stand back and Standby"
stand back and stand by was in a debate.
I looked it up and you're right, but he says shit like this so often it's difficult to keep it straight anymore.
Who thought it was hyperbole?
He's projecting again. Liberals protest by blocking highways. MAGAs protest by threatening public officials directly, storming their offices and stealing their laptops.
Was the Canada truck blockage caused by liberals? Thought for sure that was magats. Also Operation gridlock was trump shits too.
The Canada convoy crap was definitely degenerate Canadian wannabe magats
i'm only interested in which method is more effective. whichever one that is is the one the good guys need to use.
Hey I was just checking through all the history books, and wouldn't you know it, the good guy always wins.. Crazy how often it works out that way.
my point exactly
Supreme Court rules that Colorado's decision is upheld, more states can follow through with their own bans towards Trump.
Supreme Court rules that Colorado's decision must be overturned, it sets a precedent for federal regulation of state election processes (which red states have been the most resistant towards).
I'm not counting on the Supreme Court not finding some way to fuck everything up, but the decision could be a win-win. Kick Trump off the ballot, or kickstart federal election reform.
Supreme Court: Consitution doesn't have anything to do with primaries. You could run Airbud in a primary and he could win it - but he would be ineligible for the general. Come back after the primaries and we will rule on Trump's eligibility in like March of 25.
You forgot option C: Supreme Court rules that Colorado's decision must be overturned, and Republicans spend the year roadblocking everything with extreme prejudice until the election. That's how they got 3 Supreme Court Judge picks while blocking Democrats from picking.
That's option two, the sheep will cry bloody murder regardless.
Supreme Court somehow tortures logic to say trump gets whatever he wants, everybody else can fuck off.
What the SC will decide is that every state has the right to run their elections. Trump will get banned from states that have laws preventing ineligible candidates from appearing on the ballot, and Red states remove Biden from their ballots because they are regressive shit heads.
I'm surprised they even want anything to do with this. I don't there is a decision they can make that won't piss off half the country no matter what.
If they decide states have a right to control who can be banned from running in an election, then there is a clear pathway for states to ban anyone who does not align with their views from being on a ballet - See: Missouri Secretary of State stating Biden will be banned if the bans against Trump stand. Tit for tat becomes the standard.
Or if the decision is to say states don't have the right to ban a obviously evil candidate, then there is no pathway to prevent evil from winning.
Or if they say this ONLY applies to Trump, then evil wins again and open violence becomes a very real risk.
Demented rapist who smells like shit drives clicks, says corporate sewer media
Your right, we should ignore him and just let him get away with it.
Can you hear the dog whistle?
"Does everybody understand what I'm saying?"
It was so subtle.
"lock and load."
It makes sense that Trump is invoking Bobby Knight here. Knight met the main criteria to be spoken of favorably by Trump: he supported Trump in the 2016 election.
Bobby Knight was a one of the all-time great college basketball coaches. He was a genius. He also valued academics, and as I recall all of his teams had a high graduation rate. But he said stupid shit all the time and was verbally (and physically) abusive to his players (and everyone else, even his friends). He once was so upset at a call fhat he threw a chair on the court during a game. There is a litany of other abuses o his wiki page, but this one stands out for me, because it was just a passing comment that sheds some light on how he thought:
In an April 1988 interview with Connie Chung, when discusssing an Indiana basketball game in which he felt the referees were making poor calls against the Hoosiers, Knight said, "I think that if rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy it." In response, women's groups nationwide were outraged by Knight's comments.
Bobby Knight is the perfect example of a leader from the 70s and 80s whose personality simply wouldn't be tolerated today without major changes in their philosophy. I bet Donald Trump thinks that it's a shame that his life is controversial at all, but he is just one of a long line of abusive people who got a pass because they were perceived as tough leaders.
This guy got fired for physically assaulting a student athlete on tape. His privilege kept him out of jail. Fuck the both of them. They’re criminals.
No, he got put on "double-secret probation" for assaulting his player on tape. He got fired for grabbing the arm of a random student who "disrespected" him by calling him "Knight" and not "Coach Knight", lecturing him on respect.
He held grudges, too.
In a March 2017 interview on The Dan Patrick Show, Knight stated that he had no interest in ever returning to Indiana. When host Dan Patrick commented that most of the administration that had fired Knight seventeen years earlier were no longer there, Knight said, "I hope they're all dead."
Knight died this past November.
I stand corrected as he was worse than I described.
More terrorist talk
“Because if we don’t, our country’s in big, big trouble. Does everybody understand what I’m saying?”
We know exactly what he's saying. 1/6 was our beer hall putsche and we need to start talking his threats seriously. It was too close for comfort last time and they won't fuck it up again.
“That puts pressure on people to do the wrong thing. What they’re doing is no different than Bobby Knight,” he continued, referring to the legendary college basketball coach famous for raucous arguments with referees.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
The only one in trouble is Trump. Cya later dipshit!
I want him gone too but we both know it ain’t that simple.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former President Trump warned Friday that there will be “big trouble” if the Supreme Court does not rule in his favor on his eligibility for the 2024 presidential ballot.
The Supreme Court is set to hear the Colorado case after the state’s Supreme Court determined last month that Trump should not be on the primary ballot due to his involvement in the Jan. 6 insurrection.
Trump also complained of Democrats casting doubt on the court because Trump appointed three of its justices, claiming that they are attempting to put undue political pressure on the court’s decisions.
What they’re doing is no different than Bobby Knight,” he continued, referring to the legendary college basketball coach famous for raucous arguments with referees.
The Colorado case argues that Trump’s actions surrounding the Jan. 6 Capitol riots fall under the 14th Amendment’s “insurrection clause,” which disqualifies those who have engaged or assisted in insurrection against the country from holding office.
Any Supreme Court decision will likely also put to bed the issue in other states.
The original article contains 299 words, the summary contains 171 words. Saved 43%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
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