Another attempt to kill Trump

[Sweetiedarling7]

Can’t see another thread.

Armed intruder shot dead at Mar-a-Lago. I haven’t seen whether Trump was in residence at the time.

I wonder if anyone will succeed eventually?

Torn between thinking well it would be a good start and then thinking it would just make a martyr of him.

And yes, part of me is appalled that I should think that killing someone is ever justifiable.

No he wasn’t

just another stunt....

A coping method?

Hitlers generals were very good on the battlefield. Not good people though obviously.

To get over the fact he lost the election he said they were rigged.

They lost. Thankfully.

The left wing media in US have stoked the people to become vigilantes. These people really believe they're in a dictactorship and react accordingly. It's becoming lawless over there. Unfortunately, US ideas have a habit of leaking over here.

The left wing media in the US?
😂😂😂😂

I can't even.

You mean that he lies.

They fought a war on 2 fronts with less men and resources while holding territory. Most of the big mistakes were caused by Hitler not his generals.

Yes. Thats what I said 😂

His lies are coping methods?

And what was January 6th about then?

No, that actually makes sense. However, it's likely that he believes his own lies, because his puny little brain can't deal with him losing at anything. Look at the way he constantly feels the need to big himself up in every speech he makes, look at the childish name calling, the paraphernalia of wannabe royalty. Underneath it all he is a man with zero self esteem or confidence. It is one of the things that makes him dangerous - his need for validation makes him so easy to influence.

No.

But I do believe he is dangerous and showing clear fascist tendencies.

He said the election was rigged to cope (lie) and then January 6th happend because of those lies, not because he told anyone to do anything though. He was still democratically elected.

Can you explain to me those facist tendencies?

Do you agree he is a racist?

Here's the funny part:

You'd think it would dominate the news. But - nothing!

That poster was correct. Hitler came to power via the democratic election process.

Because that would mean mentioning the Epstein Files.....

The Nazis were elected and that's why Hitler was appointed Chancellor. As you say the point is that it was a democratic process.

Oh, I'm not sure if I can be bothered. There is a lot already written on the subject if you're genuinely interested. But as a starting point:

The ultranationalistic rhetoric
The expansionist ambitions
The dehumanisation of immigrants and the blatant racism
The deployment of ICE as a paramilitary force to generate fear and silence protest
The authoritarian tendencies and the desire for absolute power
The cult of personality and emphasis on loyalty to the leader at all costs
The politicisation of the justice system
The disregard for the rule of law and constitutional norms
The denial of election results that don't suit his narrative
The encouragement of a violent insurrection
The bully boy tactics and the use of threats to get what he wants
The victimisation of those who dare to challenge him
The disinformation and propaganda or "alternative facts"
The attacks on the media

There is actually a lot if you choose to look.

I thought Hitler was appointed not elected.

He was indeed appointed. The German constitution at that time required that the Chancellor be appointed by the President - it was not possible for a Chancellor to be directly elected.

But he was appointed as Chancellor because the Nazi party had been elected - they didn't have an actual majority but they were the largest party in the Reichstag, hence Hitler's appointment.

The point is, Hitler became Chancellor as the result of an entirely democratic, constitutional process.

So we know that, sometimes, the electorate can make decisions which are spectacularly wrong.

• Removal of historical narratives in public places which do not suit his agenda (slavery, feminism)
• Erasure of non white non male pioneering influences from museums, monuments and national parks
• Influence on the press and the media by means of threats, resulting in a less than free press
• Gerrymandering of election districts by his party to ensure maximising his vote (I mean, have you SEEN the shapes of those districts?) - fortunately all that's happened is that those gerrymanders are now being countered by other states gerrymandering their own
• Aggressive pronatalist agenda
• Denial of rights of due process, including to actual citizens