Pictured: Gianforte seen here at a rally and not, strangely, in prison. |
Above: the President, usually the source of threats, seen here, calling for unity. |
"...I just want to tell you that in these times, we have to unify, we have to come together and send one, very clear, strong, unmistakeable message: that acts or threats of political violence of any kind have no place in the United States of America..."
-President Trump denouncing
threats of political viola-really?
Finally, the Administration can demand an investigation of a crime the President didn't commit himself. |
"This egregious conduct is abhorrent to everything we hold dear and sacred as Americans. We are extremely angry, upset, unhappy about what we witnessed the morning, and we will get to the bottom of it."
-President Trump, something of an
expert on things we find abhorrent
Anyway, first of all, and understand I'm swallowing some bile here, yes, that is what a person should say in a situation like this. Cool, so now, that that's out of the way, when did he start using the royal 'we?' Also, angry upset and unhappy are kind of the same thing. But that aside, the other day, Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska suggested that Trump was just being 'playful' when he praised Gianforte's assault of reporter Ben Jacobs, and maybe he was. The problem here is that a lot of people who support Trump are goons.
Speaking of violent goons, Alex Jones and Ann Coulter have already started in with broad and unfounded assertions that the entire thing is a left-wing smear job to make Trump-fans look like the kind of rage-filled extremists who might resort to violence and I'm not sure that's fair. Sure, people on both sides have gone too far at times, but the left doesn't actively court neo-nazis and Obama never called the press an enemy of the people, so maybe they should shut up?
Look, it's not that I don't appreciate the call for unity and the strong (-ish) denouncement of these attempted attacks it's just that I wonder if maybe the time to speak out against political intimidation and terrorism would have been before the pipe-bombings and wandering gangs of Proud Boys?
expert on things we find abhorrent
Huh...egregious conduct...acts or threats...I wonder why neither the President nor anyone else from the administration is referring to this as a thwarted terrorist attack?
"The President is unwilling to characterize these acts as terrorism until we can determine whether or not those responsible are white."
-Sarah Huckabee Sanders
(actual quote)*
|
On the one hand he came out against trying to murder Democrats...on the other hand, what does he want a cookie? |
Just...goons. And I don't know if that's rude or unproductive to say but for real: an unacceptable number of people who support Donald Trump are actual white supremacists who attack people in the street. And I don't think it's divisive to call them violent, ignorant, racist goons. I think it's just observation.
What I'm suggesting is that if there are white supremacists marching in the street in support of the guy you voted for, it's probably time to take a long, hard look at your decisions. |
If the MAGA hat fits, right guys? |
Look, it's not that I don't appreciate the call for unity and the strong (-ish) denouncement of these attempted attacks it's just that I wonder if maybe the time to speak out against political intimidation and terrorism would have been before the pipe-bombings and wandering gangs of Proud Boys?
No comments:
Post a Comment