*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Poopadoop]

Do you think Trump's policy position is a tough-call that he's made to counteract terrorists propensity to use their families as shields? Or do you think he's a racist killer who just wants to see some arab babies bleed?

Talk about a poorly framed question lol. Are those the only two options?

I think Trump is racist, yes. I think he doesn't value the lives of POC as much as he values white lives, yes. That is wholly consistent with the idea that it's ok to kill the family of terrorists.

And do the same thing with regard to the Seal. Does the guy deserve a fair trial or not?

Sure he deserves a fair trial. Where did you get the idea I thought he should be lynched?

And what "intervention" do you think Trump made improperly??

As outlined above, I suspect Trump tweeted after seeing the report on FN and taking it at face value. I doubt very much he fully informed himself on the details of the treatment Gallagher was receiving before he expressed his opinion. I doubt he asked the obvious questions such as 'what does the warden say?', which interestingly, doesn't seem to have been thought of by you or Fox either.

The fact that a tweet is not the same as 'intervening' is a fair point. I don't know what he's done since then, if he's followed up his words with action. But his tweet is interesting inasmuch as it's wholly consistent with the idea that he considers the lives of POC less important than those of white.

[TheSpoonald]

As outlined above, I suspect Trump tweeted after seeing the report on FN and taking it at face value.

The FN report that I linked came out AFTER Trump tweeted.

[Poopadoop]

The FN report that I linked came out AFTER Trump tweeted.

So what information do you believe Trump had? He's not exactly known for fully informing himself.

[TheSpoonald]

So what information do you believe Trump had? He's not exactly known for fully informing himself.

Intellectually vapid


Are you really asking me how the commander in chief stays informed of military affairs? Really?

[Poopadoop]

Intellectually vapid

Projection.

Are you really asking me how the commander in chief stays informed of military affairs? Really?

No I'm asking you what I asked you. What information do you believe Trump had when he came to his decision to intervene? Do you think the guy who doesn't like to read and prefers briefings with lots of pictures had a firm grasp on the complexities of the situation?

[TheSpoonald]

I think Trump is racist, yes. I think he doesn't value the lives of POC as much as he values white lives, yes. That is wholly consistent with the idea that it's ok to kill the family of terrorists.

Is screaming your racism on national TV consistent with the conclusion that he's a closet racist?

[TheSpoonald]

You really should be embarassed to be commenting this strongly on something you clearly know nothing about.

The fact that a tweet is not the same as 'intervening' is a fair point.

Finally some sense. But I already know this. Go tell Oskar.

I don't know what he's done since then,

Are you paying attention?? He hasn't done anything since then. He just tweeted about what he had already done, which is order the guy to be moved to less restrictive confinement.

if he's followed up his words with action.

He acted first.

But his tweet is interesting inasmuch as it's wholly consistent with the idea that he considers the lives of POC less important than those of white.

This is the most intellectually vapid thing you've said in a very long time. And that's saying something.

[Poopadoop]

This is the most intellectually vapid thing you've said in a very long time. And that's saying something.

Actually, saying ^^ is intellectually vapid.

Ironic isn't it?

[Poopadoop]

He acted first.

We know from recent history that his orders aren't always followed. I'm interested in whether he followed up on his orders to ensure they were followed, or if he 'changed his mind' again.

[TheSpoonald]

We know from recent history that his orders aren't always followed. I'm interested in whether he followed up on his orders to ensure they were followed, or if he 'changed his mind' again.

Intellectually vapid

Navy captains don't ignore orders from the CIC

[Poopadoop]

Intellectually vapid

Navy captains don't ignore orders from the CIC

You sure? Everyone else seems to when the CIC in question is Captain Retard.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I think he doesn't value the lives of POC as much as he values white lives, yes. That is wholly consistent with the idea that it's ok to kill the family of terrorists.

Is your "evidence" that Trump is a racist any stronger than FTR's evidence that you're a racist?
'Cause it really sounds like you just said terrorist means non-white.

Did you actually say that?
IDK... maybe... prob not... it's certainly a viable interpretation of that quote.
Maybe you just assume Trump is a racist who thinks that.

If he doesn't assume "terrorist" meant "non-white," then the racism is gone.

If you assume racism, you see it. If not, you don't.

[oskar]

Is your "evidence" that Trump is a racist any stronger than FTR's evidence that you're a racist?

https://youtu.be/HoVNLcXSQLw

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...386539008?s=20

[oskar]

It could not have been a DNC ad, because no network would air it. Fox News refused to air it because it was too racist for Fox News.

[TheSpoonald]

It could not have been a DNC ad, because no network would air it. Fox News refused to air it because it was too racist for Fox News.

No, it was too "racist" (your word not mine) for FN's advertisers. Not the same thing.

FN had plenty of outrage to display for Mr. Bracamontes.

Do you remember when the Dems were all about building a wall? Or did you just erase that from memory because ORANGE MAN BAD

[TheSpoonald]

ZOMG, Trump protected the constitutional rights of someone accused of doing something bad to a brown person.
So logically, that means Trump is a vehement racist who is solely committed to the supremacy of the aryan race.

Meanwhile in this Saturday's NYT........

[oskar]

I don't arbitrarily restrict the stats. We're talking about the US. I didn't include the christchurch shooter either. I'm being consistent.

[oskar]

Mocking the authoritarian leader of a colonial apartheid state is not necessarily anti-semitic unless he's being attacked for being jewish. Since I don't get the cartoon at all, I can't make a judgement.

[TheSpoonald]

Mocking the authoritarian leader of a colonial apartheid state is not necessarily anti-semitic unless he's being attacked for being jewish. Since I don't get the cartoon at all, I can't make a judgement.

That thing he's holding is a selfie-stick. I'm not sure I get the joke either. I also don't think the cartoon is racist. But I didn't think the Serena Williams cartoon was racist either. So at least I can claim consistency.

This one though is definitely racist
https://twitter.com/kishkushkay/stat...90507714113538

[TheSpoonald]

A wall or barrier in the right places makes sense. A wall in the middle of the desert is retarded.

Are you absolutely sure that no human trafficking or drug smuggling occurs there? You are positive that open desert is not a vulnerability at all, and has no potential to be a vulnerability in the future. You're sure of that?

[MadMojoMonkey]

Are you absolutely sure that no human trafficking or drug smuggling occurs there? You are positive that open desert is not a vulnerability at all, and has no potential to be a vulnerability in the future. You're sure of that?

That seems like a really low bar to set for the cost involved.
How else might the money be spent to address the same concerns?
Is a wall our best option?

[oskar]

Are you absolutely sure that no human trafficking or drug smuggling occurs there? You are positive that open desert is not a vulnerability at all, and has no potential to be a vulnerability in the future. You're sure of that?

This is something you'd have to ask the DEA, and they'll tell you that most drugs come through ports of entry. So you'd stop some drugs, but spending the money on better checks at ports of entry would be vastly superior solutions.

This is wrong. Again, you're conflating two talking points. Stop watching CNN. It's true there is less crime per capita among immigrant populations compared to native born US populations. That's it. You don't get to insert any additional words into that sentence. End of talking point.

Do you have any data that shows the frequency of criminal activity among illegal immigrant populations compared to native born populations? Do you have that data? Because it kinda pads your crime stats if you include a few million people who waited in line at the border, and went through the immigration process legally. We already know those are law abiding people. The wall isn't meant for them.

What do you think is wrong?
You're shifting goal posts. Trumps ad clearly implies that illegal immigrants murder americans and that is why you need a wall. No word about crime or economy.

[Poopadoop]

Is your "evidence" that Trump is a racist any stronger than FTR's evidence that you're a racist?
'Cause it really sounds like you just said terrorist means non-white.

Did you actually say that?
IDK... maybe... prob not... it's certainly a viable interpretation of that quote.
Maybe you just assume Trump is a racist who thinks that.

If he doesn't assume "terrorist" meant "non-white," then the racism is gone.

If you assume racism, you see it. If not, you don't.

You've missed the subtlely of my statement there.

I said in effect 'it's not disproving the notion that he's a racist'. Not the same as saying 'it proves he's a racist'.

And when he was talking about killing the families of 'terrorists' the conversation was about ISIS, who are undoubtedly almost exclusively POC. He has not suggested a similar treatment for the families of, say, right-wing terrorists in America. You can contest whether that's because they're American or whether it's because they're white I guess, as opposed to ISIS which are neither.