“In recent months, former Trump supporters, such as Tucker Carlson, have suggested the FBI was involved in the Butler attack. Joe Kent, the former US National Counterterrorism Center director who resigned over the Iran war, used an interview with Carlson to raise his own doubts, including claiming – without evidence – that investigations into the Butler shooting were shut down prematurely,” Cumming wrote. “Some prominent Right-wing accounts have suggested that Saturday’s incident may have been staged, too, possibly in order to facilitate Trump’s ballroom.”

He added, “Despite the rapid destruction of the old building, the new facility has run into trouble recently. In March, Judge Richard Leon temporarily halted construction, upholding a complaint by the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) that Trump’s planned improvements required congressional approval. Work has resumed after an appeal, but is only allowed to continue until another hearing — due to take place on June 5 — is held.”

Indeed, lending credibility to these conspiracy theories, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) posted shortly after the shooting, “I'm dropping a bill tomorrow. Let's build the Ballroom.” Similarly Senator John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who often crosses over to support Republicans, likewise posted that critics of the ballroom have “Trump Derangement Syndrome” (a term used to almost exclusively deflect from trump's relationship with Epstein and his cover up of the Epstein list)

As Cumming reported, skeptics of the assassination attempt point to reactions like these as evidence that the whole thing was planned to help Trump advance his agenda.

“Guy. It was staged.” political commentator Tom Santos posted on Twitter. “We’re not stupid. Well, not all of us anyway. They’ve figured out the only thing that shifts public opinion is the idea of an assassination attempt. There are going to be many fake claims at pivotal political moments, for the rest of his term. Bookmark this. It’s near certain.”

The influential activist Beks wrote on twitter, by contrast, that the proof the whole thing was staged was that the “grifters got their marching orders,” quoting social media posts from conservative activists Tom Fitton, Jack Posobiec, Libs of TikTok and Wall Street Mav urging the ballroom to be built.

“The more that right wingers talk about the ballroom, the more it's going to seem staged to many people,” commentator David Pakman posted on twitter,. “Jumping from ‘security should have been better in the lobby' to 'build Trump’s scam bribe ballroom’ is just ridiculous.”

By contrast novelist Joyce Carol Oates cast doubt on the possibility of the ballroom shooting being staged… although she said she thinks one of the other supposed attempts on his life was not genuine.

“Though I think it is highly possible that exceedingly awkward Butler PA was staged, I don't think that last night's D.C. shooting was staged,” Oates posted on twitter,. “... For one thing, there was no bravado photo-op for [Trump], so no image to play on TV; nor was the shooter killed, the usual protocol for a staged incident. in addition, the shooter got nowhere near [Trump], so no dramatic pay-off. Just a chaotic, unglamorous scene of some panicked people running [and] others remaining behind, like Fetterman, intent upon their meals.”

Perhaps summing up one point on which the “staged” and “not staged” crowds can agree, one Democratic strategist observed that the overall conversation speaks to deep distrust about Trump’s honesty and that of his top officials.

“The sad reality is most people just don’t care if that half-assed ‘attempted shooting’ was staged or real,” wrote Democratic strategist Jon Cooper on twitter,. “Trump lies constantly about everything, calls anything he dislikes ‘fake news,’ and his administration can’t be trusted. Trump brought this credibility collapse on himself.”

Hugh Dougherty, the executive editor of The Daily Beast and an attendee at the WHCD, admitted that although he now believes the shooting attempt probably was real, he understands why the weight of evidence makes that difficult to believe.

“To believe that the WHCA shooting was real, you have to believe that,” Dougherty wrote before listing the numerous implausibilities. “A man can waltz into a hotel with a shotgun and ammunition, and other weapons, a day before the president and two-thirds of the line of succession are known to be coming to dinner; The man can sprint past Secret Service-controlled magnetometers before he is stopped; Multiple shots are fired but nobody, including the shotgun-wielding shooter, is wounded; The president continues to take part in a routine with Oz the Mentalist while people shout ‘get down,’ and plates crash to the ground; At this precise moment, the shots were heard, but the routine by Oz the Mentalist kept going momentarily. JD Vance — not Trump — is taken first from the stage, and the president apparently either falls, or stops to inspect what is going on; Law enforcement have so little clue about what is going on that about an hour after Trump and his cabinet have fled, an announcement is made, ‘Could any members of Congress come to the stage?’ while officers wander the tables, asking if anyone has seen representatives or senators; The president musters a press conference, laughs and jokes at what has happened, and his base — in apparently perfect lockstep— amplifies his demand for a ballroom, all within two and a half hours of the shooting.”

He added that, not even three hours after the supposed shooting, “the president was cracking jokes and laughing with his minions." He also pointed out that the Secret Service offered shockingly sub-par security to the event, especially given that President Ronald Reagan was nearly assassinated outside the Washington Hilton in 1981.

“That is not even an exhaustive list of what it takes to believe that the WHCA shooting was real,” Dougherty wrote. “It does not cover the outlandish facts that Karoline Leavitt claimed ‘shots will be fired,’ just before they literally were; that some guests kept eating while others sheltered on the floor; that cabinet members slowly trailed out in the same direction as the shooting had been; that Oz the Mentalist went to the microphone and said the program would resume; and how members of the media elite appeared to keep chatting and drinking in the ballroom after the shooting for well over an hour?”

>>1509930
Oh look, and conveniently now they're using this as an excuse to have his ballroom be 100% taxpayer funded after months of him insisting it would be donations only.

>>1509935
Now the shills are having to split their attention between this and trying to get jimmy kimmel fired, again since snowflake donald 'publicly celebrates the deaths of people who doesn't like' trump is seething over a joke and wants to further destroy the first amendment

>>1509930
>call for everyone to kill Trump for over 10 years on social media
>another person is stupid enough to take it seriously
>RIGGED! PSYOP! INSIDE JOB! FALSE FLAG! WE DINDU NUFFIN!

>>1509940
what are... three things that did not happen?

>>1509940
You mean trump who just last year, was talking about seditious behavior committed by Democratic lawmakers, saying that seditious behavior is ‘punishable by death,’" she stated. “And he also re-posted, saying, ‘Hang them. George Washington would, that's something that he did previously.’ He floated the idea of executing the former Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley.”
Or trump, since he entered the scene in 2016, has repeatedly talked about using violence against his enemies, like he did this during 2016 rallies when there were protesters, saying he'd like to, ‘punch them in the face.’ And notably, his former Defense Secretary Mark Esper put in a memoir that Trump asked, ‘Why can't we just shoot protesters? Just shoot them in the legs or something?'’’
Or trump, who has over and over again talked about using violence against his enemies, talked about retribution.

Interesting how you are doing everything to deflect from the one person responsible for the massive spike in violence and violent rhetoric, trump himself.

>>1509942
And as for his attempt to shred the first amendment again to get Jimmy Kimmel fired, again.
trump was the guy who openly crowed 'I'm happy he's dead' when Robert Muller died

>>1509941
>leftists haven't been calling for Trump's murder
What do these three names have in common: Destiny, Hasan, and Vaush?

>>1509942
>You mean trump who just last year,
Stopped reading your whataboutism there.

>>1509945
>It's okay when trump has a long history of making threats, inciting violence and celebrating the deaths of people.
And your entire pearl clutching goes down in flames.

>>1509945
I'm sorry homie but I don't think even 4chan is gonna drink the Don's Kool aid anymore. You may have to find or make somewhere even more inbred than /pol/

>>1509946
>trump says mean things
>therefore it's okay for me to shoot at him

>>1509948
>nobody has said to kill trump
>here are three popular left-wing influencers who have said to kill trump
>uhhhhh.... gb2/pol/!
I accept your concession.

>>1509952
You should probably gb2 the corner and cry it out, poor magabrain baby

>>1509952
4chan is for men to discuss shit, not butthurt little snowflakes to whine every time one of us says we should kill their guy

>>1509955
Dubs confirm

>>1509952
>downplaying making threats, inciting violence and celebrating the deaths of people.
Classic shill

>>1509952
We should kill Donald J. Trump, or at least pay for some lessons cause damn why can't we get a more capable crazy to do this shit?

>>1509959
>why can't we get a more capable crazy to do this shit?
>anti-gun democrats have a hard time killing people with guns
>especially when there are police/SS that can shoot back
Yeah that's a tough one. A real fuckin' head-scratcher.

>>1509962
Yeah that's literally what I was getting at, dipshit. Nice reddit response but I'm Afraid there's no upboats for you here

>>1509952
"I accept your concession" is something an insecure beta bitch would say.

>>1509964
Knowing you're gonna lose the civil war that you're so gay to start probably has that effect on the maga tardbabies

>>1509963
>Yeah that's literally what I was getting at, dipshit.
Yeah I guess I missed that part in your post. Can you point out where you were implying that the people who constantly try to ban guns might suck at shooting?

>>1509966
Yeah it was the part that wasn't worth explaining at length because I don't have Asperger's

>>1509967
I just know he's getting ready to give another try at another butthurt little zinger/epic review because he's so desperate to win le internet argument

>>1509969
That that oughta calm em down.

>>1509945
>>leftists haven't been calling for Trump's murder
I'll just accept your concession before you embarrass yourself further

>>1509972
Which leftists? May I see them?

>>1509972
>I'll just accept your concession
>"I accept your concession" is something an insecure beta bitch would say.
You should stop saying that before you embarrass yourself even further.

>>1509973
sorry, all they have are who? streamers

>>1509975
Haven't you heard anon? We have to judge the entire left by the actions of a few popular leftist streamers, but completely ignore how their rough counterparts on the right include literal nazis and groomers.

>>1509978
> literal nazis
This is a call to violence.
Reminder: leftists hate you, they want you dead and they think it's funny.

>>1509979
>You can't call us Nazis after we do Nazi stuff! That's basically threatening violence, basically justifying me actually directly celebrating and supporting violence against you
Republicans will try to make it legal to run over protestors then turn around and blame Democrats for "normalizing violence in politics"

>>1509980
>Try to
Republicans actually did pass laws to make it legal to use your car to murder peaceful protestors.
Yet it's everyone else who's violent in their clown world.

>>1509980
>>You can't call us Nazis after we do Nazi stuff!
You support a movement that has normalized terrorism.
>Republicans will try to make it legal to run over protestors then turn around and blame Democrats for "normalizing violence in politics"
Defending yourself isn't terrorism. Nobody wants to end up like Reginald Denny.

Everyone already forgot when trump celebrated the murder of Reiner and said he deserved it.
This is the world trump wants.

>>1509981
>Republicans actually did pass laws to make it legal to use your car to murder peaceful protestors.
Are you retarded?

*some* states passed laws creating a narrow immunity or legal defense for when protestors block a road and drivers are trying to escape a perceived danger.

>literal nazis
>This is a call to violence.
>Reminder: rightists hate you, they want you dead and they think it's funny
ftfy

>>1509984
So republicans passed to legalized murder with your car, or at least their party members doing it.
Not betting the allegations that republicans are violent savages.

>>1509989
Ah, you're retarded. I get it. Don't mind me, carry on.

>>1509978
>he said while ignoring the millions of people calling for the death of Trump and/or conservatives

>>1509980
>Republicans will try to make it legal to run over protestors
And where did this happen? What state legalized running over protesters? Utah? Florida?

Watch, there's going to be a caveat that allows for driving through mobs if they start to attack or threaten you - the opposite of peaceful - and you feel your life is in danger.

>>1509992
>https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Have_GOP_lawmakers_tried_to_shield_drivers_who_hit_protesters
>No no it's fine though; they were blocking a roadway and that inconvenience means attempted murder of them should be legal

>>1509993
>https://www.wlrn.org/light/law-justice/2025-06-13/florida-drivers-run-over-protesters-law
lol

>>1509993
>inconvenience
Yeah I guess being surrounded by an angry mob and having a gun pointed in your face is an inconvenience.

>>1509995
Nice strawman. Unfortunately for you, these laws literally just say if they're blocking a roadway it would be legal to hit them.

>certain policies/executive orders issued since 20th January 2025
What's to stop a future Democrat administration using the same against rightists?
Why let laws enacted against those you don't like go to waste? You've really fucked up, MAGAts.

>>1509996
NTA, except it doesn't and I already posted an article that debunks your bullshit.

>>1509998
Yeah the fact the final Florida bill that passed specified "uh armed mobs only though!" doesn't change the fact there were FIVE other bills attempted in various other red states basically trying to legalize attempted murder over an inconvenience.

>>1510000
Yeah that "uh armed mobs only though!" is kind of a big deal, and shows how bad-faith you are. I'm certain that if I were to check on those other five bills attempted in other states, I'll find the same similar caveats as Florida. So I'm not even going to bother wasting my precious time.

You got called out for your bullshit. Deal with it.
>REEEEE REPUBS MAKING IT LEGAL TO DRIVE INTO PEACEFUL PROTESTERS FOR NO REASON
>turns out they can still be held criminally and civilly liable

>>1510000
You're only mad because leftists can no longer hurt people with lynch mobs with zero repercussions.

Something thought it had the right to drive through protestors:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack
>the perpetrator sentenced to 419 years
The only right James Alex Fields Jr has now is to die in prison.
>he apologized after sentencing which means the only way he'll be leaving prison is in a box
At least he admitted that all his opinions were more than wrong. But then, if he thought that all his rightard opinions were right, why did he commit murder?
Come on, rightards in /news/, say that you're supposed to be 'better' than leftists: that you would never commit violent acts against them, because you're supposed to be 'above' such inferior thoughts. PROTIP: by not debasing yourself to their level, you don't have the right to 'hate' leftists: because hating them only makes you as bad as they are. Indeed: with your hypocrisy, so much as thinking of hating leftists, it makes you infinitely worse than them.
At least James Alex Fields Jr apologized - but only after he was sentened to 419 years in prison, thus the only thing he was actually sorry for was being caught acting on his violent, therefore wrong opinions - thus proving that all rightists are inferior. No Exceptions.

>>1510001
>I'm certain that if I were to check on those other five bills attempted in other states, I'll find the same similar caveats as Florida. So I'm not even going to bother wasting my precious time.
>Uh, I'm probably right, so I'm not even going to check
You're wrong btw. These other attempted laws carried no such provision for "armed mobs" and only specified if they were blocking a road. You're mad I'm objectively right that Republicans attempted to make it legal to hit protestors.

>>1510005
>You're wrong btw.
Sure anon. Can't wait for you to cherry-pick bits of law out of these bills without the full context, so you can try to salvage what's left of this train wreck you called an argument after getting caught with the Florida bill.

>>1510006
>so you can try to salvage what's left of this train wreck you called an argument after getting caught with the Florida bill.
I literally presented an article verifying that Republicans had at least 6 different bills in different states that all focused on making blocking a road an offense that allowed anyone to hit you with their car. The funniest part is the Florida one in that article actually ISN'T the one you linked, but rather an earlier version that literally didn't have the "angry mob" addition and just said "[a] motor vehicle operator who unintentionally causes injury or death to a person who obstructs or interferes with the regular flow of vehicular traffic" would be civically unliable. You literally posted a different bill and are pretending I lied about it.

>>1510007
>I literally presented an article verifying that Republicans had at least 6 different bills in different states that all focused on making blocking a road an offense that allowed anyone to hit you with their car.
Except that was bullshit, as we saw with Florida. Turns out you can't just hit someone with your car because they're in your way.

>The funniest part is the Florida one in that article actually ISN'T the one you linked, but rather an earlier version
Post the full bill here. I'll read it in between playing Rimworld.

>>1510003
>why did he commit murder?
A leftist flashed an AK-47 at him, the turn-offs were barricaded by protesters, they attacked his car with a bat. He instinctively hit the gas to escape, hit his brakes before actually hitting anyone, but he still hit some of the crowd in blocking the road in front of him.
As the leftists surrounding him pulled out guns (as shown in photographs of the scene), he reversed away and fled.
The only person who died was a morbidly obese woman who wasn't actually hit by the car, but got knocked over by a parked car he had hit while trying to flee, and then suffered a heart attack because she was 400lbs.
>the perpetrator sentenced to 419 years
A black guy can stab a Ukrainian woman on public transit and get a slap on the wrist, whereas this guy got a harsher sentence than actual child rapists. You can figure out for yourself whether or not the justice system is fair.

>>1510008
>Except that was bullshit, as we saw with Florida.
You are literally only acknowledging your own article and not the one I actually fucking posted lmao.

>Post the full bill here.
>https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2017/1096/BillText/Filed/HTML
You may notice this literally is not the bill your article talks about.

>>1510009
>an AK-47
You sure about that? Forensic court-admissible evidence to back up your claim, and proof it was an AK-47?

>>1510009
Motherfucker he hit 20 protestors with his car and killed a woman. You're literally arguing it was OK she died because she was fat.

Reminder, apparently leftists calling Trump a nazi is actively promoting violence, but literally justifying someone who committed vehicular homicide, was found guilty in a court of law and sentenced to life, is fine.

Oh, and btw; the guy was, ironically, an actual fucking neo-nazi.

>>1510009
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sRS1dwCotw

>>1510011
>You sure about that? Forensic court-admissible evidence to back up your claim, and proof it was an AK-47?
I had to go back and check, it was actually an AR15. The guy wielding it was a communist named Dwayne Dixon who bragged about following his car and 'waved' James Fields off by muzzle sweeping him.
One of the videos shown by the defense was a helicopter manned by the Virginia State Police that captured the incident.
>>1510012
>You're literally arguing it was OK she died because she was fat.
At best it was manslaughter. And whether or not he was an actual nazi has no bearing on the fact that he was threatened and chased by an armed mob.

>>1510014
Still got sentenced to 400+ years in prison lmao. I love when you retards take convicted murderers and pretend like their status as murderers are subjective.

>>1510015
It's pretty insane that you think what happened to this guy was perfectly fine because he was a nazi.

>>1510010
>You may notice this literally is not the bill your article talks about.
Hey you know what, anon? You're right. I'll give you that one. My bad. I fucked up...

HOWEVER... I noticed the use of the word "unintentionally" in that bill. Which seems to me that the bill was proposed if someone accidentally hits a protester they didn't know was blocking a road or highway at that time.

Then I found Senator Gainer's quote about it:
>“They should have every right in the world to protest the things they disagree with,” Gainer said. “But they don’t have the right to randomly go out into the interstates and attack the cars, beat on the windshields, jump up on the hoods and act like they’ve been hit. In some cases, they set themselves up to be hit.”

>“The bill I filed during the last legislative session would have made it a crime for protestors [sic] to block traffic,” Gainer wrote. “Comparing that legislation with the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia is quite frankly lazy reporting. By simply reading the two-page bill, it’s clear that my intent was to protect motorists who unintentionally cause injury or death to a protestor [sic] blocking the flow of traffic. A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law.”

Yeah that totally sounds like a Republican who wants to make vehicular manslaughter legal.

>>1510016
he's just paid to say absurd shit, i doubt he believes any of it, or even cares at all for that matter

>>1509990
>ad hominem
republicans need to stop passing legislation that legalizes murder while projecting their violence onto others

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/suspected-shooter-note-security-bad-at-whcd_n_69ef6c48e4b0f3a433cc192d
'Gunman' says there was almost zero security.
More proof this was staged

>>1510017
>HOWEVER... I noticed the use of the word "unintentionally" in that bill. Which seems to me that the bill was proposed if someone accidentally hits a protester they didn't know was blocking a road or highway at that time.
I knew you were gonna pull this shit, so let me point out the obvious; under the logic of this bill, all any car attack perpetrator would have to do is say "Oh, I accidentally put my foot on the gas instead of the break", and that would be an entirely valid legal defense even if they crippled or even killed multiple. YOU CANNOT MAKE AN ACTION THAT CAUSES DEATHS OR SERIOUS INJURY COMPLETELY PROTECTED AS LONG AS IT WAS AN "Accident".

>>1510017
>No no no we only meant for the ACCIDENTAL cases of people hitting multiple protestors with their car
You retards will say Dems are doing double talk whenever they condemn violence but when a bill that effectively provides a legal way to hit protestors just for blocking traffic all of a sudden we have to taken Repubs entirely by their word alone.

>>1510021
>>1510022
>basically trying to legalize attempted murder over an inconvenience
>A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law.
Pick one.

>>1510009
>an AK-47
Your first mistake
>>1510014
>it was actually an AR15
Your second mistake. And for that which strikes you out:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack#White_nationalists
'a protester threatened Fields with an AR-15 rifle before the attack. Lawyer Mark Fenster said those conspiracy theories were "part of a self-sustaining narrative created by white nationalists who might be worried that the violence that took place delegitimized their cause."'
Their cause died before yours here nearly a decade later. Thus your wrong opinions - that are nothing but lies - go straight into the trash, because rightards never had the right to have their wrong opinions & lies listened to in the first place.
>it was an AK-47
>it was an AR-15
>not one shred of forensic court-admissible evidence to back up its wrong opinions
>y-y-you must listen to meeeeee! reeeeee!
>m-m-my lies are superior to your facts!
>w-w-why aren't you accepting what I say?! You must!
>that which lies to itself
Facts don't care about your feelings.
Why should anyone care about your precious rightard that only has the right to die in prison? Why should anyone care about the collapse of the white right as a result of what happened in Charlottesville? Why should anyone care about a proven liar?
>it was an AK-47
>it was an AR-15
>facts prove all of a rightist liar's opinions wrong
Why should anyone care about you: which supports a proven neo-Nazi?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack#Ideology
Because that in itself condemns you as one. Guilty as charged.

>>1510024
but have you considered the fact that you will never be a woman?

>>1510023
Again, Dems condemning violence? Means nothing? Republican submits a law that effectively all but eliminates manslaughter charges if you hit protestors with your car "by accident"? "Take him by his word!"

This law openly tried to give any fucking car attacker on a protest specifically a full legal defense that would let them escape charges even if they killed someone. Again, all they have to do is claim "Oh no it was an accident!" and instead of investigators having to prove it was murder instead of manslaughter, they'd have to prove they can even bring charges at all. But oh, this isn't inciting violence at all. But calling Trump out for touching kids and doing fascist things? Practically asking people to kill the piece of shit.

>>1510024
>that are nothing but lies
Here's a video of Dwayne literally admitting to flagging him with his rifle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH7fNVdUGvQ
>Why should anyone care about your precious rightard that only has the right to die in prison?
You can care about whatever you like, but you're creating a negative political climate by trying to justify terrorism and using the levers of power to punish people that try to defend themselves.

>you will never be a woman?
>the proven rightard liar reduced to this level of immaturity.
As I'm a man who has absolutely no interest in changing my gender, why are you reduced to further lies? Or perhaps it's conclusive proof that you will never be a _man_. Certainly a human , little lying rightard.
>you will never be a woman
Is something an insecure beta bitch would say.
You'll never beat that and any & all other self-damning allegations, rightard.

>>1510026
>Again, all they have to do is claim "Oh no it was an accident!"
Which is probably why the bill failed. But that's not the main point. This whole time you've been going on about how Republicans want to legalize murder and allow protesters to get run over for mildly inconveniencing their travel. Now we have the quote from the maker of the bill itself where he says "A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law", which would include the "reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia" that you've been arguing with that other anon about, and that his intention wasn't to find a loophole to murder protesters, but to "protect motorists" that "unintentionally" caused death or injury.

> But oh, this isn't inciting violence at all.
It literally isn't. And the way you tried to make this senator who sponsored the bill out to be some kind of evil motherfucker is the typical bullshit "lazy reporting" I expect here on /news/.

>>1510028
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack#White_nationalists
'Other debunked claims and conspiracy theories suggested that a Michigan man was driving the car during the ramming; that Fields was under assault and acted in self-defense, and that a protester threatened Fields with an AR-15 rifle before the attack. Lawyer Mark Fenster said those conspiracy theories were "part of a self-sustaining narrative created by white nationalists who might be worried that the violence that took place delegitimized their cause'
>any & all BS by 1510028
Lies by rightards that are unlooked at go straight into the trash. Whatever rightards say never had the right to be listened to in the first place. And rightards' feelings don't have the right to be cared about.

>>1509984
>UM ACKCHUALLY NO THEY DIDN'T DO THAT LIKE U SAID THEY DID THEY CHOSE THE PUSSY METHOD TO GET WHAT THEY WANT SO THERE

Maga people just need to be rounded up and gotten rid of

>>1510031
>wikipedia
>debooonked
All you're doing is proving that leftists are subversives that hurt people and use the media to distort the truth.

>>1510033
just pack it in. You can only be called a little pussy maga inbred so many times.

>>1510033
You can defend your retard logic and mindset all you like but the fact of the matter is that you're all such little baby bitches that now not even 4chan wants anything to do with you

>>1510033
This is why you're losing the future civil war. This little penis personality shit right here. All of you do this. The rest of us are tired of you. Kill yourself my man.

>>1510028
>lies
>not only debunked but don't have the right to be watched/listened to
All you're doing is proving that all rightards are liars, are hypocrites that defend rightards that hurt people and ignore forensic court-admissible facts to spew rightard liars' subjective so-called 'truth' which is proven to be lies. Only facts are accepted by humans, But then rightards aren't humans because facts always prove their 'truth' which is lies & opinions wrong.
>b-b-but you must listen to my proven lies & wrong opinions! reeeeee!
When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.

>>1510037
This is why we need to stop trying to debate and talk to these people like they give a fuck about the truth or anything that doesn't appeal to them. They need to be wiped off the face of the earth. Its an entire genre of person, multiple generations of person that acts like the faggot rich boy antagonist from an 80s movie

>>1510017
Doing something potentially life threatening which leads to accidentally killing someone is the definition of manslaughter

>>1510040
Like driving down a highway at night you didn't know was full of BLM protesters? But that would never happen - oh wait.

>>1510041
If you don’t know or have any reason to believe there’s people blocking the road and you drive into them that’s just a traffic incident. The legislation isn’t about that it’s about purposefully driving towards or into people blocking the road, if someone is killed it will depend on factors of speed, intent, whether they jumped in front of the vehicle, perceived threat level, a bunch of other stuff like the vehicle type, many factors as to whether it’s manslaughter or murder.
Generally speaking in law the pedestrian has the right of way and decisions will be based on that regardless of whether they should be on the road or not, for example if they’ve blocked the road have they set up some kind of warning system to inform drivers to slow down, are the plainly visible, is it reasonably possible for any vehicle to stop for them in the situation they have placed themselves. It’s really case by case, which is why we need judges

>>1510017
>Yeah that totally sounds like a Republican who wants to make vehicular manslaughter legal.
Drivers have a duty to conduct themselves in a way as to prevent traffic incidents absent mechanical failure or outside interference. And they can still even be liable for mechanical failure if they don't perform expected maintenance or were made aware of an issue before it caused an accident.

In the case of someone blocking a road, if they didn't literally throw themself in front of your car, it would still be manslaughter if you plowed into them because you should have been traveling at a speed and with headlight usage where you could safely brake before slamming into a fucking road obstruction.

The problem with the bill as written is it removes liability in situations like that for unpermitted protesters. It literally legalizes manslaughter as long as the perpetrator did so unintentionally and the victim didn't have the right paperwork. End of inquiry.

To give you an example scenario, a school has a walkout and a driver plows through a group of kids going 50 in a school zone cause they were messing with their phone and speeding like a dumbass. Under this bill, that driver wouldn't be responsible for the dead kids.

Just a thought, but maybe people's lives shouldn't be worthless because they were being annoying dumbasses?

>>1510046
>Just a thought, but maybe people's lives shouldn't be worthless because they were being annoying dumbasses?
>A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law.

>>1509935
They have billions to give to Israel but they can't spot the pocket change to renovate a single room in the white house?

>>1510046
>… and the victim didn't have the right paperwork
dystopian

>>1510047
>A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law.
READ dumbass
>To give you an example scenario, a school has a walkout and a driver plows through a group of kids going 50 in a school zone cause they were messing with their phone and speeding like a dumbass. Under this bill, that driver wouldn't be responsible for the dead kids.

>>1510048
That "single room" expansion is bigger than the central building. 89,000 sq feet vs 55,000.

>>1510050
Read and don't care. I'm going to keep repeating that Senator's quote every single time you imply he wrote the law just to give conservatives a pass to run over dems.

>READ dumbass
>Comparing that legislation with the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia is quite frankly lazy reporting.

>>1510052
>I'm going to keep repeating that Senator's quote every single time you imply he wrote the law just to give conservatives a pass to run over dems.
The words where he admits to wanting to legalize manslaughter against protesters?

READ DUMBASS
>my intent was to protect motorists who unintentionally cause injury or death to a protestor

>>1510053
>“The bill I filed during the last legislative session would have made it a crime for protestors [sic] to block traffic,” Gainer wrote. “Comparing that legislation with the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia is quite frankly lazy reporting. By simply reading the two-page bill, it’s clear that my intent was to protect motorists who unintentionally cause injury or death to a protestor [sic] blocking the flow of traffic. A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law.”

>>1510055
Quoting shit you didn't read in a conversation you didn't read doesn't impress anyone.

>>1510056
Get mad all you want. That quote clearly shows that he doesn't support taking lives just because they're being annoying - contrary to your bullshit line you've been at for hours now.

>>1510047
>>1510052
>>1510055
>>1510064
>No no no, but he said he only meant it to be the protect motorists!
>Please ignore how the actual language of the law works and look at my quote! A politician wouldn't LIE, would he?

>>1510046
>The problem with the bill as written is it removes liability in situations like that for unpermitted protesters.
The bill only exists because mobs of 'protesters' were surrounding cars and physically using their bodies to prevent drivers from leaving, which is a form of imprisonment.

>>1510090
>Once again talking about a different fucking bill
You're flailing.

>>1510091
I'm talking about the impetus behind these bills.
Leftoids are mad that there could be lasting consequences for fucking with random people.

>>1510092
Unless that random person is a cop doing their job
Then there's no consequences for beating that man to death on camera

>>1510094
When did that happen?

>>1510079
>Please ignore how this senator condemned Charlottesville. It really hurts my narrative that republicans want more Charlottesvilles.

>>1510092
>I'm talking about the impetus behind these bills.
>No no but the INTENT was there-
Republicans tried to make it legal to run over protestors because they found them annoying. Not because of "muh armed mob", that's the excuse and in the round of laws they tried to pass there was no such stipulation other than the road being blocked.

>>1510096
Why did the language of his own bill allow someone to literally get away with a Charlottesville as long as they claimed it was an accident?

>>1510095
You don't keep notes on events you've memoryholed?

>>1510098
>By simply reading the two-page bill, it’s clear that my intent was to protect motorists who unintentionally cause injury or death to a protestor [sic] blocking the flow of traffic.

>>1510097
>angry mobs killing drivers at street corners
>found them annoying

>>1510099
Find me a case in which a civilian wasn't armed and/or resisting arrest.

>>1510102
Are you pretending its legal for an unarmed citizen resisting arrest to beat a police officer to death?

>>1510103
Actually I'm retarded and misread your post, nevermind.

>>1510100
>Hence why I literally eliminate manslaughter as a charge and give any car attack perpetrator on a protest the ability to claim it was an accident and dodge all charges

>>1510101
Where's the angry mob provision in the bills I posted? Keyword: the ones I POSTED, not yours.

>>1510112
Which wasn't at all the sponsor's intent, as we've been over a thousand times already, and why the bill failed because of that highly unlikely possibility. The point you keep dodging is that he clearly didn't intend to create a loophole to get away with murder, contrary to what you keep saying. He even went out of his way to specifically condemn Charlottesville, which you keep implying he wanted more of.

This going back and forth with you is getting old. He specifically wanted to protect drivers who "unintentionally" caused harm. You can't prove otherwise without resorting to
>w-well he's lying! What he REALLY meant was...

>>1510129
>He didn't intend to do it
>He just put a very open loophole
>Please believe the politician when he says this
Literally why should I give your politicians the benefit of the doubt when they're submitting bills like this but every dem must be condemned for every time they said Trump was a bad person even though they consistently condemn violence every time it happens?

>>1510136
>Literally why should I give your politicians the benefit of the doubt
Because this politician has explained his meaning for the bill - and pointed out the "lazy reporting" technique you and others are doing.

>when they're submitting bills like this
You're intentionally mixing incompetence with maliciousness to win an argument. Let me quote the man again: "A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law."

>but every dem must be condemned for every time they said Trump was a bad person
Where did I say this?

>even though they consistently condemn violence every time it happens?
I'm going to disagree with you on that one (Waters, Booker, Holder, Tester, etc.), but that's a topic for another thread. I don't want you moving the goalpost to get away from this bill you keep going on about.

>>1510139
There are multiple bills, you zero-ed in on the Florida one in an attempt to mislead by mixing it with a different bill, I don't give a shit what excuse he gave, and this entire argument is about how Dems can't even critique Trump's actions without being accused of promoting violence even as Republicans seek to outright legalize it against people they dislike. Now fuck off.

>>1510140
>There are multiple bills, you zero-ed in on the Florida one in an attempt to mislead by mixing it with a different bill,
Actually what happened is I googled and that was what came up. I already told you I fucked up mixing this not-successful bill with the current law, that also doesn't allow murder, but this doesn't change the fact that you lied your ass off by making this Senator out to be an evil mastermind creating a bill that allows people to squish dems with their cars and get away with it - when he's clearly stated otherwise.

>I don't give a shit what excuse he gave,
I know you don't. Still doesn't change that his intent wasn't to legalize murder like you claimed.

>and this entire argument is about how Dems can't even critique Trump's actions without being accused of promoting violence
Again, where did I say this? Where are you getting this from? I don't think I brought up dems being mean to Trump yet ITT.

>even as Republicans seek to outright legalize it against people they dislike.
Except they're not, and you keep pushing this bullshit lie.

"A person who intentionally uses their vehicle to injure or kill another should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law."

>Now fuck off.
No U!

>>1510142
>I know you don't. Still doesn't change that his intent wasn't to legalize murder like you claimed.
Then why leave the fucking loophole? Either Republicans are trying to legalize hitting protestors, or they're so retarded they're doing so without even trying.

>Except they're not, and you keep pushing this bullshit lie.
Yeah just like how that Lynne DiSanto posting "All Lives Splatter, no one cares about your protest, keep your ass out of the road" was "taken out of context". The GOP let her keep her position after that.
>https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/politics/2017/09/21/south-dakota-gop-wont-punish-lawmaker-controversial-facebook-post/688544001/
And isn't it just such a wacky coincidence they started pushing these laws right after Charlottesville specifically? Like "well, we don't support this, but you know, if there was hypothetically a version where they totally didn't mean it, they should face no charges". Yeah, right.

>>1510002
Wtf does a leftist lynch mob look like? A drum circle? Bruh imagine being such a deluded little retard that every time you see a KKK member you think that he probably would have voted Obama. You should probably contemplate suicide once more.

>>1510016
They had all the time in the world to not be Nazis so death is their penance for being a fucking dipshit

>>1510144
>Then why leave the fucking loophole?
Perhaps he, like most rational people, assumed the word "unintentionally" would've been enough. But I guess he didn't predict mental circus performers like you who might exploit it, so the bill died and we have an even more secure law in Florida. Thanks!

>Yeah just like how that Lynne DiSanto posting "All Lives Splatter, no one cares about your protest, keep your ass out of the road"
Did she push a bill legalizing splattering protesters on the road? No? Nice try moving the goalpost.

>And isn't it just such a wacky coincidence they started pushing these laws right after Charlottesville specifically?
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the multiple incidents of angry mobs blocking road, vandalizing cars and assaulting drivers, throughout the country. Why on earth would they suddenly want to clarify the language to protect motorists that are trying to protect themselves from an angry mob?

And since you made the Charlottesville quote again, I'm going to post the Charlottesville quote again:
>Comparing that legislation with the reprehensible actions of the evil person in Virginia is quite frankly lazy reporting.

>>1510164
Oh my God I'm sorry you were dumb enough to back the wrong retards but you're not winning this. Anons are gonna realize soon enough that you retards don't care about facts or logic and will just wriggle and whine until you get your way. This is why we just need to bully these people. No need to debate with troglodytes anyways.

Kill yourself, inbred.

>>1510165
Geez, you're really upset that your DiSanto whataboutism didn't work.

>>1510164
This is 4chan, not reddit. We can all see what you little bitches are doing when you pull the usual bullshit. You know what you're doing and we know what you're doing. Stop acting like a faggot. Stand by your shitty beliefs like a man and get made fun of and/or the shit beaten out of you for it.

>>1510166
My what? I'm not whoever you think I am, genius. I'm yet another person just here to call you pathetic.

Go ahead and use some more tard terms lol who else am I in league with? The windmill makers? Big vaccine? Jesus Christ it's a wonder you can even type.

>>1510166
not even the anon you were arguing with before lmao. You're pathetic.

>>1510166
>Post is literally insulting you and has no names in it whatsoever
>Tip your fedora and claim "DiSanto Whataboutism" in response

just start using random terms hoping you're hitting some random demographic that makes you personally butthurt anon that'll show them


You guys and your Habsburg word vomit lol

>>1510170
SEE? This is why we need to cut the bullshit and just start bullying these people straight up.

>>1510166
Hopefully you're done posting after doing some cringe shit like this.

>>1510165
This. Fucking this.

I'm so tired of playing this little fucking game with these fucking people. They know they're fucked up, we know they're fucked up. I don't know why people even pretend to act civil to these Walmart goblins anymore.

>>1510176
probably because you haven't realized you will never be a woman

>>1510181
Aww is baby gonna cry and break out that old chestnut? Where do you think you're posting, bruh? I'll never be a woman? Thank god.

You'll never be a man though, which is definitely worse.

>>1510181
>Gets butthurt for using random terms and insults his inbred group has fed him
>Does it some more


It'll work eventually, right?

>>1510181
I love how quickly you pussies fold the moment someone more man than you starts telling you to shut the fuck up and return to the kids table. You deserve every bit of ridicule you receive, both online and irl.

>>1510181
>Throws big PMS tantrum
>Calls people trans

lol welp so much for my conversation with >>1510144 it was fun while it lasted.

>>1510201
>Gets absolutely BTFO for being a little bitch
>Leaves a bitter little faggot signoff comment whilst in tears


lolcows just never know when to quit, do they?

>>1510201
at least they lasted longer than your delusions about being a woman

>>1510205
You're really gonna try the same insult again? You gotta be an adult to post here. We already established how pathetic of an attempt that is. Maybe try making your own insults up so you don't sound like a retard

>>1510205
That doesn't even make sense. So he stopped thinking he was a woman in this scenario? Think before you flap that Habsburg Jaw.

>>1510205
Are you turned on by public humiliation? Or are you just genuinely this retarded and cringe?

>>1510206
>>1510208
>>1510210
distinctly man like and definitively never gonna be a woman like hands wrote these posts
don't blame these posts on trump and try to shoot him like you libs do

>>1510212
>NU UH I AM TOO A MAN UR A LIB

You can try all you like but you're not gonna win this. Especially when we can all see how mad it's making you

>>1510212
Its kinda late to try and say you're the man in this situation when you've already been laughed at for your little bitch antics

>>1510212
>Calls everyone trans
>Gets butthurt when someone tells xer they're not a man

>>1510212
He's distinctly a man, everyone. We got a real badass over here and definitely not someone that would get the shit kicked out of them immediately

>>1510212
>Distinctly man like

So you're FtM?

>>1510214
>>1510216
>>1510217
>>1510219
>can't define a woman
>pretends not to discriminate based on gender
>tells someone they're not a man as an insult
woman like thinking but not woman like bodies
curiouser and curiouser

>>1510221
>Can't define a woman
You never asked? Why would I care?
>Pretends not to discriminate
We're on 4chan you retarded faggot nigger when did I do that?
>Tells someone they're not a man as an insult

Pretty hard to not when you act like a bitch in this manner hahahaha

>>1510221
stop getting off to humiliation without our consent shill anon, and get a real job

>>1510222
>>1510223
done throwing your tantrum and ready to have a discussion?
or do you need more time to insult everyone and shit all over our board before spreading liberal lies?

>>1510224
nobody will ever take you seriously enough to have a conversation on this board, esl shill. you've besmirched your reputation far too much for that

>>1510221
I love how anyone that points out their faggot behavior automatically gets labeled with any and every term that makes them personally butthurt, they truly cannot even think for themselves enough to reply in real time and just use these pathetic little preset soundbytes instead, even if it doesn't make sense.

It's like making fun of a disabled person that can only use the buttons on their touchscreen to communicate

>>1510224
You're talking to multiple people that all find you pathetic and repugnant btw.

Maybe also try not to use insults that were just said to you. We already pointed out your tantrum, kinda sad that you'd try and repackage that and give it back to us like no one would notice.

>>1510224

>>1510197 must have really got to you, huh? Still can't even make up your own insults lol

>>1510225
>>1510226
>>1510227
>>1510228
pretending to be someone else won't help you in this argument, and it doesn't make you better than me
keep being a lying liberal baby, it comes with your TDS right?

so do you want to talk about Trump getting shot at, or do you want to keep derailing the thread with your delusions?

>>1510224
>Our board
Maga faggots weren't here when we were protesting Scientology, Newfag. Don't act like this is your little inbred clubhouse. I bet even /pol/ is tired of you

>>1510229
Regurgitate some more terms you know that'll show em. At least one of those has to apply to them because they're being mean to you, right?

>>1510229
We're done discussing shit with you retards, it's time for you to leave. Or stay and continue being laughed at, either way you're not winning this one.

>>1510231
tranny fanny

>>1510233
I win the internet argument. You can continue to cry though

esl shill lost another argument nobody was even having with him, lol

>>1510234
>I win the internet argument
Excellent, I've won the argument, and you've won never being a woman

>>1510233
I can hear how mad you are

>>1510236
>He's gonna do the nu uh I win thing because he's such a man guys

Homie already won, you're just making yourself look even more sad by being pathetic enough to do this cartoon reverse psychology shit you're doing. That's some shit literal children do.

>>1510236
Aw dang I'll just have to continue being more of a man than you, then.

>>1509930
The telegraph co.uk is where I go for all my Trump supporter opinions. Nobody is closer to the pulse of what MAGA is thinking than those brits at the Telegraph

>>1510236
Im pretty sure the other guy won when he's clearly reduced you to acting like a child... Again.

>>1510241
I'm clearly not acting like a child though
Maybe if you weren't deluded by your rampant TDS and liberal gender fantasies you'd realize that

>>1510242
>I'M NOT BEING A BABY GUYS STOP! LIBERAL! TDS! GENDER! GENDER!

Absolute gold.

>>1510242
>I'm clearly not acting like a child

lol

>>1509941
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4953596-johnson-mcconnell-harris-trump-fascist/
https://www.axios.com/2024/10/11/mark-milley-trump-fascist-bob-woodward-book
In Bob Woodward's 2024 book War, Milley is quoted saying Trump is "a fascist to the core" and "the most dangerous person to this country." He added: "I had suspicions when I talked to you about his mental decline and so forth, but now I realize he’s a total fascist. He is now the most dangerous person to this country.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-kelly-former-white-house-chief-staff-on-trump/
In a October 2024 New York Times interview, Kelly stated that Trump "falls into the general definition of fascist, for sure." He read the definition of fascism (far-right authoritarian, ultranationalist, dictatorial leader, etc.) and concluded: "Certainly the former president is in the far-right area, he’s certainly an authoritarian, admires people who are dictators... So he certainly falls into the general definition of fascist." Kelly added that Trump "prefers the dictator approach to government.

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2024-10-23/the-high-profile-military-leaders-who-have-come-out-against-donald-trump
There's a long list of military members who compared Trump to Hitler, and his policies to fascism.

>>1510242
The person you're arguing with is much better than you at this. You really should just stop posting.

>>1510242
Its like they truly do not think before they talk or even post. You had to have known this was cringe to say in response, right?

>>1510243
>>1510244
>>1510245
>>1510246
>>1510247
posters bad

trump good

>>1510249
>>>/Littlepenis/