Why did my other thread get deleted, I wonder? Well, SOMEONE (I wont say who) claimed in the other thread that seems to have been deleted that Trump said he would use the military and National guard against his opponents. Let's see what was actually said, along with context. Please note bolded underlined portions, which we will discuss.
BARTIROMO: I'm just wondering if these outside agitators will start up onElection Day. Let's say you win, I mean let's remember, you've got 50,000 Chinese nationals in this country in the last couple of years, you have people on the terrorist watchlist, 350 in the last couple of years. You've got — like you said — 13,000 murderers and 15,000 rapists. What are you expecting? Joe Biden said he doesn't think it's going to be a peaceful Election Day.
TRUMP: Well, he doesn't have any idea what's happening in all fairness. He spends most of his day sleeping. I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within, not even the people that have come and… and destroying our country and, by the way, totally destroying our country. The towns and villages, they're being inundated. But I don't think they're the problem in terms of Election Day.I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical-left lunatics. And I think… and it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or if really necessary by the military, because they can't let that happen. [b][/b][/u][u]
The question is IMPORTANT context. (CAPS for emphasis) Notice a few things here.
a. The question was about agitators, not opponents. b. The question was about election day Trump will not have the power to use military or national guard on election day c. There was a mention of it possibly not being a peaceful election day, so contextually the question is asking about if Trump expects violent agitators or not. d. Trump never said "go after" or "round up" opponents. e. In fact, the word Opponent is is not in the text.
So Kamala lied again. 100 pinochios for her.[/u][u]
“I always say, we have two enemies,” Trump said, adding: “We have the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within, and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia and all these countries.”
He also suggested that the military could be called in to handle any unrest on Election Day from "radical left lunatics."
“They’re Marxists and communists and fascists, and they’re sick,” Trump added. “We have China, we have Russia, we have all these countries. If you have a smart president, they can all be handled. The more difficult are, you know, the Pelosis, these people, they’re so sick and they’re so evil,” Trump said. _______________________________________
“These are bad people. We have a lot of bad people. But when you look at ‘Shifty Schiff’ and some of the others, yeah, they are, to me, the enemy from within,” Trump said in an interview on Fox News’ “MediaBuzz” that aired Sunday.
Fox News’ Howard Kurtz gave Trump an opportunity to clarify — “He’s a political opponent of yours, but is he an enemy?” — to which Trump responded, “Of course he’s an enemy, he’s an enemy.”
“I think Nancy Pelosi is an enemy from within,” he said. “She was supposed to protect the Capitol.” He also falsely claimed that he “offered her 10,000 National Guard” and that the California Democrat “didn’t take them.”
Trump, in a separate interview on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” last week, had suggested using the military to handle what he called “the enemy from within” on Election Day. “I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within, not even the people that have come in and destroying our country.”
“We have some very bad people. We have some sick people. Radical-left lunatics,” Trump told host Maria Bartiromo in that interview, adding later, “I think it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.” ________________________________________
So now you want to try to parcel what part of the enemy within he was talking about and which parts of the enemy within he named by name he wasn't talking about? He labeled them all the enemy within and gave no distinction between the two. Some of the excuses people such as yourself try to make for the words that come from his own mouth would be hilarious if it weren't so damned sad.
When someone is speaking your own language a twisted view of a lame translation isn't needed.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Yes, the military or Guard could be called in to handle UNREST. Not Opponents. and the question beforehand was about violent agitators. SO violent unrest. Thanks for confirming my argument. And it is really bad exegesis to take more than one context and put them all together as if they are all the same context. He was not talking about Nancy Pelosi in the "military/national guard quote, unless you think Nancy is going to be out rioting on election day. (that would be a sight!)
Anyways, TRUMP will have zero power to use the military or National Guard on election day, so the entire claim is ludicrous.
He called all of them the enemy within. Now you have decided in your own mind which of those "enemies within " he was talking about and which ones he wasn't while he himself made no distinction between the two. That's nothing more than some translation you have created in your own mind.
The SCOTUS has determined that anything a president decides to do is legal as long as the can make the claim it was an official act of the president.
Zero power to use the military?
Quote
The President (without Congress's approval) cannot take actions that put the United States in a state of war – most obviously, military attacks on a foreign nation. But the clause does not bar presidential actions that do not put the United States in a state of war.
In the interview about using the military and national guard, two things are evident.
A. the context was election day. Trump has no power to use military on election day. B. The topic was about violent agitators. Apparently you think that Trump thinks that Pelosi, Waters, and other elderly politicians are going to go out and violently cause unrest. It creates this picture in my mind. https://live.staticflickr.com/6065/6120583180_f59067dd34_b.jpg
One thing is evident. He called even his democratic opponents "the enemy within". He then went on to say he would use the national guard and even the military if needed to round up "the enemy within". He made zero distinction. The problem is you keep creating some translation that he never even so much as hinted at which is creating the distorted pictures in your mind. We both know he called Pelosi and Shiff "the enemy within". We both know he said he would use the national guard and even the military to round up "the enemy within". Now can you show me anywhere he differentiated between the two? Where he clarifies which part of the enemy within he was referring to or not referring to?
If not what you are posting is some fantasy you have made up in your own mind. And you claim he is limiting it to election day. That's the very foundation of your fallacy.
Are you saying trump is too stupid to know he can't use the military if he isn't president? If so that speaks volumes in and of itself. Or does it mean he will do these things after he is sworn in as president? The answer to that one is only obvious. It's what his plans are if he is elected.
And just remember, you are trying to invent excuses to absolve a man of his very own, direct words. The same man who said Jan. 6th was "A day of love".
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
One thing is evident. He called even his democratic opponents "the enemy within". He then went on to say he would use the national guard and even the military if needed to round up "the enemy within". He made zero distinction. The problem is you keep creating some translation that he never even so much as hinted at which is creating the distorted pictures in your mind. We both know he called Pelosi and Shiff "the enemy within". We both know he said he would use the national guard and even the military to round up "the enemy within". Now can you show me anywhere he differentiated between the two? Where he clarifies which part of the enemy within he was referring to or not referring to?
If not what you are posting is some fantasy you have made up in your own mind. And you claim he is limiting it to election day. That's the very foundation of your fallacy.
Are you saying trump is too stupid to know he can't use the military if he isn't president? If so that speaks volumes in and of itself. Or does it mean he will do these things after he is sworn in as president? The answer to that one is only obvious. It's what his plans are if he is elected.
And just remember, you are trying to invent excuses to absolve a man of his very own, direct words. The same man who said Jan. 6th was "A day of love".
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
He called all of them the enemy within. Now you have decided in your own mind which of those "enemies within " he was talking about and which ones he wasn't while he himself made no distinction between the two. That's nothing more than some translation you have created in your own mind.
The SCOTUS has determined that anything a president decides to do is legal as long as the can make the claim it was an official act of the president.
Zero power to use the military?
Quote
The President (without Congress's approval) cannot take actions that put the United States in a state of war – most obviously, military attacks on a foreign nation. But the clause does not bar presidential actions that do not put the United States in a state of war.
BARTIROMO: I'm just wondering if these outside agitators will start up on Election Day. Let's say you win, I mean let's remember, you've got 50,000 Chinese nationals in this country in the last couple of years, you have people on the terrorist watchlist, 350 in the last couple of years. You've got — like you said — 13,000 murderers and 15,000 rapists. What are you expecting? Joe Biden said he doesn't think it's going to be a peaceful Election Day.
TRUMP: Well, he doesn't have any idea what's happening in all fairness. He spends most of his day sleeping. I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within, not even the people that have come and… and destroying our country and, by the way, totally destroying our country. The towns and villages, they're being inundated. But I don't think they're the problem in terms of Election Day. I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical-left lunatics. And I think… and it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or if really necessary by the military, because they can't let that happen.
Observations.
a. The question was about agitators
b. The question was about election day. Trump won’t have power to call the military on election day, because he won’t be prez yet.
c. The question was about violent agitators.
d. Trump never said “round up”
E. The word opponents was not used.
That’s 1 2/3 innings of strikes on you all. I’m going to keep track until we get to 9 innings of strikes, which shouldn’t take long.
I'm going to guarantee[size:14pt][/size]that no one can copy and paste the quote from Trump where he said that with link. Not someone claiming he said it, his actual words. Good luck.
I'm going to guarantee[size:14pt][/size]that no one can copy and paste the quote from Trump where he said that with link. Not someone claiming he said it, his actual words. Good luck.
Good luck with that. It did not happen, but it is a terrible line of reasoning. It’s is the same logic that “Don the Con” never called for an insurrection.. But it’s going to be wild, and you are going to have to fight like hell for you country are just words and not a call to action…
Hahahaha...you don't know WHO he was calling to action!!!! Where's the quote where he said that he's going to use the military against opponents again? I didnt see it in your post. HE clearly defined what he meant by "fight" when he said "you have to get your people to fight and if they don't fight, you primary the $#%% out of them."
Who do you primary? POLITICIANS. Where? At the BALLOT BOX. When? At the next primary election. Is it violence? No it's fighting at the ballot box. What kind of insurrectionist talks about fighting at the ballot box at the next election.
HE clearly defined what he meant by "fight" when he said "you have to get your people to fight and if they don't fight, you primary the $#%% out of them."
Who do you primary? POLITICIANS. Where? At the BALLOT BOX. When? At the next primary election. Is it violence? No it's fighting at the ballot box. What kind of insurrectionist talks about fighting at the ballot box at the next election. rofl[b][/b][color:#FF0000][/color]
So Mark Esper was on NPR on Friday when I was on my way to work and he addressed this
Would Donald Trump really use the military for retribution against perceived political rival? October 25, 20247:26 AM ET Heard on Morning Edition
7-Minute Listen Download Transcript NPR's A Martinez talks to Mark Esper, a Trump-era defense secretary, about how Donald Trump might use the military if he wins the upcoming election. For example to round up and deport migrants.
A MARTÍNEZ, HOST:
A number of former aides to President Trump worry about how he might use the military if he's reelected. That's because he's repeatedly said things like what he told Fox's Maria Bartiromo earlier this month.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
DONALD TRUMP: I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they're the - and it should be very easily handled by - if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military.
MARTÍNEZ: During the summer of 2020, Trump wanted to use active-duty troops to quell Black Lives Matter demonstrations. His then-defense secretary, Mark Esper, disagreed with him. Here's Esper speaking at the Pentagon that June.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
MARK ESPER: The option to use active-duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort and only in the most urgent and dire of situations. We are not in one of those situations now.
MARTÍNEZ: Esper says he stayed on the job as long as he could, until Trump fired him that November. I spoke to the former defense secretary yesterday, and I asked him about how he remembers his interactions with Trump during those turbulent months of 2020.
We understand that after you said that, Mark Meadows called and screamed at you, I mean, really laid into you - expletives flying - and then at the White House, Donald Trump did the same thing. I mean, what was going on in your head when that was happening, when you were getting that kind of response to what you said?
ESPER: I'd have to go back into my memoir and see exactly how I wrote it. And what I said at the Pentagon, which I think is what you're referring to, is I stood before the American public at the podium and said that there is no need for American troops unless something like in the most urgent and dire of circumstances - right? - because we have deployed federal troops in the past in certain situations at the request of the governors, though. You think about the times of segregation. But in this circumstance, when the discussion within the Oval Office two days earlier was about using active-duty troops to put down protests, peaceful protests, I thought that clearly crossed a line.
And to me, that was the issue at hand, and that's why I felt because, as I wrote in my memoir, over the preceding two days, tensions continued to escalate in the country. More protests were breaking out in cities and, of course, now there was this shadow of the United States military being deployed. And I felt the need a day and a half later on the morning of June 3, I believe, to go out publicly and say I do not support invocation of the Insurrection Act.
MARTÍNEZ: Now, I was listening to an interview that you did a few years ago with my colleague, Michel Martin, and you said that when Donald Trump asked, why can't you just shoot them in the leg, that it was a suggestion in the form of a question. That's how you describe it. Why do you think he didn't just make it an actual presidential order?
ESPER: That tended to be his style, was to kind of talk in terms of suggestions or, wouldn't it be great if somebody did this, or - he was reluctant to give orders for some reason. I think he was trying to take the temperature of the audience to see if there would be receptivity. And, you know, when he said that, we were all stunned, particularly General Mark Milley and myself, who were - he was the ones we were principally talking to at that point in time.
MARTÍNEZ: Secretary, what do you think would have happened if Donald Trump had, indeed, made that an order?
ESPER: Well, in this case, to deploy paratroopers into the streets of Washington, D.C., the worst of the worst would be that you would see active-duty troops in the streets. Again, in the worst-case scenario, they would be armed. And in the worst-case scenario, like we saw at Kent State, they would fire their weapons. And I can say that with some credibility because I was a paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne stationed in Europe. I understand the military ethic. I understand the nature of the Army. And I understand our history as well.
And to me, there were a number of really bad outcomes, not least of which what would happen on the scene to peaceful protesters or even protesters who weren't peaceful but who were violent. You had that immediate negative of people getting shot, possibly killed and what that means. You obviously would have a crisis within the government given the fact that active-duty troops were deployed in the streets of Washington, D.C.
MARTÍNEZ: You mentioned maybe a situation where it's urgent and dire. What would that mean? Give us a picture of what that would look like, where an urgent and dire situation would call for this.
ESPER: Well, you could look back through our history, or you could just imagine situations. I mean, the Insurrection Act was about putting down insurrections or rebellions. So if you really literally had an armed rebellion that neither law enforcement - and this is how I thought through the process - law enforcement, either local or state or federal law enforcement or the National Guard couldn't put down or control, that's when there is a role for active-duty troops in that scenario.
MARTÍNEZ: In 1968, Black service members refused to arrest people at the Chicago Democratic National Convention. Five dozen service members from Fort Hood were court-martialed. My colleague Tom Bowman talked to a retired senior U.S. official who said that if they - you - that if an administration use active military to deport migrants, that it could break the military. Secretary, do you see a similar scenario that you would be concerned about if that was something that an administration wanted to do when it comes to migrants?
ESPER: I don't believe that the active-duty military can be used to round up illegal persons in the country and deport them, if you will. I think it violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which basically restricts the U.S. military, the active-duty military, from performing policing actions within the United States. And so there are some exceptions here and there, but they're very specific. So I don't believe that authority exists. But I'm not a lawyer, and I think it's something that needs to be looked at.
MARTÍNEZ: How concerned are you that if Donald Trump were to have a second administration, that he would not surround himself with people like you that would push back, that he would have people that would encourage him to act out on these impulses, these inclinations, as you call them?
ESPER: My concern has always been in a second term that Trump and those around him learned the lesson that you have to get the right people in, people who will be loyal to you and what you want to do in your policies, people who aren't necessarily loyal to the Constitution, but to the president. And it's a big distinction. It's certainly a significant one when it comes to the oath of office to the Constitution that we all swear, but particularly the military.
MARTÍNEZ: Secretary, do you agree with John Kelly, Trump's former chief of staff and a former Marine general, who has said that Trump meets the definition of a fascist and, quote, "prefers the dictator approach to government"?
ESPER: You know, I've said what's - the terrible thing that's happened over the last several years is the public discourse has gotten too angry, too mean. There's too much name-calling, ad hominem attacks, etc., etc. So I'm not going to put labels on this right now. But what I said the other day was this - if you go open up the dictionary and look at how fascism or a fascist is described. There are certain elements. And as you pick through that, you can't help but see where John Kelly's coming from and agree with some of the descriptions. And so I think each person should make their own judgment. I'm concerned, and I've put my caution out there to others as a warning.
MARTÍNEZ: That's former Defense Secretary Mark Esper. Secretary, thank you.
I think the bigger problem are the people from within. We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they're the - and it should be very easily handled by - if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military.
God help you man. Do you not read. This quote was in reply to violent agitators on Election Day. Not opponents when Trump is president. Do you really think that Trump will have the power to use the military and National guard on election day While Biden is still president? God help you man.
This is what Kamala was quoting too, and she was lying. Deceptively taking things out of context.
I doubt if Trump wanted to deploy guard or militaryfor peaceful protests.
More likely for Antifa and other Thugs who burned down cities, looted stores, destroyed business, murdered people, took over police stations, shot police, stabbed police with umbrellas, threw paint on old woman, mob attacked a Latin marine, white antifa destroying black businesses. 😡
All of this was called peaceful, and one idiot said “protests are not meant to be peaceful.
Regardless, you have not provided a quote where Trump would use military against opponents. Only a quote where he said military or guards could take care of violent agitators ON ELECTION DAY.
And Trump would Not be the one to do that, as he would not be president on election day, Biden would be president
[quote] In this story, we'll explore the full context of Trump's remarks and lay out the word-for-word transcript that shows the somewhat context-free way his comments were highlighted in headlines from some news organizations.[https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/01/24/trump-dictator-day-one//quote]
…explore the FULL Context and the CONTEXT-FREE manner in which his comments were handled. 😮
Are you saying trump is too stupid to know he can't use the military if he isn't president? If so that speaks volumes in and of itself. Or does it mean he will do these things after he is sworn in as president? The answer to that one is only obvious. It's what his plans are if he is elected.
And just remember, you are trying to invent excuses to absolve a man of his very own, direct words. The same man who said Jan. 6th was "A day of love".
He called all of them the enemy within. Now you have decided in your own mind which of those "enemies within " he was talking about and which ones he wasn't while he himself made no distinction between the two. That's nothing more than some translation you have created in your own mind.
Originally Posted by Stiffarm
Man, you really need to read. He won’t be president on election day, buddy🤣
Man you need to learn to read. I already answered that part of your so called point.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
“I always say, we have two enemies,” Trump said, adding: “We have the outside enemy, and then we have the enemy from within, and the enemy from within, in my opinion, is more dangerous than China, Russia and all these countries.”
He also suggested that the military could be called in to handle any unrest on Election Day from "radical left lunatics."
“They’re Marxists and communists and fascists, and they’re sick,” Trump added. “We have China, we have Russia, we have all these countries. If you have a smart president, they can all be handled. The more difficult are, you know, the Pelosis, these people, they’re so sick and they’re so evil,” Trump said. _______________________________________
“These are bad people. We have a lot of bad people. But when you look at ‘Shifty Schiff’ and some of the others, yeah, they are, to me, the enemy from within,” Trump said in an interview on Fox News’ “MediaBuzz” that aired Sunday.
Fox News’ Howard Kurtz gave Trump an opportunity to clarify — “He’s a political opponent of yours, but is he an enemy?” — to which Trump responded, “Of course he’s an enemy, he’s an enemy.”
“I think Nancy Pelosi is an enemy from within,” he said. “She was supposed to protect the Capitol.” He also falsely claimed that he “offered her 10,000 National Guard” and that the California Democrat “didn’t take them.”
Trump, in a separate interview on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” last week, had suggested using the military to handle what he called “the enemy from within” on Election Day. “I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within, not even the people that have come in and destroying our country.”
“We have some very bad people. We have some sick people. Radical-left lunatics,” Trump told host Maria Bartiromo in that interview, adding later, “I think it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.” ________________________________________
So now you want to try to parcel what part of the enemy within he was talking about and which parts of the enemy within he named by name he wasn't talking about? He labeled them all the enemy within and gave no distinction between the two. Some of the excuses people such as yourself try to make for the words that come from his own mouth would be hilarious if it weren't so damned sad.
When someone is speaking your own language a twisted view of a lame translation isn't needed.
Stff. you really need to learn to read.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Already answered in other thread. The answer is no. But my goal and aim is not to try to get you to vote for Trump, My goal is aim Inform you about what the other side does so that if and when Kamala does win, which in my opinion is likely, you can hold the Dems and media accountable for their actions too. Don’t let them lie like this. Demand the truth. Primary the liars. Boycott media that has a record of lying. Fact check by reading actual transcripts.
It sounds like you Admit the Democrats have told lies. My point is some of them have been egregious lies and they need to be held accountable when they do these things
Again, My goal is not for you to vote for Trump. Positive y’all have your mind already made up. But you need to be reminded of these things so that you do not let them continue to use lies to manipulate and exploit people in the future.
Let me know when they're convicted on 34 felony counts. Let me know when a jury finds they committed sexual assault. Let me know when their crooked charity is closed and they have to pay restitution. Let me know when their sham university is shuttered and they have to pat restitution to their former students.
It looks like you need to be reminded of some things too. You're trying to compare J walking to robbing, cheating and assaulting people.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
See the vid two posts up? Look at all the Dems questioning a valid election and causing doubt about the election process. 😮😮😮
We aren't talking about "questioning the election". That's never what any of this has been about until you just tried a bait and switch pivot. We're talking about using illegal means to try to overturn an election. What official actions did they take to try and stop the certification of the election? Did they try to appoint fake electors in states that trump won and allow their votes in congress? Did any of them try to pressure state election officials to overturn the results of their elections? Did people use violence to try and prevent congress from certifying the election?
Your false equivalency only works on fools.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Already answered in other thread. The answer is no. But my goal and aim is not to try to get you to vote for Trump, My goal is aim Inform you about what the other side does so that if and when Kamala does win, which in my opinion is likely, you can hold the Dems and media accountable for their actions too. Don’t let them lie like this. Demand the truth. Primary the liars. Boycott media that has a record of lying. Fact check by reading actual transcripts.
It sounds like you Admit the Democrats have told lies. My point is some of them have been egregious lies and they need to be held accountable when they do these things
Again, My goal is not for you to vote for Trump. Positive y’all have your mind already made up. But you need to be reminded of these things so that you do not let them continue to use lies to manipulate and exploit people in the future.
So Trump did not speak the truth when made the statement. Most would consider that a lie.
I did not ask for nor do I need any help with me making my decisions. It is not a D or R thing. It is a personal thing. I don't rely on political parties to state the truth - far from that. I have and always held both parties in disregard. Personally, and before Trump, I always considered politics "The artful art of lying" Trump changed my opinion and the "artful" went away from the "art". So get a clue, both political parties can lie, (or shade the truth) and that is why it is called politics. It is my opinion that it is a false equivalency to lean on the tired trope of both parties do it, when the R's have gone out of control with Trump and January 6th was the cherry on top of the crap show.
I will say media is just as much to blame, because creating emotion drives ratings. See Rush, Fox News, MSNBC etc. That is why it is appropriate to obtain news from more than one source or understand the bias that you are watching.
