Judge to Trump: No protection for speech inciting violence - Fox News Channel

a reply to: Wayfarer

you might wish to check your grammar sir

"Haha, Gryphon66 you're making all these fools like absolutely grade-school education silly! Keep it up!"

did you possibly mean "look like" I do not wish to put words in your mouth?

a reply to: thedigirati

LOL ... my "slant" ... okay, would that be the one where I suggest we should all wait for the court proceedings and verdict?

You were attacked? Because I opined about your apparent lack of ability to read what I wrote? My apologies, I thought that the possibility of English as a second language was kinder that just pointing out "you didn't read what I said" or "you're grossly misrepresenting what I just said."

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Gryphon66

And yet you did the exact thing in your OP

Yeeouch! That hits some of the strongest stereotypes of Trump supporters right on the head, doesn't it?

Yea, I'm afraid we are going to need to call the police here and get them involved. You seem to have set a standard, and by those standards, you crossed the line. Perhaps a heart felt apology might work here.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Interesting you never posted footage of the event.

Going by this one Trump must be a habitual offender?

a reply to: Gryphon66

I never denigrated your ability to comprehend at all. why would you do such? Yes, you keep saying this or that would not "hold up in court" you may be surprised, many court cases have been surprising of late. like what is or is not the purvue of the President. Of late, is seems the Courts are rewriting law instead of interpreting it.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Gryphon66

Interesting you never posted footage of the event.

Going by this one Trump must be a habitual offender?

Perhaps because my intention was to discuss the news story associated with the court case I linked in the OP?

Rather than rehash all the "we said / they said" about the violence at Trump rallies?

Tell, us, what do you find from the video that is meaningful in addressing the topic in the OP?

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Gryphon66

I never denigrated your ability to comprehend at all. why would you do such? Yes, you keep saying this or that would not "hold up in court" you may be surprised, many court cases have been surprising of late. like what is or is not the purvue of the President. Of late, is seems the Courts are rewriting law instead of interpreting it.

You mistated a comment that you were responding to. I pointed that out. You took it personally, apparently.

My suggestion ... don't take things so personally.

Yes, yes, the tactic of claiming "judicial overreach" and "legislating from the bench" is nothing new from the right.

a reply to: thedigirati

I'm sorry, you are correct. I should have said, "Gryphon66, you are making the individuals in this thread who rail against trump's culpability for clearly inciting violence look like children arguing with an adult." Keep it up man!

a reply to: Gryphon66

You didn't post the video of the event in question so that we wouldn't do he said she said? Sounds more like you didn't so people would have little to discuss other than that. If we could all see the tape we could actually discuss if Trump even deserves it.

I'll leave pasting it in to you, but when I just checked Youtube for |trump get them out of here| it was obvious he had been saying it all like all his rallies, and then I saw that compilation piece.

For you to play coy like you cant fathom how that would be relevant to criminal intent or whatever is baffling!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Seems he had more "outs" than a MLB game LOL

a reply to: Gryphon66

I never take anything online personally, I've been online for 25 years; I barely take "news" online seriously. I was a Marine and insulted by professionals, amateurs never bother me at all.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Gryphon66

You didn't post the video of the event in question so that we wouldn't do he said she said? Sounds more like you didn't so people would have little to discuss other than that. If we could all see the tape we could actually discuss if Trump even deserves it.

I'll leave pasting it in to you, but when I just checked Youtube for |trump get them out of here| it was obvious he had been saying it all like all his rallies, and then I saw that compilation piece.

For you to play coy like you cant fathom how that would be relevant to criminal intent or whatever is baffling!

I posted the news article that was the point of departure for the thread.

Your critique is appreciated and noted. You may have noticed here at ATS, members post all sorts of corroborating evidence. I'm glad you chose to. Would you like to engage on what you think the video shows that's relevant to the court case that is the topic?

originally posted by: thedigirati
a reply to: Gryphon66

I never take anything online personally, I've been online for 25 years; I barely take "news" online seriously. I was a Marine and insulted by professionals, amateurs never bother me at all.

LOL good for you!

Thanks for visiting.

a reply to: Gryphon66

From your OP I was inferring a "pattern of behavior" the Candidate Trump inciting violence, (although maybe you were meaning something else?) The video shows something other than what you were perhaps thinking?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Can you prove there was no security at the event to answer the call?

Can you prove Trump could even see the hecklers when he said it, to not know if there was anyone but the 'rioter' dude to "get them out"? You do realize that podiums have lights pointed at them to help the speaker not be able to see the crowd?

All I see is you stacked the OP as like a hook with worms. Like its Trump fault if the guy happened to be a white nationalist, as in what does that even have to do with anything?

Meanwhile I've pasted in proof Trump said that as his typical thing to say regarding hecklers. You can even hear him say "security". What would you say if hecklers were interrupting your message? What would or would not be CRIMINAL? Is it the crowds job to remove hecklers, did Trump REALLY tell that guy to do it, or would most people expect for security to be the ones to handle such an "order"?

Show us the tape!

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I presume here is where I interject a "Rah Rah Rah" like Wayfer did above, RAH! RAH! RAH!

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Lol, Obama appointed, that's all anyone needs to know.

Really? So nothing about the legal standing of the case, or precedent or anything?

Perhaps you should say that's all a Trump supporter needs to know? LOL

When a gangster thugs momma can stand on the hood of a car in the midst of a BLM riot mob and scream burn this b#@$#@# down!! to urge the arsonists on and nothing is done about it, yeah this is frivolous politics with an Obama appointed Judge yet again.

Did the injured parties bring cases against the "gangster thugs momma" (I'm not sure why anyone would think you're racist, geez.) in Judge Hale's court and he threw it out? No?

Then your partisan argument doesn't hold any water.

Awwww, you went full retard and pulled the race card, I win just like Trump said...we will get tired of winning there will be so much winning. You've been tremendous.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: Gryphon66

So asking security to remove someone can lead to you being sued? Wow that cant hold up in any court because they leads into problems even talking to police. People who even report a crime could be held liable for actions of others.

Trump guldered that remark over the mike in his own inimitable way, everybody was being addressed, from the sublime to the ridicolous...you are trying to make it sound like a kindergarten type request when it wasn't. I sincerely hope Trump is prosecuted for incitement, maybe he'll learn a few manners.

a reply to: smurfy

Is that so?

Show us the tape!

2 can play this game