[AATW]

When the famous billionaire owner is coming from out of town and appears in front of the building with his limo, obviously everyone will know about it.

Of course people would have known he was there, that doesn't mean they would have expected him to come barging in to their dressing room while they were getting changed.

It appears to me that you are repeating liberal falsities.

I'm repeating Trump:

“You know they’re standing there with no clothes. Is everybody OK? And you see these incredible looking women. And so I sort of get away with things like that.”

What's there to "get away with" if that's OK?

Obviously your tactic to keep defending the perversions of your cult leader is deny, deny, deny. Whatever helps you cope I guess.

[Action80]

I was now able to see the video LD posted.

The woman said she was trying to get to her apartment.

A. There is no evidence provided she had any business in that area.

II. The police told her to leave the area.

c. She ignored the situation.

You guys were all here cheering on the draconian response to covfefe.

Spare us your wails of anguish over this incident as they ring hollow.

[Lord Dave]

I was now able to see the video LD posted.

The woman said she was trying to get to her apartment.

A. There is no evidence provided she had any business in that area.

II. The police told her to leave the area.

c. She ignored the situation.

You guys were all here cheering on the draconian response to covfefe.

Spare us your wails of anguish over this incident as they ring hollow.

A) Well, she likely had an ID that had her address on it.  Which the police could have asked for.  But no... they didn't.  They didn't even GIVE her the chance to show she had business. 

B) Of course, like a good boy, I'm sure you'd be like "Yes sir, I'll just sleep in the streets tonight,sir." >_>  What about all that love of freedom?  Doesn't apply to cops?

C) I think her standing a good 20ft away was not an "I'm ignoring the situation" kinda thing.  If she tried to walk through the line then sure, I'd probably agree.  But she didn't. 

So, do you think shooting her, when she was far from the line, not in the area, claimed to have business there, AND posed no threat... was appropriate behavior?

[Tom Bishop]

When the famous billionaire owner is coming from out of town and appears in front of the building with his limo, obviously everyone will know about it.

Of course people would have known he was there, that doesn't mean they would have expected him to come barging in to their dressing room while they were getting changed.

It appears to me that you are repeating liberal falsities.

I'm repeating Trump:

“You know they’re standing there with no clothes. Is everybody OK? And you see these incredible looking women. And so I sort of get away with things like that.”

What's there to "get away with" if that's OK?

Obviously your tactic to keep defending the perversions of your cult leader is deny, deny, deny. Whatever helps you cope I guess.

You are referencing a comedy show where participants are encouraged to skew events to be as humorous or lewd as possible. Comedy sources are not a good way to get your information.

We have a witness who says that the reality was different. Trump did go backstage, but the participants were warned ahead of time. These pageants are fairly sensitive about this sort of thing and potential lawsuits from inappropriate behavior or sexual harassment

Another contestant throws doubts on your narrative:

https://www.tmz.com/2016/10/13/katie-blair-donald-trump-beauty-pageant-dressing-rooms/

Katie was Miss Teen USA '06 and Miss CA USA '11 ... and Trump owned both pageants at the time. We talked to her about her interactions with the boss, and while she admits there were plenty of situations for him to leer ... she insists it NEVER happened.

Katie says anyone who's had any experience with live TV would know there's an obvious reason why Trump couldn't have done many of the things some other pageant contestants have accused him of doing.

In the embedded video on this page she affirms that if Trump did go backstage, that the girls were well aware of it. She also points out that it is operationally unrealistic that some of what is claimed could happen during a live broadcast.

[Action80]

LD, the expert cop.

The cops were doing what they are going to do.

You want that to change or if you have a real beef about it, move back to the US, stop being the griping AI bot, and change it.

The woman was likely a paid actor.

[Lord Dave]

LD, the expert cop.

The cops were doing what they are going to do.

You want that to change or if you have a real beef about it, move back to the US, stop being the griping AI bot, and change it.

The woman was likely a paid actor.

So you think it IS ok.
Glad we had this chat.

Also: paid actor?  Really?

Not gonna claim the cop was a paid actor too?  Since he shot her for the film?

[juner]

She was a good 10-20 feet away from the line.

if you get a direct hit in the torso at that range you are going to buckle over instantly and possibly bleed out since rubber bullets have a metal core and can penetrate the skin.

since all i have to go on is a performative tiktok video where the person filming switches it to selfie mode before "rendering aid" i am going to take it with a grain of salt. if she files a lawsuit and provides some evidence of injury i am happy to be proven wrong. my random hot take is that she didn't actually get hit. but since she would need medical attention if she did i am sure there will be evidence of any harm caused because in the best case you are looking at massive bruising. worst case is internal bleeding, ruptured spleen, broken rib(s), and other bad things.

[Lord Dave]

She was a good 10-20 feet away from the line.

if you get a direct hit in the torso at that range you are going to buckle over instantly and possibly bleed out since rubber bullets have a metal core and can penetrate the skin.

since all i have to go on is a performative tiktok video where the person filming switches it to selfie mode before "rendering aid" i am going to take it with a grain of salt. if she files a lawsuit and provides some evidence of injury i am happy to be proven wrong. my random hot take is that she didn't actually get hit. but since she would need medical attention if she did i am sure there will be evidence of any harm caused because in the best case you are looking at massive bruising. worst case is internal bleeding, ruptured spleen, broken rib(s), and other bad things.

Not all rubber bullets have a metal core.


So I found her tictok with the extended version.  Which doesn't show much in terms of new information or evidence.

I'm not gonna dismiss your claims because
1) no injuries were shown. Which is pretty important.
2) the woman never appears on camera close up so we can see her face.  Maybe intentional to avoid cops IDing her. 
3) no follow up information Or news outlets picking it up beyond the video.
4) in the tictok video she meets another protester who she talks to about it.  Doesn't mean anything but it's there so maybe another angle was gotten by someone else.

None of this proves one thing or another but it does make me doubt the validity of the claim tho the lack of info and follow up is easily explained away.

Which is a sad thing in this world.

The cop's gun recoils.
So unless the cop is in on it...he fired a shot.

[Action80]

Fuck that shit, LD.

I never said any of it is ok.

It is MORE stupid or more NOT OK to approach a goddamn police line after fucking curfew, ignore multiple directives to leave the area, and expect nothing to happen.

It is even more stupid to post this in a thread about Trump and try to act like he had anything to do with this. Sheer stupidity.

You should have started a new thread about the LA mayor, ignoramus supreme.

[Action80]

Not all rubber bullets have a metal core.

Is your point now to claim she was struck with a rubber bullet that is less lethal?

WTF are you trying to argue?

[Lord Dave]

Fuck that shit, LD.

I never said any of it is ok.

It is MORE stupid or more NOT OK to approach a goddamn police line after fucking curfew, ignore multiple directives to leave the area, and expect nothing to happen.

Except...
The curfew didn't go into effect until the 12th or 13th.  This video was posted on the 10th.
And why the fuck would you, wanting to go home, leave the fucking area?  You really are just a sheep, aren't you?  Cops say stay away from your house because we said so and you just say 'yes sir!  I love being kept from my home for no reason.  Thank you, master.'

It is even more stupid to post this in a thread about Trump and try to act like he had anything to do with this. Sheer stupidity.

You should have started a new thread about the LA mayor, ignoramus supreme.

Because Trump literally started it.  His mass ICE raids started it, then his decision to bypass the governor AND MAYOR and send in the national guard and marines made it worse.

Thats why it's here.

Not all rubber bullets have a metal core.

Is your point now to claim she was struck with a rubber bullet that is less lethal?

WTF are you trying to argue?

Yes.  At that range a rubber bullets with a metal core and one that doesn't would have different effects.  Which might explain why she walked away and not fell down on the sidewalk and started to bleed.

[Action80]

^If anyone can find a more incoherent attempt to state anything resembling sense, please do.

Trump started the riots in LA.

Jesus, fucking christ...there are liars and shit bags and then there is LD.

[Lord Dave]

^If anyone can find a more incoherent attempt to state anything resembling sense, please do.

Trump started the riots in LA.

Jesus, fucking christ...there are liars and shit bags and then there is LD.

First, this might help with reading.
https://www.hookedonphonics.com

As for Trump starting the riots..

https://www.coursera.org/learn/crash-course-in-causality

Maybe learn some causality.

[AATW]

"I talked to Putin. He lost 51 million people (in WWII) and he did fight… He fought with us in World War II and everybody hates him.”
- Trump

Is that the Putin who was born in 1952?

[Tom Bishop]

"I talked to Putin. He lost 51 million people (in WWII) and he did fight… He fought with us in World War II and everybody hates him.”
- Trump

Is that the Putin who was born in 1952?

Stop lying. He is talking about WWII in a geopolitical manner and is referring to countries by their leaders. He is clearly referring to Putin in terms of Russia fought with the USA in WWII, not Putin personally. This is abundantly clear in the below video at the 19 second mark when he says "and he did fight, Russia fought". It is further understood why Putin is referred to as his country when Trump explains how he is referring to a prior WWII conversation with Putin where Putin said "we lost 50 Million people", hence why Trump would say that "he" lost 50 million people, and that "he" fought with the USA in WWII.

It is fairly understandable what he is saying, and it is apparent that you are playing dumb to make your argument.

https://twitter.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1933207285733756966

[Lord Dave]

"I talked to Putin. He lost 51 million people (in WWII) and he did fight… He fought with us in World War II and everybody hates him.”
- Trump

Is that the Putin who was born in 1952?

Stop lying. He is talking about WWII in a geopolitical manner and is referring to countries by their leaders. He is clearly referring to Putin in terms of Russia fought with the USA in WWII, not Putin personally. This is abundantly clear in the below video at the 19 second mark when he says "and he did fight, Russia fought". It is further understood why Putin is referred to as his country when Trump explains how he is referring to a prior WWII conversation with Putin where Putin said "we lost 50 Million people", hence why Trump would say that "he" lost 50 million people, and that "he" fought with the USA in WWII.

It is fairly understandable what he is saying, and it is apparent that you are playing dumb to make your argument.

https://twitter.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1933207285733756966

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?  Because typically we'd use the leader of the nation at that time, not currently.

Also, Trump seems to not understand that 80+ years have gone by and governments change, nor the whole cold war propaganda that he literally lived through.

[AATW]

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?

He'll understand it whatever way his cult leader tells him to.
Imagine being an "independent thinker" and having such a slavish devotion to a narcissist's whims.
I like to think Tom is just trolling but I have a feeling he really is this much of a sheep.

[Lord Dave]

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?

He'll understand it whatever way his cult leader tells him to.
Imagine being an "independent thinker" and having such a slavish devotion to a narcissist's whims.
I like to think Tom is just trolling but I have a feeling he really is this much of a sheep.

I'm not sure I'd call him a sheep.
Sheep run when shown danger, even from the Shepard.  MAGA are probably closer to addicts.  They know it's dumb and bad and could kill them... They just don't care.

[Tom Bishop]

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?  Because typically we'd use the leader of the nation at that time, not currently.

Also, Trump seems to not understand that 80+ years have gone by and governments change, nor the whole cold war propaganda that he literally lived through.

Trump says to World Leader 2 "We lost half a million soldiers in WWII". World Leader 2 then says to someone else, referring to that conversation: "He lost half a million soldiers in WWII" and "He fought with us in WWII" Both of the later two sentences make perfect sense to consider Trump as the USA in this instance, considering that Trump is describing the USA as "we". Especially if during the conversation World Leader 2 clarified that "and he did fight, the US fought" to convey that "he" means the US.

I am certain that everyone here understands this and that you guys are continuing with this liberal tactic of "playing dumb" to make an argument.

He'll understand it whatever way his cult leader tells him to.
Imagine being an "independent thinker" and having such a slavish devotion to a narcissist's whims.
I like to think Tom is just trolling but I have a feeling he really is this much of a sheep.

Independent thinking isn't blindly posting the partisan rubbish you find on the internet. Your entire narrative is almost completely rubbish, and this exemplifies it. If you had watched the video before posting it you would have found that there was a whole lot of context in the "..." that your sources were lying to you about, but you accepted uncritically. You basically took a lie and posted it here, spreading lies to us directly.

[Lord Dave]

So... "Trump fought in WW2 and was very helpful in securing it." - is something you'd understand as USA?  Because typically we'd use the leader of the nation at that time, not currently.

Also, Trump seems to not understand that 80+ years have gone by and governments change, nor the whole cold war propaganda that he literally lived through.

Trump says to World Leader 2 "We lost half a million soldiers in WWII". World Leader 2 then says to someone else, referring to that conversation: "He lost half a million soldiers in WWII" and "He fought with us in WWII" Both of the later two sentences make perfect sense to consider Trump as the USA in this instance, considering that Trump is describing the USA as "we". Especially if during the conversation World Leader 2 clarified that "and he did fight, the US fought" to convey that "he" means the US.

They.
The correct pronoun to use when quoting a person using we, is they.  We is a plural, in this case meaning the people of America.  They, meaning the people of America in which you are not apart of, is how you'd say it.