Typical

I don't know anyone that says all protesters are looters and rioters. I do believe that BLM and Antifa have people inside their organization that are there to cause trouble and stir up the crowd into a frenzy. Some protesters start out with the idea of peaceful protest but get caught up in the frenzy and become a looter / rioter.


My question for you is why do all protesters and those on the left believe all police are just like the SOB in Minnesota that killed Floyd? Before you start throwing stones at the right you better take a hard look at what these fuckers on the left are saying. Originally Posted by Budman

What is the likelihood that any of the cops involved in any of this shit gets anything that can possibly be described as a fair trial.

Poor little bitch. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Why do CommunistSocialistNazisLiberal AntiTrumpers call people "Poor little bitch" when they ask a dumbass question and don't get the answer they demand? Let me explain to you:

"Conservatives" DON'T .... you and yours, the CommunistSocialistNazisLiberal AntiTrumpers and their LameAssLyingPOSNewMedia ..

lumps the looters etc with the protestors and try to label them as PEACEFUL ...

... LIKE YOU JUST TRIED TO DO!

Have another alcoholic beverage!

Why do CommunistSocialistNazisLiberal AntiTrumpers call people "Poor little bitch" when they ask a dumbass question and don't get the answer they demand? Let me explain to you:

"Conservatives" DON'T .... you and yours, the CommunistSocialistNazisLiberal AntiTrumpers and their LameAssLyingPOSNewMedia ..

lumps the looters etc with the protestors and try to label them as PEACEFUL ...

... LIKE YOU JUST TRIED TO DO!

Have another alcoholic beverage! Originally Posted by LexusLover

It's a reflex.

Describe the stand that he made. Originally Posted by Next Best Thing

T R U M P sent the national guard.

I also love the photo op H E did.

H E did that to show everyone that H E was not going to be controlled by the so called movement. It also sent a powerful message of L A W & O R D E R.

It was superb.

The protesters lost their credibility. I don't have any respect for them.

T R U M P sent the national guard.

I also love the photo op H E did.

H E did that to show everyone that H E was not going to be controlled by the so called movement. It also sent a powerful message of L A W & O R D E R.

It was superb.

The protesters lost their credibility back in May. I don't have any respect for them. Originally Posted by yitzchak

In DC.

Protesters? Credibility?

They're rioters.

It amazes me that he's too afraid of political fallout to send the military in to Seattle.

This would be a huge win for him.

Perfect opportunity to show the country what happens when criminals unlawfully occupy parts of an American city.

But I guess this is too controversial.

It amazes me that he's too afraid of political fallout to send the military in to Seattle.
Originally Posted by Next Best Thing

A couple of comments Trump made reveals his motivation for not doing so .... and I suspect part of his hesitancy was based upon information provided to him from intelligence on the ground inside the barriers. He was allowing the said excuses for politicians in Seattle and Washington State to show their asses and not doing anything and then having their "Summer of Love" turn into a nationally broadcase shit-hole with shooting and killing.

It was inevitable.

These ignorant, immature want-a-bes don't have the sense to run a one-car funeral, much less a village.

The reason they want "free education" is because it wasn't worth paying for it.

Ask Bernie ....

In DC. Originally Posted by Next Best Thing

Distinctly a different "ball of wax"!

I heard him say that at the Oklahoma rally, about a week after all the tough talk.

I find it to be damage control.

And why not just go in now, the situation seems perfectly ripe.

In DC.

Protesters? Credibility?

They're rioters.

It amazes me that he's too afraid of political fallout to send the military in to Seattle.

This would be a huge win for him.

Perfect opportunity to show the country what happens when criminals unlawfully occupy parts of an American city.

But I guess this is too controversial. Originally Posted by Next Best Thing

I also think T R U M P should send the military to Seattle.

I'm not exactly sure of his reason for not doing so. I think it is kind of funny to let them be idiots and see what happens. However, I would have a different opinion if I lived in the area.

He mentioned making an example out of them by letting them prove to the world that their movement is purely destructive. I'm not too mad at it.

I went to one of the BLM protests after the National Guard came in. It was eye opening. The cops and soldiers were unbelievably tolerant, some even showed support for the protest. I felt 100% safe, and the police and soldiers were the reason for that.

So, when you see these protesters being tear gassed and smacked with billy clubs, I'm convinced they must have provoked it. I was blown away by the tolerance the police and soldiers demonstrated and the security they provided.

Other than that, most of the BLM protesters are just kids or random people coming out to try and get high or see wtf is going on. It was kind of a joke. But, hey, I actually went and stood with them, which is more than some of these keyboard worriers can say.

I think most of them are misguided youths, who probably were taken advantage of by gangs and the mentally challenged. I can sympathize with them, but I don't respect their cause.

It's pretty shameful to take advantage of the lock down to loot, vandalize and cause anarchy. The whole country was in a vulnerable position, and it's despicable to have taken advantage of that. If it wasn't for T R U M P, I'd be ashamed to call myself an American.

I asked a simple question. And the party of lying liars leaps in. Video evidence? Like the evidence of the number of people at trump's inauguration? How many of your videos are just a different angle of the same action?
You have no clue. Or you do and still present them as different events.


Think about it.
You don't trust outlets like NYT or WaPo and expect your word taken on trust or your "logic". Should be easy to prove your statements but you don't even try.

You squirm, you deflect, you cry. You claim WaPo isn't valid because.....why?
Because I've proven you wrong with it many times. You don't provide links that prove WaPo wrong. You base your claims on your talking points.
Time is running out for trump.

So we're back to the original question.

Why do you group lawful protesters, exercising their 1st Amendment rights, with criminals?
Don't you know what the term "lawful protesters" means?

In general, most protests during the day are peaceful. Most of the damage occurs at night.

He looks like a weakling and a waffling bullshit artist when he says he's going to neuter the rioters and then backs off of it.

You have a weakling mayor of a socialist city telling him to fuck off. It makes him look feeble.

I asked a simple question. And the party of lying liars leaps in. Video evidence? Like the evidence of the number of people at trump's inauguration? How many of your videos are just a different angle of the same action?
You have no clue. Or you do and still present them as different events.


Think about it.
You don't trust outlets like NYT or WaPo and expect your word taken on trust or your "logic". Should be easy to prove your statements but you don't even try.

You squirm, you deflect, you cry. You claim WaPo isn't valid because.....why?
Because I've proven you wrong with it many times. You don't provide links that prove WaPo wrong. You base your claims on your talking points.
Time is running out for trump.

So we're back to the original question.

Why do you group lawful protesters, exercising their 1st Amendment rights, with criminals?
Don't you know what the term "lawful protesters" means?

In general, most protests during the day are peaceful. Most of the damage occurs at night. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Because the agenda of the Washington Post, the New York Times, CNN et al has been on display for long enough that it's impossible to ignore, even for moronic knee-jerk democrats.

The New York Times is actively attempting to boil the existence of this country down to racism. This is an active campaign that they openly admit to and has zero to do with conjecture.

Project Veritas has Jeff Zucker on tape ordering his idiots to make the fantasy impeachment the lead story all day, every day.

The New York Times gets caught hiring an editor with a history of being openly racist against white males, refuses to rescind her offer of employment, and tells the white males to then fuck themselves.

This is extremely evident and is being unapologetically done right out in the open.

So you admit the majority of protesters you saw were kids. If you felt safe you must have been in a peaceful demonstration. And even though you you don't know what happened you're sure the police were provoked.
Like in Buffalo. Or for trump's Bible photo op.

I also think T R U M P should send the military to Seattle.

I'm not exactly sure of his reason for not doing so. I think it is kind of funny to let them be idiots and see what happens. However, I would have a different opinion if I lived in the area.

He mentioned making an example out of them by letting them prove to the world that their movement is purely destructive. I'm not too mad at it.

I went to one of the BLM protests after the National Guard came in. It was eye opening. The cops and soldiers were unbelievably tolerant, some even showed support for the protest. I felt 100% safe, and the police and soldiers were the reason for that.

So, when you see these protesters being tear gassed and smacked with billy clubs, I'm convinced they must have provoked it. I was blown away by the tolerance the police and soldiers demonstrated and the security they provided.

Other than that, most of the BLM protesters are just kids or random people coming out to try and get high or see wtf is going on. It was kind of a joke. But, hey, I actually went and stood with them, which is more than some of these keyboard worriers can say.

I think most of them are misguided youths, who probably were taken advantage of by gangs and the mentally challenged. I can sympathize with them, but I don't respect their cause. Originally Posted by yitzchak

how about because there are looters, shooters and arsonists and destroyers


ever think of that? Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

^^^^^^

Why do "conservatives" put protesters in the "looting, shooting, arson, etc" group? Other than an attempt to put a negative connotation to the right guaranteed by the Constitution? Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Wrong question, munchy!

Let me rephrase it for you!

Why can't the libtards control the violent anarchists and lowlife types who have infiltrated their wonderful peaceful movement? Why do they tolerate, if not applaud, arson and looting and defacing and defiling of public and private property? Do the libtards think such behavior is "guaranteed by the Constitution"?

Why do you blame conservatives for your inability to police your own demonstrators? Why blame conservatives for your cowardice and timidity in not allowing the authorities to swoop in and arrest the rabble-rousing hoodlums?

I don't give a rat's ass whether or not these thugs are carrying cards in their wallets (if they even own wallets) stamped "ANTIFA member" or "BLM member". We have actual videos of them committing crimes! Hundreds of them!

And speaking of trying to put a "negative connotation" on a peaceful movement, remember back in 2010 when Pelosi, Clyburn and other dishonest dim-retards circulated fake stories about Tea Party demonstrators spitting on them and using the n-word? That was pretty desperate and pathetic, wasn't it?

Conservatives don't need to fake it like you do. We have it all on video!

Here's an example of Munchy's pals keeping it "peaceful":