It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump has never threatened riots.

page: 1
11

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Many of the anti-Trump people out there have said that Trump has threatened riots if he is not the GOP nominee. I want to see PROOF of support of this argument. Yes he has millions of supporters who may riot if the popular vote is not respected, but he himself has never called for riots.
"I THINK you'd have riots"
"I WOULDN'T LEAD it, but I think bad things would happen".
He is making a prediction based on the idea that America is a democracy that it's citizens would try to restore and preserve. The video is the interview that the anti-Trump movement is using to say Trump is threatening riots and violence. Exactly where is he threatening riots?

The violence at Trump's rallies are caused by the anti-Trump crowd ignoring the rights of the Freedom of Speech and Freedom to Assemble in America. Many, if not most of these people spreading this hate and violenceat Trump rallies are Hillary supporters from radical organizations. The same people who cannot see the lies and security violations Hillary has committed against our country. The same people who twist Trump's words into calling for riots. How could somebody construe these quotes into inciting riots when they cannot believe Hillary's 100% direct lies she intentionally told to Americans? I am specifically referring to her email to the Egyptian Prime Minister on September 12, 2014 when she said in her email: "We know the attack in Lybia had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack - not a protest". Yet two days later on September 14, 2012, she stood 'patriotically' with Obama in front of the coffins of those killed and claimed it was the result of a 'terrible video'.

How could a person be honest with themselves and believe Hillary's rhetoric is the honest, complete truth while claiming Trump's words are calling for riots? Do you think Trump supporters are causing violence amongst themselves, or can you admit that it is caused by the anti-Trump movement infiltrators? Is it ok for anti-Trump people to throw tomatoes and tear down signs just because they don't agree? Is it not hypocritical to blame Trump supporters for violence when it is instigated from the anti-Trump crowd? I don't agree with a lot of what Donald has to say but I believe he is the only candidate left that an honest person can support.




posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:34 AM
link   
a reply to: SouthernForkway26



One of the favored methods proposed by Sharp and embraced by Soros-financed groups is the taunting of individuals. Sharp’s advice to taunt speakers is being played out in the US presidential campaign: «instead of predominantly silent and dignified behavior... people may mock and insult officials, either at a certain place or by following them for a period». Sharp suggests that taunting individuals, such as presidential candidates, be combined with a refusal to disperse when either asked or ordered to do so. Sharp claims that these methods are «non-violent». However, when the US Secret Service, charged with protecting presidential candidates from assassination or bodily harm, order protesters to leave a campaign venue and there is a subsequent refusal to do so, violence is a certainty.
www.strategic-culture.org...

Claim he threatened riots then instigate violence.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:45 AM
link   
a reply to: SouthernForkway26

So, if he doesn't win via convention his people will riot, and if he does win the other side is gonna riot, so pretty much it's safe to say - people are just gonna riot.

Well, when's the party start? Do I have to be clothed for this lavish joyful event?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

A machete, a pair of boots and an old T shirt. Nothing else.

There wont be riots if he loses. There will be civil rebellion.

If he wins, there will be martial law until a year passes.


edit on 3 21 2016 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:53 AM
link   
a reply to: tadaman

Sounds like a party. I'll be there brother



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:53 AM
link   
Even though I don't like the Donald and think that he is a loud mouthed loose cannon who would be in favor of big business over the common citizen, he starts to look a lot better when you compare him to a weak entitlement crazed pinko socialist and a money grubbing lying criminal lowlife. Got to love the choices we get for presidents these days. It almost makes me wish that Bush was still running, almost. I'm tempted to toss away my vote on a third party or a write in candidate. What a waste of a vote, but I'm going to the polls regardless.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 03:03 AM
link   
I would totally Vote for Trump.

Call it Intuition, but yes i feel he is being honest, and clear as to his intentions, and he loves his Country. That has to count for something right?

Look at the quotes about America from the Bush Admin 'pay attention'...




posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 04:57 AM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

Nah just naked for the party and everyone must have beautiful widows peak to attend.



posted on Mar, 22 2016 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

His supporters would be rioting because the popular vote is ignored. We're not talking about a slim margin like the way Bush somehow became president in 2000 despite losing the popular vote. That was by less than 1%, 600k votes across the country. Trump is the clear-cut leading candidate for the GOP by a sizable margin.

If Trump was to lose by a percentage point or two in the popular vote there wouldn't be concern for riots. That is the difference. Rioting simply because your candidate lost is criminal. Rioting because democracy is lost is a different ballgame. I would never want to see nationwide rioting in the same vein as Ferguson, MO because that is not productive but maybe something closer to what happened back in 1776. Clothing optional. Scare tactics and intimidation have proven successful throughout history.



new topics

top topics



 
11

log in

join