Tuesday, August 09, 2016


Today, Donald Trump was talking about shooting (or threatening to shoot) somebody. The only question is whether it was Hillary Clinton or judges she'll appoint as president:
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump appeared to joke about the possibility that Hillary Clinton could be shot in remarks at a campaign rally Tuesday in Wilmington, N.C.

Trump was discussing the possibility that Clinton, the Democratic nominee, would be able to appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court if she wins the race for the White House.

He then said that there was nothing that could be done in that scenario, before mentioning “Second Amendment folks.”

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment,” Trump said to boos from the crowd.

“By the way, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks,” he then added.

“Though the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know.”

The campaign's response simply doesn't address the fact that Trump said "if she gets to pick her judges"-- a reference to a period after Clinton is inaugurated:

Charlie Pierce asks:
Is that The Line?

You know, The Line, the one that He, Trump has to cross before the entire Republican Party, not to mention a good portion of the human race, finds him too revolting for their delicate stomachs? What say you, Paul Ryan? Is that the line? John McCain? Mitch McConnell? All you clowns in the tricorns and the Watering The Tree Of Liberty tank tops? What say you all? Do you stand by this?
If he'd implied that a citizen should stab her to death, or wire explosives to her car, I think -- I think -- that Ryan and McConnell and the rest of the party-before-country bastards who've enabled Trump for a year would finally say they've had enough. Or maybe not -- heaven knows they don't want to offend his base! (John McCain couldn't say anything negative about Trump until the end of the month -- his primary is on August 30. Ryan might say something sooner -- his primary is today.)

But in this case, they simply can't say anything, because denouncing Trump would be implicitly denouncing conservative America's true god, the holiest of holies: the Gun. None may blaspheme it!

So they'll say nothing. They'll elbow reporters out of the way if questioned. They'll pray for a swing in the news cycle that will spare them from having to offer an opinion. If forced, they'll echo the nonsense from Trump's communications director.

My question is: What are they going to do when Trump says this again?

Would he dare? Why not? In his mind, this remark put him right where he wants to be: under attack from the forces of "political correctness" and revving up his base. Maybe he'll do it with a nod and wink to the forces he'll say are trying to suppress his plain talk -- They told me I can't talk anymore about the Second Amendment people (cheers), but you know who you are, and you know what to do if Crooked Hillary starts picking the judges (massive roar from the crowd). But I think he'll say it again. No one could make him stop talking about Judge Gonzalo Curiel for days, or the Khan family. Why should this be any different?

Oh, maybe Paul Manafort and the kids will get him to back off before he doubles down and becomes the first major-party presidential candidate to be questioned by the feds for violent threats. But don't bet the house on that.


UPDATE: Nope, no Republican is even going to entertain the possibility that Trump meant what he said -- 100% of the Republicans who respond will talk just like this:


Rand Careaga said...

"Trump would be implicitly denouncing conservative America's true god, the holiest of holies: the Gun. None may blaspheme it!"

'Twas ever thus.

Victor said...

I'm actually speechless...

Enjoy it, folks!

KenRight said...

Well, I've been reading some liberal commentaries suggesting that the fake far lefties who indeed wish to confiscate masses of guns do not represent Clinton nor Clinton them. That it isn't feasible anyway.
So what's all the projectioned fuss about other than both sides trying to checkmate the others?

Feud Turgidson said...

"maybe Paul Manafort and the kids will get him to back off"

Have you seen Manafort's C.V.? Client list? Portfolio? Body of work? His necklaces of finger bones? His collection of skull candales? He was in partnership with Lee Atwater, Roger Stone& Charlie Black.

rickstersherpa@msn.com said...

You forgot Red Skull as I am convinced Trump is the candidate from Hydra.

Lit3Bolt said...

But Hillary's e-mails--!

BKT said...

Can KenRight provide a single example of a "far leftie" advocating mass confiscation of privately owned guns?

I think the key word in his comment was "fake."

Unknown said...

And somewhere in the political wastelands of Nevada, Sharron “Second Amendment Remedies” Angle is swilling hard lemonade and commiserating with her invisible friend across the campfire about the unfairness of life.

Ten Bears said...

I've read that as many times as there are words and I just make any sense out of it. Though the Hillary-bots have accused me of being fake as a Socialist it doesn't get much further to the left, and have never advocated confiscation of guns. Have even commented on the pistol and deer rifle I've had for forty years. And of course as a Vietnam Veteran have more than a passing familiarity with weapons of war.

Ken, let me 'splain somethin' to ya: one of the earliest of US Supreme Court Chief Justices, like two hundred years ago, John Marshall wrote that the Second Amendment provides relief for the tyrannies imposed upon the majority by a minority. Doesn't say anything about a tyrannical government or presidential candidate you don't like. That's a false interpretation, a mis-interperetation, a dog-damned lie. What he wrote was it provides relief for the tyrannies imposed upon the majority by a minority. I would that you and everyone like you, though indeed vocal and to most intimidating, all you Trumpettes, you racist dog-fucking assholes who have never done anything of value in your life and know no more than what comes out of the television are in fact a minority, imposing a tyranny upon the rest of us, upon the majority, and the sound you don't hear is me jacking a round into my well oiled AR.

Grung_e_Gene said...

Trump will lose no support from this, indeed the call to assassinate Hillary Clinton will further endear him to conservatives who have pledged him their bodies and souls.

Also right-wingers will trot out Both Sides as Kenright just did...

Blackstone said...

The fuss Kenny boy is that some RWNJ might interpret it similar to "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?"

Never Ben Better said...

His campaign can try to spin that all they want; watching the audience behind him as he said it, listening to the vocal reaction, you could tell they got -- and got a huuuuuuuuuuuuge charge out of -- the allusion to "Second Amendment remedies", and understood exactly what that implied.

Feud Turgidson said...

My experience is that this sort of recklessness is as likely as not to backfire on the candidate who chooses to go reckless.

Which of the 2 major candidates is more likely to have a crowd full of white male crazies who are armed and harboring fantasies of personal aggrandizement from killing someone famous? I don't think Hillary is the answer to this question.

Modern day list of right wing pols who've been shot at or actually shot or even shot and killed in assassination attempts: Wallace, Ford, Reagan.

Lefty equivalents: the brothers Kennedy.

3 versus 2.

How many podium incidents that we seen this cycle? One - at a Drumpf/Grump/Trump event. How may violent confrontations? Lots and lots - all at D/G/Trump events.

jsrtheta said...

@Ken Right.

Don't discuss guns, and those you imagine would ban them. Because here, you truly demonstrate your ignorance. Generally, you are fairly competent at appearing semi-informed. Never right, of course, but usually with some colorable basis for your bullshit.

You have truly jumped the shark, my not-friend, and done a disservice to the legions of quasi-able trolls of the Right. When you venture out of the arena of bullshit rhetoric into a fact-based environment, you burst into flame like a cheap vampire in a C movie. And it's not a good look for you.

jsrtheta said...

Oh great. Mayk is another piss-poor writer who doesn't seem to know the definition of "infer."

And she works for a news station.

Ms. Mayk, if you can't even speak proper English, then find a job more suitable to your skills. Like, I don't know, Trump speech writer.

Danp said...

It's not Trump alone. It's the Republican Party that panders to bigots through absurd conspirace theories. They argue openly that we need our Second Ammendment rights to protect ourselves from the government itself. Then they "joke" about using guns (Sharon Angle, the electoral map with targets, etc.) to eliminate the evil-doing Dems. When you see a story about some mentally ill person going postal, look at what they read, write and listen to. There are more that follow right wing media than ISIS or AL Qaeda.

So it's not Trump's intent that bothers me. It's his total disregard for human decency. He may not know how he influences people. More than likely, he doesn't care. In the meantime, let's stop calling people like Dylan Roof lone wolves. They're recruits.

maxk1947 said...

Wouldn't Trump's "Second Amendment Solution" require eliminating VP Kaine as well? Otherwise, you've stuck yourself with with another liberal President, and Hillary the Martyr to push the nominations. You need a President Ryan selecting judges to get the desired effect.

Then again, I don't think anyone's attempted the twofer before. Talk about fame and glory!

(Attention, Secret Service: this is meant as satire. I don't condone assassinations of any sort.)

Unknown said...

The craven cowards who support Trump won't abandon him until it's obvious that he's taking down the whole rotten ship.

KenRight said...

"From ex-CIA Chief Morrell, a Clinton supporter, calls to kill Russians, Iranians and Assad. See link at 45
And today, from CNN host to assassinate Assange? Democratic Strategist Calls For The Assassination Of Julian Assange

"Amid the media-hyped furor over Donald Trump's 2nd Amendment comments and Wikileaks' suggestions about the untimely death of DNC-staffer Seth Rich, we thought it perhaps of note that Democratic strategist, and CNN host, has publicly called for the "illegal assassination of that son-of-a-bitch" Julian Assange...
Meet Bob Beckel - Democratic strategist, CNN host (former Fox host), and clear "treasonous, traitor" Assange-hater...
This strikes us as very dangerous talk... We wonder if he is being questioned or investigated for such a public and unquestionable demand for someone to be murdered? Forget due process... "just kill the son of a bitch."

And Clinton's violent references to Obama ignored here, covered elsewhere.


Ten Bears said...

Boy, you keep flogging that dead horse.

spinozista said...

I'm afraid I have to insist that "Ten Bears" provide an actual full citation to the case (or whatever) in which Chief Justice Marshall wrote what "Ten Bears" says he wrote about the Second Amendment.

Ten Bears said...

No, "spinozista", you provide citation to where it says the Second Amendment is there to overthrow a "tyrranical government", or assassinate a presidential candidate you don't like.

I've been studying this shit longer than you've been alive. It comes not from case but from personal, the sort thing read and tested on in a first year Constitutional Law class.

Yes, you should be afraid.

jsrtheta said...

@Ten Bears,
I practiced law for 30 years, and I dealt with the Constitution on a more or less daily basis all that time. I've also written on the Second Amendment, and I gotta say, I know of no such Marshall opinion. And given the huge amount written on the Second Amendment in the past 25 years or so, I have to believe someone would have mentioned it.

Are you seriously suggesting the Second Amendment exists to protect the citizenry from the federal government? Because if you are, you couldn't be more wrong.