Did Donald Trump suggest Hillary Clinton be assassinated?

Here’s Trump’s campaign statement. PolitiFact says it’s a head-scratcher. Rolling Stone says be afraid. Be very afraid.

Speaking from the Judgment Seat, it was, at best, irresponsible (and precisely what we’ve come to expect). Bro. Don, we’ll keep praying fer ye.

Advertisements

13 responses to “Did Donald Trump suggest Hillary Clinton be assassinated?

  1. How many times has he said “people said I shouldn’t this” and then say what he shouldn’t say. Or “I’m not going so say” or “I’m not saying” and then say it. He’s like a twelve year old who thinks he’s cleverly outwitting adults, so invested in his scam that he’s outraged if you question it. Caught in the same situation at that age I would lay down my trump card (sorry) and rage, “Mom, don’t you trust me!?”. She would smile and say, “of course not, dear”.

    Everybody, including his defenders, know he was hinting at violence. Unfortunately, he’s not an incorrigible adolescent with a mom that knows the truth and a dad in denial. He is however a spoiled man child who’s been handed the power of a major party nomination. He’s found the gun in the shoebox hidden in Dad’s closet and he’s sitting on the edge of the bed fantasizing about the possibilities.

  2. The tactic of using mass communication to promulgate dog whistle rhetoric and hate speech that repeatedly dehumanizes a particular person or group with the intent of arousing both fear and moral disgust within a target audience is nothing new for right-wing extremists, be they politician, pundit or preacher. The occasional inclusion of violent symbolism, (or sometimes explicit calls for violence), in right-wing extremist rhetoric is genuine cause for concern. I’m not sure I’m willing to sign on to the whole “stochastic terrorism” thing, but it’s definitely cause for serious concern.

    The question, in this case, is whether the phrase “2nd Amendment people” when alluding to political activism necessarily connotes violence.

    Being a 2nd Amendment people myself, someone who supports the 2nd Amendment as interpreted in 2008, I tend to think not. Because…strange as it might seem…when I listened to Trump’s latest fear-mongering, I did not feel the least bit compelled to arm myself and go hunting for Hillary.

    The “progressive” media apparently thinks otherwise. And it’s better clickbait than covering Trump’s economic agenda. Boring!!

    • I watched the Detroit economic speech. I saw a nostalgia unmatched in today’s political theater, a longing for a time-that-never-was but sure plays well to the general public.

      • And as long as Trump controls the coverage, as long as the “progressive” media RSVPs every Trump invitation to effectively ignore his actual policy proposals, (which…strangely enough…mirror the GOP’s nebulous “Better Way” agenda), that’s the kind of play that will more likely than not determine who’s going to be the next President.

        • Ha. On that. I just sent something to The Hill about it. I hope they publish it, though I have to admit I had a hard time not writing about white Evangelicals along with it. It’s a word salad!

    • “Strange as it might seem” ?! With all due respect, I don’t think you’re the best test of who might be driven to action by Trump’s rhetoric or who might be drawn to it even if they don’t act. Trump keeps doubling down on his apparently shrinking universe of support which I’m sure doesn’t include all “second amendment people”.

      • I don’t see much in the press…”progressive” or otherwise…concerning this latest Trump transgression…or most other 2nd Amendment coverage for that matter…any delineations within the boundaries of 2nd Amendment supporters. On the Right, we’re patriots. On (what passes for) the Left (in the media), we’re gun nuts. So, with all due respect, I am, according to media standards, as good an example as any. I think that’s proved in the apparently unchallenged assumption demonstrated by the “progressive” media in this case, (where one would naturally expect to find such qualifying delineations), that the phrase “2nd Amendment people” when alluding to political activism necessarily connotes violence.

        Is Trumpism a shrinking universe? Really? I am not convinced.

        The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about. Public Relations 101. The keystone in Trump’s media campaign strategy. And its working like gangbusters.

        • I don’t think Trumpism/Nativism/Authoritarianism/Whateverism is a shrinking universe, yet anyway. I do think that candidate Trump’s universe of support may be shrinking. There’s a difference.

          And I have to ask, Trump used the phrase “second amendment people”. Do you think he was primarily alluding to activism or violence? To me, based on his past comments, it’s pretty clear. Like the wise guy that tells you it would be shame if anything bad happened to your nice store.

          • When Trump used the phrase “2nd Amendment people” he was referring to people who are unlike Clinton, who, according to Trump, wants to “abolish” or “essentially abolish” the 2nd Amendment. According to Trump, 2nd Amendment people do not want to abolish or essentially abolish the 2nd Amendment. I think that’s reasonably accurate.

            The allusion to activism comes in at “maybe there is.” After his dire prediction of hopelessness should Clinton be elected.
            Alluding to some unspecified potential in the activism of 2nd Amendment people.
            Potential which the Clinton Camp immediately judged to be a reference to violence.
            A judgement which the “progressive” media didn’t challenge. Building on it and expanding it into the kind of headline grabbing sensationalism that makes Trump hard.
            A judgement based completely on an utterly unjustified assumption.

            It’s the Clinton Camp and the “progressive” media…in their response to Trump’s statement…that explicitly employs “2nd Amendment people” as an allusion to violence.

  3. Speaking of alluding to… The speech General John Allen gave recently alludes to grave consequences and civil unrest within the military if Trump were to win. Well I hope the good man was calling for a military coup. Damn, I would be out on the street the next day selling tee shirts. Maybe a slogan, “American Coups are Unlike Turkish Coups. We Rock.” Or something like that.

    • I think the whole “civil military crisis” thing is just more anti-Trump hyperbole. When it comes to potential illegalities, our military has never faltered in its duty to The Commander in Chief. Orders are given. Carried out. Illegality is something that’s determined down the road. An American military coup simply cannot happen here. Allen knows that.

      And having continued to serve The Obama Administration, and the Clinton State Department, after his retirement, (special security envoy to Israeli/Palestinian negotiations…ISIS Czar), I’m inclined to think Allen’s performance at the DNC is politically motivated: jockeying for consideration of possible future postings in a Clinton 2.0 Administration. His email problems having been all cleared up and all, he’s probably eyeing Secretary of State.

  4. I wouldn’t disagree.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s