5 ms·

You must have missed when trump tweeted/fbed “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” late last week.

eanzenberg 6y ago
And it has, as people take the law into their own hands. Unfortunately in 2020 we’re still arguing whether violence is ok.
99_00 6y ago
He clarified his comments and his explanation is not inflammatory. "Looting leads to shooting, and that's why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot," Trump tweeted https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-defends-his-when-the-looting-starts-the-shooting-starts-tweet-2020-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-defends-his-when-the-l... People should be given a chance to explain what they said if it is misinterpreted. Focusing on the misinterpretation after the explanation has been made is in-fact inflammatory and divisive.
- malloreon 6y ago
  It’s been way too many years to give trump the benefit of the doubt. His words are never misinterpreted.
  - ogre_magi 6y ago
    ... never? People are always correct to choose the most inflammatory interpretation?
- IvyMike 6y ago
  His explanation feels disingenuous in the context of his other tweets, his "you have to dominate" statements, and the use of the military the past few days. Trump has continued to escalate things, and while I hope that it doesn't lead to shooting, it feels plausible that Trump would threaten people with "thats where things are heading!" (The origins of the of the "looting leads to shooting" statement should also speak for itself. I know Trump claims ignorance of that statement, but there are reasons to doubt that as well.)
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    Recent polling suggests a majority of Americans would like to see the military used, so this isn't exactly a fringe call to violence. And it doesn't split along many of the fault lines you might expect either; 48% of Democrats and 37% of African-Americans are on board. (https://assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2020/06/01181629/2005131_crosstabs_POLICE_RVs_FINAL_LM-1.pdf https://assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2020/06/0118162...)
    - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
      That's the most frightening thing I've heard in this entire mess. The rule against the military intervening in domestic affairs is hugely important. We can't afford to lose that in the heat of the moment.
      - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        Do remember that the military was deployed to quell domestic riots as recently as 1992. It's a big failure if we end up having to do it, but it's not an unprecedented nor unrecoverable one.
        AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        If the state wants it, I have no problem with it. If the state doesn't want it, though, and Trump says "You're getting them anyway, because you're out of control", well, that's quite different.
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        Completely agreed.
  - 99_00 6y ago
    Do you agree that public officals can clarify comments that are misinterpreted and that we should take that clarification at face value. Or do you think that all public officials should be held to the first impression of their statement forever?
- tzs 6y ago
  Then maybe he should run his Tweets by his staff before posting, so things like this that might be easily misinterpreted could be caught and clarified before they go out? Look at another recent Tweet of his: "STRENGTH!" in response to someone else's Tweet. That other Tweet was from some QAnon conspiracy theorist referencing a QAnon thing about how Trump and military will soon be arresting and imprisoning or executing Democrats. QAnon follows took Trump's Tweet as confirming that this was going to start soon. Maybe Trump didn't know what that other Tweet was referencing, and he didn't mean to encourage it. But he's the freaking PRESIDENT. His words automatically have a huge impact, and so the responsible thing to do would be to take care with them.
  - 99_00 6y ago
    >Look at another recent Tweet of his: "STRENGTH!" in response to someone else's Tweet. That other Tweet was from some QAnon conspiracy theorist referencing a QAnon thing about how Trump and military will soon be arresting and imprisoning or executing Democrats. QAnon follows took Trump's Tweet as confirming that this was going to start soon. Can you clarify what you mean? Are you saying Trump retweeted a call to imprison and execute democrats, because I looked into this and it looks to me like that was not at all the case. On the face of it, it looks to be an inspirational Ronald Regan quote. https://twitter.com/joep1776/status/1267222813334663169/photo/1 https://twitter.com/joep1776/status/1267222813334663169/phot...
    - tzs 6y ago
      It's a SeanCordicon tweet that Trump is retreating. The content of that tweet is: > We knew this moment would arrive. > We are the calm before, during & after the storm. followed by a Reagan quote. Cordicon is a QAnon conspiracy theorist. "The Storm" is a prominent thing in QAnon stuff [1][2] about how Trump will impose martial law to quell unrest and then he and the military will use that for a quiet coup to purge the government of Democrats and others. [1] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/QAnon#.22The_Storm.22 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/QAnon#.22The_Storm.22 [2] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/qanon-4chan-the-storm-conspiracy-explained.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/qanon-4chan-the-stor...
jki275 6y ago
Are you arguing that looting and rioting are free speech? That would be an argument mostly without legal precedent or support.
- dbt00 6y ago
  Are you arguing that property crimes should result In summary execution?
  - jki275 6y ago
    How exactly did you torture what I wrote to get that out of it?
    - DFHippie 6y ago
      looting : property crime :: shooting : summary execution
      - jki275 6y ago
        Which is not what I wrote. straw man somewhere else.
- thinkharderdev 6y ago
  I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that. But it would be nice if the President of the United States would act like a grown up and when tensions are running high try and calm the situation instead of adding fuel to the fire. It is actually possible to try and deal with situations in a measured, substantive way instead of going on Twitter and making incendiary statements.
  - jki275 6y ago
    I don't disagree with you there and have always hated the way the President uses Twitter, but in times of massive civil unrest (this isn't it, btw -- this is but a small bit of noise), there are times when ultimatums must be put down.
downandout 6y ago
How is it bigoted to observe that people breaking into businesses with weapons, baseball bats, etc., in an attempt to try to steal from and destroy them, might get shot at by business owners in fear of their lives? I’m genuinely curious to hear an explanation from your perspective, because I don’t see it - I see it as a pretty logical conclusion that such a thing might happen, regardless of the race of anyone involved.
- hejja 6y ago
  this is the very problem with censorship. messages aren't exact so on some level you have to be subjective. the very fact that twitter interpreted it as bigoted enough to sensor, and you didn't points a red arrow to why any censorship is bad.

And it has, as people take the law into their own hands. Unfortunately in 2020 we’re still arguing whether violence is ok.

99_00 6y ago

He clarified his comments and his explanation is not inflammatory. "Looting leads to shooting, and that's why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot," Trump tweeted https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-defends-his-when-the-looting-starts-the-shooting-starts-tweet-2020-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-defends-his-when-the-l... People should be given a chance to explain what they said if it is misinterpreted. Focusing on the misinterpretation after the explanation has been made is in-fact inflammatory and divisive.

malloreon 6y ago
It’s been way too many years to give trump the benefit of the doubt. His words are never misinterpreted.
- ogre_magi 6y ago
  ... never? People are always correct to choose the most inflammatory interpretation?
IvyMike 6y ago
His explanation feels disingenuous in the context of his other tweets, his "you have to dominate" statements, and the use of the military the past few days. Trump has continued to escalate things, and while I hope that it doesn't lead to shooting, it feels plausible that Trump would threaten people with "thats where things are heading!" (The origins of the of the "looting leads to shooting" statement should also speak for itself. I know Trump claims ignorance of that statement, but there are reasons to doubt that as well.)
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Recent polling suggests a majority of Americans would like to see the military used, so this isn't exactly a fringe call to violence. And it doesn't split along many of the fault lines you might expect either; 48% of Democrats and 37% of African-Americans are on board. (https://assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2020/06/01181629/2005131_crosstabs_POLICE_RVs_FINAL_LM-1.pdf https://assets.morningconsult.com/wp-uploads/2020/06/0118162...)
  - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
    That's the most frightening thing I've heard in this entire mess. The rule against the military intervening in domestic affairs is hugely important. We can't afford to lose that in the heat of the moment.
    - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
      Do remember that the military was deployed to quell domestic riots as recently as 1992. It's a big failure if we end up having to do it, but it's not an unprecedented nor unrecoverable one.
      - AnimalMuppet 6y ago
        If the state wants it, I have no problem with it. If the state doesn't want it, though, and Trump says "You're getting them anyway, because you're out of control", well, that's quite different.
        SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
        Completely agreed.
- 99_00 6y ago
  Do you agree that public officals can clarify comments that are misinterpreted and that we should take that clarification at face value. Or do you think that all public officials should be held to the first impression of their statement forever?
tzs 6y ago
Then maybe he should run his Tweets by his staff before posting, so things like this that might be easily misinterpreted could be caught and clarified before they go out? Look at another recent Tweet of his: "STRENGTH!" in response to someone else's Tweet. That other Tweet was from some QAnon conspiracy theorist referencing a QAnon thing about how Trump and military will soon be arresting and imprisoning or executing Democrats. QAnon follows took Trump's Tweet as confirming that this was going to start soon. Maybe Trump didn't know what that other Tweet was referencing, and he didn't mean to encourage it. But he's the freaking PRESIDENT. His words automatically have a huge impact, and so the responsible thing to do would be to take care with them.
- 99_00 6y ago
  >Look at another recent Tweet of his: "STRENGTH!" in response to someone else's Tweet. That other Tweet was from some QAnon conspiracy theorist referencing a QAnon thing about how Trump and military will soon be arresting and imprisoning or executing Democrats. QAnon follows took Trump's Tweet as confirming that this was going to start soon. Can you clarify what you mean? Are you saying Trump retweeted a call to imprison and execute democrats, because I looked into this and it looks to me like that was not at all the case. On the face of it, it looks to be an inspirational Ronald Regan quote. https://twitter.com/joep1776/status/1267222813334663169/photo/1 https://twitter.com/joep1776/status/1267222813334663169/phot...
  - tzs 6y ago
    It's a SeanCordicon tweet that Trump is retreating. The content of that tweet is: > We knew this moment would arrive. > We are the calm before, during & after the storm. followed by a Reagan quote. Cordicon is a QAnon conspiracy theorist. "The Storm" is a prominent thing in QAnon stuff [1][2] about how Trump will impose martial law to quell unrest and then he and the military will use that for a quiet coup to purge the government of Democrats and others. [1] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/QAnon#.22The_Storm.22 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/QAnon#.22The_Storm.22 [2] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/qanon-4chan-the-storm-conspiracy-explained.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/12/qanon-4chan-the-stor...

jki275 6y ago

Are you arguing that looting and rioting are free speech? That would be an argument mostly without legal precedent or support.

dbt00 6y ago
Are you arguing that property crimes should result In summary execution?
- jki275 6y ago
  How exactly did you torture what I wrote to get that out of it?
  - DFHippie 6y ago
    looting : property crime :: shooting : summary execution
    - jki275 6y ago
      Which is not what I wrote. straw man somewhere else.
thinkharderdev 6y ago
I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that. But it would be nice if the President of the United States would act like a grown up and when tensions are running high try and calm the situation instead of adding fuel to the fire. It is actually possible to try and deal with situations in a measured, substantive way instead of going on Twitter and making incendiary statements.
- jki275 6y ago
  I don't disagree with you there and have always hated the way the President uses Twitter, but in times of massive civil unrest (this isn't it, btw -- this is but a small bit of noise), there are times when ultimatums must be put down.

downandout 6y ago

How is it bigoted to observe that people breaking into businesses with weapons, baseball bats, etc., in an attempt to try to steal from and destroy them, might get shot at by business owners in fear of their lives? I’m genuinely curious to hear an explanation from your perspective, because I don’t see it - I see it as a pretty logical conclusion that such a thing might happen, regardless of the race of anyone involved.

hejja 6y ago
this is the very problem with censorship. messages aren't exact so on some level you have to be subjective. the very fact that twitter interpreted it as bigoted enough to sensor, and you didn't points a red arrow to why any censorship is bad.