Just as I suspected:
The leftists are using the attack on Paul Pelosi as an election tool!
Biden's WH spokesperson said the attack "was similar to the January 6 attack!"
Here's what I make of all this:
The other leftists were angry with Paul for getting the recent DUI charge, and then by trying to use a get-out-of-jail-free card he had in his wallet.
Democrats don't need all this negative attention while they're stealing our money and trying to win elections (we're a few days away from election day.)
So they hired this lunatic 2 kill to birds with 1 stone: give payback to
Paul, then claim the attacker was a MAGA nut, to make people feel sorry for elitist globalist leftist scumbags, and scare up some votes.
Biden's WH spokesperson said the attack "was similar to the January 6 attack!"
The attacker shouted "Where Nancy", Where's Nancy"
The other leftists were angry with Paul for getting the recent DUI charg and then by trying to use a get-out-of-jail-free card he had in his wall
A "get out of jail free card". I see.
Democrats are not "getting all this negative attention".
So they hired this lunatic 2 kill to birds with 1 stone: give payback to
Who hired "this lunatic"?
No one has to claim he "was a MAGA nut". It is obvious.
Yea the January 6 rioters only wanted to take a dump on her desk. This crazy guy wanted to hit her with a hammer!
A "get out of jail free card". I see.
Yes, it's not actually called that, but it's a card that shows that Paul is a member of a police benevolent association. He hoped that they'd let him go once they saw that, but they didn't. (Cops are conservatives.)
Democrats are not "getting all this negative attention".
Not in the media but on the street.
Who hired "this lunatic"?
This was just one possible scenario. Maybe nobody hired him, but his work is paying off for the Democrats because now everyone's crying for Paul. "Poor Paul! Just because his wife's a Democrat! I guess we'd better vote for his wife then!"
No one has to claim he "was a MAGA nut". It is obvious.
How is that obvious?
Here's what I make of all this:
The other leftists were angry with Paul for getting the recent DUI
charge, and then by trying to use a get-out-of-jail-free card he had in his wallet. Democrats don't need all this negative attention while
they're stealing our money and trying to win elections (we're a few days away from election day.)
So they hired this lunatic 2 kill to birds with 1 stone: give payback to Paul, then claim the attacker was a MAGA nut, to make people feel sorry for elitist globalist leftist scumbags, and scare up some votes.
They did take a dump in her office. But they were there to kill Mike
They did take a dump in her office. But they were there to kill Mike
Did your "psychic" tell you this? Because as far as I can tell, you've
got no evidence to back any of it up.
It's far more likely that some brainwashed right-wing nutjob, hyped up on conservative hate speech and acting alone, tried to assassinate a member of the Democrat leadership but failed because she wasn't where he'd thought she'd be.
Did your "psychic" tell you this? Because as far as I can tell, you'v got no evidence to back any of it up.No it's just obvious because of how it happened a week before election
day and then quickly got turned into an anti-Republican talking point.
It's far more likely that some brainwashed right-wing nutjob, hyped u conservative hate speech and acting alone, tried to assassinate a mem of the Democrat leadership but failed because she wasn't where he'd thought she'd be.Let's see the guy's voter registration card and let's see how fit he is
to stand trial. But more importantly, let's try to pin it on Trump, or white nationalists.
I know that people died, and because of that especially, the crimes committed are significant. People are getting killed every day in Democrat-run cities but for some reason Congress isn't interested in that.
Joe claimed responsibilty for an airstrike in Afghanistan that killed 11 children. What went wrong? Why doesn't congress investigate that? Because
the victims weren't members of congress?
They did take a dump in her office. But they were there to kill Mike
I love that detail. The perfect place to leave a fresh one is right next to a stale one.
His social media posts say quite a bit about his political stances. Whether he's fit to stand trial or not has little to do with his motive. Some of his posts had to do with the 2020 election and the 1/6 insurrection, so Trump is at least partly responsible. I'm not sure that white nationalists had anything to do with it, but that's a marginally better "theory" than your original one.
His social media posts say quite a bit about his political stances. Whether he's fit to stand trial or not has little to do with his moti Some of his posts had to do with the 2020 election and the 1/6 insurrection, so Trump is at least partly responsible. I'm not sure t white nationalists had anything to do with it, but that's a marginall better "theory" than your original one.He's extremely mentally ill according to his ex girlfriend, but let's
just blame it on "Trump rhetoric" because that's what "most" idiots want to hear.
I know that people died, and because of that especially, the crimes comm are significant. People are getting killed every day in Democrat-run cit but for some reason Congress isn't interested in that.
I thought we were discussing the Paul P attack?
But now you want to put a new spin on this old and debunked "people are getting killed every day in Democrat-run cities" right wing talking
point?
But if one of those 8 people had been married to a congressional prune, we'd be frantically seeking new laws and money to "stop the political violence."
I thought we were discussing the Paul P attack?
Yea but the media says that the Paul P attack was "political violence" that happened as a result of "Trump rhetoric" and that it's "synonymous with the January 6 attack."
I wouldn't call it "debunked."
Unless the media is lying about all the crimes in Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington DC, and/or Chicago.
I'm not trying to spin us off topic or anything, I just want to point out that there seems to be a lot of concern for Paul P but not much concern for "8 people killed & dozens injured over the weekend by gunfire in Chicago."
But if one of those 8 people had been married to a congressional prune, we'd be frantically seeking new laws and money to "stop the political violence."
"Mentally ill" and "driven to action by lies and violent rhetoric" are
not mutually exclusive.
"Mentally ill" and "driven to action by lies and violent rhetoric" ar not mutually exclusive.I think I remember Trump telling us to "hit leftists with hammers." He's nuts though, and I don't wish that on anyone.
Paul Pelosi was attacked because of, and not in spite of, who he is. It was 100% a political attack.
I wouldn't call it "debunked."
Yeah, that right wing talking point is debunked.
The attack on Paul Pelosi was not your average assault. It was politicaly motivated. It was a politcal attack, political violence.
Paul Pelosi was attacked because of, and not in spite of, who he is. was 100% a political attack.Or maybe 1% political and 99% mental illness?
not mutually exclusive.I think I remember Trump telling us to "hit leftists with hammers." H nuts though, and I don't wish that on anyone.
You know better than that. Calls to violence need not be so specific. You+re just grasping at straws now.
"Fight like hell" is what we're doing right now; fighting to saveI think I remember Trump telling us to "hit leftists with hammer nuts though, and I don't wish that on anyone.You know better than that. Calls to violence need not be so specific. You+re just grasping at straws now.
America from 2 more years of tyranny,
fighting to keep capitalism alive,
and fighting for equality.
Or maybe 1% political and 99% mental illness?
Nice try at minimizing the role of violent rhetoric in political speech, but no. It wasn't one thing that was said, but a continued repitition of violent rhetoric.
All political rhetoric involving skin color IS violent rhetoric.Or maybe 1% political and 99% mental illness?Nice try at minimizing the role of violent rhetoric in political spee but no. It wasn't one thing that was said, but a continued repitition violent rhetoric.
We should focus on the violence against police that resulted from the Democrats' violent "Defund the Police" rhetoric.
The "Defund the Police" rhetoric was not violent. It was a reasoned call to allow police to focus on policing and have others take care of the things that police are called upon to do that have nothing to do with policing. There was nothing violent about it.
On 02 Nov 2022, Jeff Thiele said the following...
The "Defund the Police" rhetoric was not violent. It was a reasonedcall
to allow police to focus on policing and have others take care of the things that police are called upon to do that have nothing to do with policing. There was nothing violent about it.
Others like who? People who might be part of the problem?
Who would have that authority and who would even want that massive responsibility to make this judgment call.
Let cops do their jobs and you do you.
No the violence comes when these nonsensical persons who making these requests get what they have been asking for and get to de-fund the Police. This will be HELL - Unleashed!
The mere mentioning of such a request SHOULD be immediately be met with a board of inquiry (hearing) and be countered with mandatory class based on fundamentals of right and wrong, followed by a why one comment form.
As to why they are making such a request in the first place.
If de-funding the Police comes to be a reality there will be unstoppable
and
continuous crime and it will only empower & embolden the criminal mind.
Who will return the peace, when gangs form and claim territories of city blocks, terrorizing every corner of the city.
Maybe commissioner Gordon can rush to the top of Police Headquarters and flash
the Bat Signal? What your suggesting is just as ridiculous, not to
mention is
totally preposterous as well as dangerous because these are the exact ingredients of a bloodbath.
A rational mind is required at this time. Not liberal ones who obviously
have not thought through one element w/ any type of clarity.
Not even slightly. You're insane!
De-funding the Police is not the answer. They are there to Protect and
Serve
remember? Furthermore de-funding the Police will lead to chaos and a lot more
death without this check and balance in place. There should be more cops
in
schools and in after school programs (in summer programs too.) As well on the
basketball courts and within the inner cities in general to change this ridiculous notion and (complete lie) that one needs to fear the Police.
This notion needs to be eliminated just because your skin may be brown
that
this does NOT mean that your a criminal or up to no good.
Cops have families too, they want to return to them at the end of their shift.
.≈______ ┌───┐ ┌─────────┐ ┌────────┐ ╔═════════╗ ┌───────────────┐
_[]_││──││ │HUB│ │ Fidonet │ │FSX Net│ ║T R U M P║ │Another Message│
{ NET 267 │ │800│ │1:267/150│ │21:1/127│ ║ 2 0 2 4 ║ │ by Gregory │
/ 00────00'┘¿└0─0┘¿└─00───00─┘¿└─00──00─┘¿╚═00════00╝¿└──00────────00─┘
--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A46 2020/08/26 (Windows/64)
* Origin: Capital Station BBS * Telnet://csbbs.dyndns.org * (1:267/150)
Sorry for interfering in the discussion.
But I have an American friend.
He has a lot of legal firearms. And there are many like him in America.
He is a war veteran and does not like communists. I think you'll have to
No one can offend Americans in America as long as you have "Rednecks" basements full of weapons. Just give them a call. I think you will be happy with the results.
| Sysop: | deepend |
|---|---|
| Location: | Calgary, Alberta |
| Users: | 239 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 00:08:14 |
| Calls: | 1,430 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 3,321 |
| Messages: | 357,629 |