Scouring thru the bottom feeders. I hope you did a disinfection upon exiting that place.
Simpleχity;1066033811 said:Trumps initial tweet and then the ... "cover-up tweet".
Lol. The superimposed circle is a teeny bit too small and two points of the original star are still visible.
The bozo even screwed up his backpedal.
There you go with that ill-educated claim of racist again.If you tweeted a racist image, do you think you'd be called racist for it?
I'm pretty sure you would be, so feigning outrage that Trump got called racist for tweeting a racist image is irrational.
The rational thing would be to concede the point that Donald tweeted a racist image, either purposefully or by 'accident'. That would be rational.
1. This isn't about me.Excon's verdict: not racist!
1. This isn't about me.
2. Clearly you show you do not understand what racism is vs that of antisemitism.
Excon's verdict: not antisemitic!
When I saw the graphic, I didn't automatically think "Star of David." There is so much to validly criticize about Trump that I can't understand why these manufactured "gotchas!" gain such traction.
I don't know whether Trump will be elected; I've decided that anything is possible in this novel election. As you said on page 1, "Scary. On the other side, we have a group that wants to kill the Constitution, and on his side I doubt anyone's even read the Constitution."
So it's just impulsive trolling? And that's what you want your President to do?
Manufactured "gotchas" appear to be the norm for The TrumpHaters. The shrill shreaking reminds me of their Precious Hillary. The fatal irony is that they actually think they are being persuasive, like all us Trump lovers are going to quit and go home and pout. How silly.
Remember Haters, "The winner laughs and tells funny jokes. The loser cries, 'DEAL, DEAL!' "
It's also a Sheriff's star, and a dodecagon. You know? With all the actual crazy crap the guy says and does, do we really need to try and pick out silly **** like this, that only makes his opposition look petty and ignorant? You don't actually think that Trump sat down with his crayons and drew this, do you? An advertising firm made this, and they just picked a graphic from a choice of graphic stars to use as a background for the text.
The OP article and its supposed outrage is just absolutely silly.
As much as I despise Trump - and those oh-so-patriotic Republicans who think he's the Second Coming of Reagan - this is one thing that's not his fault at all. He almost certainly wasn't the one who designed the page, and there's no indication that the one who did was an anti-Semite. He could've just wanted to give the imagery of a sheriff's star for all we know.
If there's proof that Trump deliberately approved anti-Semitic imagery, then have at it - but for now (and unlike the freaking untold scores of demonstrably outrageous lies he's told so far in his campaign) he's innocent of wrongdoing in this matter.
Going for the "gotcha" is a modern political malady not limited to party or candidate, IMO.
No, he didn't design the page. He just took it from a white supremacist site and retweeted it.
Is there proof of that?
No, he didn't design the page. He just took it from a white supremacist site and retweeted it.
Is there proof of that?
As much as I despise Trump - and those oh-so-patriotic Republicans who think he's the Second Coming of Reagan - this is one thing that's not his fault at all. He almost certainly wasn't the one who designed the page, and there's no indication that the one who did was an anti-Semite. He could've just wanted to give the imagery of a sheriff's star for all we know.
If there's proof that Trump deliberately approved anti-Semitic imagery, then have at it - but for now (and unlike the freaking untold scores of demonstrably outrageous lies he's told so far in his campaign) he's innocent of wrongdoing in this matter.
The furthest back the image can be traced to is on a really horrific neo-Nazi site called /pol/ on June 22.
This incident spurred a discussion on whether Trump was a "fellow /pol/" and they proudly archived it. I could link to it but it's a pretty sick site and I'm not thrilled about sending them traffic.
Well said. The guy has in-laws and grandkids that are Jewish for goodness sake.
t for this particular piece of Jew-baiting."
Yep! Guilty, guilty, guilty.
I just saw the story on HuffPost before I read your response.
Before I saw the proof, I refused to call him anything but innocent in the matter...but now - GUILTY as charged!
Wow. Assumptions galore.Yep! Guilty, guilty, guilty.
I just saw the story on HuffPost before I read your response.
Before I saw the proof, I refused to call him anything but innocent in the matter...but now - GUILTY as charged!
1. It isn't a retweet.Ask yourself why it is that Trump would be reading - much less retweeting - anything from a white supremacist site.
Wow. Assumptions galore.
1. It isn't a retweet.
2. You assume it is a supremacist site.
3. You need to ask yourself why you assume he didn't just find it on the net with an image search.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?