[Lord Dave]

Bringing a photographer to take pictures of you at a cemetery doesn't turn it into a political event, even if you indented to use the photos politically. You turned it political after the non-political event occurred. Keyword: after

It was agreed that if I had gone to the cemetery that the Army could not control what I say about politics or photos on Twitter. If they can't stop me from posting my political commentary on Twitter then they can't stop me planning to make political commentary before visiting the cemetery. They can only control the direct and immediate content of the events at the cemetery, and that control ends after I leave their property.

Again, the Army only has control over the immediate contents of the events at the cemetery. It does not have control over what you say politically afterwards, and it does not have control over whether you plan to say anything politically about it before visiting the cemetery. The Army does not have control over the thoughts in your head. The Army isn't an all-encompassing entity that controls the speech in your life. It can control the content of its events as much as any business can control the content of its events. If there were just photos taken there, then it's not a political event.

So you agree they have control over events, like filming, at the cemetery and Trump filming, without permission, is a violation. 

[Action80]

But for some reason, he felt it was important to make his visit public...

Here is a guy who cannot take a shit without the media trying to publicize it, and Dave is trying to pretend the wreath-laying ceremony at ANC was made public because of Trump.

Who the fuck you trying to zoom here, Dave? Don't you ever get tired of posting terrible shit?

Can you show me a public announcement for it posted prior to the date?

No one knows the anniversary date for the ceremony?

[markjo]

But for some reason, he felt it was important to make his visit public...

Here is a guy who cannot take a shit without the media trying to publicize it, and Dave is trying to pretend the wreath-laying ceremony at ANC was made public because of Trump.

Who the fuck you trying to zoom here, Dave? Don't you ever get tired of posting terrible shit?

Can you show me a public announcement for it posted prior to the date?

No one knows the anniversary date for the ceremony?

Was it a public ceremony or a private ceremony?  Where was Trump for the first two anniversary ceremonies?

[Action80]

Was it a public ceremony or a private ceremony?  Where was Trump for the first two anniversary ceremonies?

So, it was an anniversary ceremony. So people did know the anniversary date. So, people knew.

[Roundy]

I know Action80 is supposed to be super old, but does anyone else imagine a petulant ginger 10 year old (I don't know why ginger, it's just what I picture) sticking his fingers in his ears going "NUH UH!" when reading his posts?

Or is it just me?

[Lord Dave]

Was it a public ceremony or a private ceremony?  Where was Trump for the first two anniversary ceremonies?

So, it was an anniversary ceremony. So people did know the anniversary date. So, people knew.

Most people know the dates their loved ones died.  And, according to Tom, the family invited Trump. Which implies it was private.  Especially given the lack of non- invited people.

[Rushy]

Poll update:

National: Harris +1.4 -- This Day In History: September 8, 2020: Biden +7.1 | September 8, 2016: Clinton +2.8
Arizona: Trump +1.6
Nevada: Harris +0.6
Wisconsin: Harris +1.5
Michigan: Harris +1.2
Pennsylvania: Tie
North Carolina: Trump +0.7
Georgia: Harris +0.1

All of these numbers are well within the margin of error for each individual poll, making them all essentially meaningless. Neither Trump nor Harris have made themselves a clear winner.

[Action80]

Was it a public ceremony or a private ceremony?  Where was Trump for the first two anniversary ceremonies?

So, it was an anniversary ceremony. So people did know the anniversary date. So, people knew.

Most people know the dates their loved ones died.  And, according to Tom, the family invited Trump. Which implies it was private.  Especially given the lack of non- invited people.

Of course, the family invited Trump. Of course, the family allowed pictures.

This is why no charges were filed.

[honk]

Of course, the family invited Trump. Of course, the family allowed pictures.

It's not up to the family. Politicians are not allowed to hold political events and take pictures for the purposes of campaigning at Arlington. Nobody can make you admit that this was a political event and Trump was taking (very tacky) pictures for the purposes of campaigning. Nevertheless, any reasonable person would agree that's what happened, and that specifically, Trump's plan was to pretend that this was an official, public ceremony and blast Biden and Harris for not attending.* You can refuse to accept this and keep insisting "Nuh uh" all you want, but that doesn't mean you're making a good case or that you're a good debater. It just means that you're being obstinate.

*To wit, here's Fox News trying to frame the story that way once they received their marching orders:

https://twitter.com/FoxNews/status/1829544169469038814

Interestingly enough, this used to have a community note attached to it correctly pointing out that there was no official event, only a private ceremony, but it's no longer there, presumably because Musk intervened and had it removed.

This is why no charges were filed.

Use your head for a moment. Pretend for a moment that you agree with me that Trump was behaving illegally in this case. Do you really, really, think that any federal prosecutor, a few months before a presidential election in which Trump himself stands a good chance of becoming their boss, would dare risk their career by launching a lengthy, controversial prosecution against a powerful political figure who will undoubtedly take revenge if they're elected, all over a fairly minor offense? That would never happen. I would go so far as to say that Trump could have unzipped his pants and pissed all over the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on camera and no prosecutor would have dared touch him.

[Action80]

I am not even going to bother reprinting your trash take, honk.

[honk]

The recent debate was a delight to watch. Kamala was strong and focused, while Trump ranted incoherently, got racist, and spouted insane conspiracy theories that the moderators firmly shut down. I won't go as far as some people in the media have by predicting that this has cemented Kamala's victory. That's ridiculous. In fact, this debate might not even matter in the long run. Trump's fans love him for precisely those qualities that the rest of the world sees as glaring negatives, and so this debate isn't likely to cost him much support. Which is entirely messed up when you think about it - the Democratic candidate is at risk of losing support if they do badly in a debate, but they don't really gain support if they do well. Still, not losing support is of course better than losing support, and no bad news is better than bad news, so this is at least a modest political victory for Kamala.

[Shane]

in a sensible world, this would be disastrous for trump, but it probably won't matter. I think Kamala's biggest problem is separating herself from biden on issues such as Israel, turning off more left leaning democrats, and she's not really done that. 

[Tom Bishop]

Sounds like Kamala lost to me

[Shane]

it actually doesn't look like that. at all.  he objectively lost. I don't think it matters in the long run but it was not good for trump.



I like this assessment better. 

[honk]

Kamala was no more a "no-show" for the Fox debate than Trump was a no-show for the debate I held in my living room last night. There was no debate for either Trump or Kamala to attend. The Trump campaign literally made up a fake debate so they could accuse Kamala of skipping it.

[Lord Dave]

Does Trump understand how debates are not prize fights?  The desire for a rematch is based on the desire to be #1 or to get back the spot they just lost.  But the debate winner doesn't become president by winning.  But losing hurts.  And if you want a rematch in a debate .. it's because you want to hurt your opponent more.

[AATW]

it actually doesn't look like that. at all.

To be fair, Tom has quoted a highly reliable source for his claim. The source being the bloke who clearly lost the debate 

[AATW]

It is quite funny seeing Trump wandering around claiming he won a debate which he clearly lost, claiming the polls show he won when they clearly don't. I'm sure there are polls of MAGA cult members which do say that, but they're too far gone to be taken seriously.
He behaves like a child who just lost a race and goes around saying "I won! I won! I definitely won!". It's a bit sad really, especially considering there's still a decent chance he could be president again.
In his head he probably does believe he won, he lies to himself as much as he does to others. And it's somewhat depressing that it won't have moved the dial one bit for millions of people who will vote for him no matter what.
But maybe for people who are still undecided his rambling display compared with Harris' far more assured one - and her ability to get under that wafer thin skin of his - will have given them some pause for thought.

[Rushy]

It wasn't a debate. It is a multi-user discussion environment. It doesn't have points or scores. It doesn't have winners or losers.

[Lord Dave]

Can't lose if it's not a competition.

Can't win either.