225
Someone do the same to Trump on that platform and see how that goes.
The image won't fit though.
Maybe a windowless van like many of his followers?
Slams
Ok, it's official now. The people complaining about the media using the word "slams" now annoy me more than when the media uses the word "slams". They have been using it this way long enough that you all know what they mean now. Just go with it. You'll be happier.
You think "slams" is bad ...try "claps back"
Whatever happened to the word "criticize?"
Clap back always reminds me of butt cheeks clapping together.
Feck off.
Surely secret service will be paying a visit and handling this clear threat to the sitting president.
Surely
All Trump did was share a photo, if you want to blame someone, blame the people producing it and the guy who put it on his truck.
Google "Biden tailgate wrap", there are a bunch, $50 to $70.
I normally agree with you but in this case I don't think we can ignore sharing such imagery. Yes, hold the producers accountable. Also hold those accountable who are popularizing it.
Oh, we definitely shouldn't ignore it, but the perps are the people producing and using it, not Trump for sharing it.
When Trump promotes this imagery, it is explicitly to incite somebody in his Cadre of cultish followers to act on it. All it takes is just one to act on it. It's textbook stochastic terrorism.
I think they're both deserving of blame - the producers deserve the lion's share but Trump is amplifying the message. In the pretrump world a politician would get a load of shit for misusing their platform like that.
Wait what? If Trump walks down 5th avenue and shoots someone, should we blame the gun manufacturer?
Sharing a picture someone else took is not illegal.
"All the shooter did was pull the trigger. If you want to blame someone, blame the ammunition producers and the individual that sold it to them."
In this case, Trump is not the shooter. He's sharing a picture of the shooter.
A famously not illegal form of protected speech (it should be illegal but it isn't)... which doesn't fit this scenario since the violence is very clearly targeted at Biden and not at all vague.
Wrong again. The implication is that Trump is sharing a picture in support of the shooter.
It's dangerous and despicable.
How fucking stupid you are being.
Did Trump produce the image? Well, no.
Did Trump photograph the image? No.
Did Trump put the image on his vehicle? No.
He shared an image someone else sent him. That's not the same thing at all.
Should the folks making it and putting it on their trucks get a talking to? Yeah, probably.
This is just the Trump equivalent of senile granddad "Fw: fw: fw: fw: fw: fw: fw: re: re: re: I LOLD"
Senile grandad doesn't have a cult following who have already demonstrated their willingness to commit violent acts for him.
While true, that doesn't make Trump responsible for the image.
I didn't say he is.
But this is absolutely a "meddlesome priest" situation and I doubt you'd argue that Henry was innocent in that case.
No. No it’s not.
I am aware of the term, in THIS case, the image and sentiment pre-dates Trump's involvement.
No doubt he's EXPLOITING it, but he didn't CREATE it.
All Kathy Griffith did was go on TV and express her feelings.
Do you see how the pot works now kettle?
Griffin actively held up a mock severed head herself, again, a first party action. Completely different.
You're confusing the actions of the truck owner with those of Trump.
No. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of holding people accountable.
Oh, I definitely think the people producing the wrap and the individual truck owner should be held accountable, just like Griffin was.
What people are arguing here is the people who re-tweeted that tweet should be held just as accountable as Griffin which is insane.
Is it protected by whatever Freedom of Speech amendment ?
this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
225 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19118 readers
2369 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