Alabama man arrested for slashing baby Trump Balloon .

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The event was still the target. Are you suggesting that someone paid $4000 to rent a balloon, sat up their protest a half-mile away, and didn't intend it to be seen by the President at the event?

Seriously?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Fallingdown


Yeah that's the one.

I also said this.

He's reduced himself to petty insults. His statement and position are, by default, now null and void.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Grimpachi

Wait... it was earlier shown that the protestors paid $4000 to rent the balloon. And you don't believe they intended to fly it?

Come on, surely you can see the illogic in that argument.

TheRedneck

How can you contend with facts? The protest was in full swing the balloon was not flying and the videos posted show no indication of it being prepared or capable of flying.

As I pointed out it may be because of the power lines which can be seen in the video link I posted. You did look, right?
If you argument is it doesn't seem logical to you then that is a weak argument.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
The event was still the target.

Except they weren't at the event, target or not, so all the handwringing about this being university property is meaningless. You also claimed they were at a street corner where there was a university building but that wasn't the case.

Too bad they didn't fly it. Hoyt would have had a hard time slashing it then.

a reply to: Liquesence

All are not being protested, just the political figure in attendance being protested. In this case, the president.

Fine. Explain to me how this balloon was to be seen by one and only one person in a crammed stadium and I will admit your point.

I will also refer you to a physics journal where you can publish your argument; that is a violation of known physical laws. There is likely a Nobel Prize in this if you can make a convincing argument.

Trump does not suspend being president just because he goes to a ballgame, as stated.

What official Presidential functions was he undertaking at this ballgame? Was he planning to attack the Kurds? Maybe he was discussing new tariffs with the fans? Oh! Maybe he was getting an update on the southern border wall construction! Or, dare I say, he was working out details on how to blackmail Zelensky of Ukraine without letting him know he was being blackmailed...

Which is it? Inquiring minds want to know!

TheRedneck

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: TheRedneck
Furthermore, it is being deployed at an apolitical event...

The event was in a stadium a half mile away, the intersection was not university property.

The event happened in Monnish Park a public state owned facility .

Source

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Actually being at a State owned Park negates your position I believe . Nothing private about those premises .

originally posted by: Fallingdown
The event happened in Monnish Park a public state owned facility .

The 'event' he's referring to is the football game.

a reply to: Grimpachi

How can you contend with facts? The protest was in full swing the balloon was not flying and the videos posted show no indication of it being prepared or capable of flying.

As I pointed out it may be because of the power lines which can be seen in the video link I posted. You did look, right?
If you argument is it doesn't seem logical to you then that is a weak argument.

No, it's not weak to assume that people who spend large sums of money for specialized equipment intend to use it as much as is possible. No one rents a crane to park it in their driveway. The fact that it was intended to be flown at some point is beyond obvious.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Fine. Explain to me how this balloon was to be seen by one and only one person in a crammed stadium and I will admit your point.

I will also refer you to a physics journal where you can publish your argument; that is a violation of known physical laws. There is likely a Nobel Prize in this if you can make a convincing argument.

Huh? I never said only one person would see it, just that it was directed towards one person.

What official Presidential functions was he undertaking at this ballgame?

Is he still president while in attendance?

Otherwise, you're being dramatic and ridiculous. And you know it.

a reply to: Liquesence

So your position is you won’t allow anyone to agree with the position he took ? You speak for everybody and if you could you would censor every detail of what he did .

Correct ?

Is your position that if anyone breaks a law in the process of expressing their self or giving their opinion.

Their position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged by anyone even the people that consider it their right to hear the position “?

originally posted by: Fallingdown
Actually being at a State owned Park negates your position I believe . Nothing private about those premises .

It's also not state owned, it's county. Regardless, the event that he's referring to was the football game.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

The event I’m referring to is the scene of the crime .

originally posted by: Fallingdown
The event I’m referring to is the scene of the crime .

I wasn't replying to you, I was replying to Redneck who said they were disrupting the event, he was referring to the football game. If you're going to interject at least follow what the conversation was regarding.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

You’re right there I should’ve checked my source before I posted .

But could you please explain to me why that technicality would matter ?

a reply to: TheRedneck

Awww, ya had to go and complete Godwin's law. lol

As for being an apolitical event, Presidential visits haven't really been apolitical in decades. Anywhere public that a U.S. President traveled has had some contingency of opposition waiting there for over 30 years. That's not about to change given the ultra-partisan political climate we have today, and with arguably the most divisive President in our history.

Such protests may, or may not directly effect US policy. It could be argued that seeing his unpopularity might effect his desire to pursue a 2nd term, or that it could inspire him to act more on behalf of the majority of Americans (instead of just his 33% base). There's no doubt that he fairly won the election through the electoral college, but he did lose the popular vote, and has done virtually nothing to court anything beyond his minority base. He's never really tried to aspire to even a 60% approval rating let alone anything higher than that.

originally posted by: Fallingdown
a reply to: Liquesence

So your position is you won’t allow anyone to agree with the position he took ? You speak for everybody and if you could you would censor every detail of what he did .

Correct ?

Is your position that if anyone breaks a law in the process of expressing their self or giving their opinion.

Their position/opinion/ expression shouldn’t be acknowledged by anyone even the people that consider it their right to hear the position “?

What in the actual F are you talking about?

This has been answered multiple times.

Trolls be trolls.

originally posted by: Fallingdown
But could you please explain to me why that technicality would matter ?

I'm not discussing the legal merits of their protest, only that he claimed it was disrupting an event that was in actuality a half mile away and they were not at it or on school grounds as the images I posted showed.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Wow something must be screwy with one of our computers ?

Reply