Let’s see …
Orange moron starts insurrection that results in 174 police officers being assaulted, with many injured. And a few officers end up dead.
Now the National Assoc. of Police endorses said moron (and convicted felon).
Is there some crazy hidden logic here?
Let’s see …
Orange moron starts insurrection that sends 150 police officers to the f*cking hospital. And a few officers end up dead.
Now the National Assoc. of Police endorses said moron (and convicted felon).
Is there some crazy hidden logic here?
No cops died as a result of that erection. I mean, “insurrection” (hahahahaha!), though one – a known Trump supporter, at that – died of a severe stroke a day or two after. In fact, the only people that died at that protest were a couple of women, one of whom was shot by a trigger-happy Capitol Police plainclothes bubba with past discipline because he was a bit of a loose cannon, and a woman who was partially trampled and who also had way too many painkillers in her system. Also, 150 POs didn’t go to the hospital. Where you getting your news on that front?
The cop union likely did it because Kamala Harris is a well-known defund-the-police advocate and even donated to the bail fund setup for those MSP Burn, Loot, Murder folks that did manage to get tossed in clink for at least the night, after their “fiery but mostly peaceful” protests.
Before that, Harris was an avid prosecutor, though, out there in the Land of Fruits and Nuts. In 'Frisco, she bragged about trying to lock up parents of kids who were skipping school. At the state level as Cali’s AG, she locked up a TON of black man, oftentimes keeping them incarcerated past their release dates, typically out of spite and to come across as some sort of tough-on-crime law dog (that one makes me laugh).
🙄
.
So, in your trumpian bizzarro world, 174 police officers assaulted = no big deal ???
I think you need to get out more often.
https://m.youtube.com/...B0aGUgQ2FwaXRvbCA%3D
https://youtu.be/...x5hu8?feature=shared
(correction: 174 police assaulted with many of them injured)
Two police officers committing suicide shortly after being attacked at the Capitol by your dear leaders mob don’t count for much eh?
You are a {redacted}
Two police officers committing suicide shortly after being attacked at the Capitol by your dear leaders mob don’t count for much eh?
You are a {redacted}
I don’t know if it is true, but BK said that one of the officers who died (from suicide?) was a trump supporter. That isn’t surprising. I’m sure that quite a few of those officers believed and supported trump. Then when they were violently attacked by the people that they sided with - they probably had some trauma, some PTSD and a lot of confliction. I can see how those things all added together could cause someone to make some emotional and irrational decisions.
Even though they may have been trump supporters, I feel sorry for them because they are still humans. Sadly, trump and his supporters don’t seem to be burdened with any sympathy for those officers.
Let’s see …
Orange moron starts insurrection that results in 174 police officers being assaulted, with many injured. And a few officers end up dead.
Now the National Assoc. of Police endorses said moron (and convicted felon).
Is there some crazy hidden logic here?
If one accepts your premise above
Then your question is valid
If one does not
then the endorsement makes perfect sense
I guess one just needs to look at your logic (crazy hidden or not) and view of the world vs. the leadership of this association’s logic (crazy hidden or not) and view of the world and decide which seems more rational.
We have your posting history here to determine your side of things.
Or we have a group who’s been tasked with running a 40-50k member association who contributes to their salary and tasks them with making decisions and doing what they believe is in the associations best interest.
For some of us this is not a tough choice.
Even though they (some of the police officers) may have been trump supporters, I feel sorry for them because they are still humans. Sadly, trump and his supporters don’t seem to be burdened with any sympathy for those officers.
Very well said.
And l completely agree.
Thread drift aside, I really would like to understand the decision for this Association to endorse Trump.
Here’s what we have so far, I guess…
“One of the most important things that the president did — he recognized that the men and women who provide public safety, who are part of law enforcement deserve the same constitutional rights as the people we serve,” NAPO president Mick McHale told attendees at a rally for the Republican presidential nominee in Charlotte, North Carolina.
“One of the most important things that the president did — he recognized that the men and women who provide public safety, who are part of law enforcement deserve the same constitutional rights as the people we serve,” NAPO president Mick McHale told attendees at a rally for the Republican presidential nominee in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Law enforcement have more rights than the regular citizen, they hold the long arm of the law in their pocket almost entirely at their own discretion. I don’t understand what constitutional rights the cops don’t have that I’ve been walking around with this whole time? Are the sovereign citizen crazies right?!?!?
this thread isn’t drifting anywhere. You started it and you wanted an explanation.
I gave you one.
Because Diesel doesn’t like the explanation so he wants to re-ask the same question by continuing to question the logic of the people who made the endorsement as to why they made it to the 40-50k people who pay them to give them the best direction possible.
I understand you and Diesel don’t like the handful of cards your holding right now. I’m surprised with the change at the top of the ticket you both don’t feel better.
But to pitch tantrums about Orange Man hasn’t worked for you for 3.6 years and isn’t working now.
At some point great intellectuals like you and Diesel are going to have to start to properly communicate what you are for rather than what you are against. And why the person at the top of your ticket represents a different and better path forward for the country that the previous person who your party threw off the ticket after giving him 14M votes.
Or you and Diesel can just continue to whine and wonder why logical people charged with endorsing the best candidate for their group would do so.
The answer is the same as why the Teamster President will endorse the Dem candidate but decided his rank and file is so important to him that he should speak at the RNC to cover his positions.
The other answer is… if you and Diesel were successful enough in the world to be in charge of a 40-50k association many more people would take you as seriously as they do this leadership group and then you could espouse your views to such a group.
But I’ll leave you and Diesel to commiserate with each other and wallow in loser talk/logic
have a nice day.
Let’s see …
Orange moron starts insurrection that results in 174 police officers being assaulted, with many injured. And a few officers end up dead.
Now the National Assoc. of Police endorses said moron (and convicted felon).
Is there some crazy hidden logic here?
No hidden logic.
Harris is a strong advocate for defunding the police and is on record saying things like more police in neighborhoods doesn’t make residents more safe.
Let’s see …
Orange moron starts insurrection that results in 174 police officers being assaulted, with many injured. And a few officers end up dead.
Now the National Assoc. of Police endorses said moron (and convicted felon).
Is there some crazy hidden logic here?
If one accepts your premise above
Then your question is valid
If one does not
then the endorsement makes perfect sense
I guess one just needs to look at your logic (crazy hidden or not) and view of the world vs. the leadership of this association’s logic (crazy hidden or not) and view of the world and decide which seems more rational.
We have your posting history here to determine your side of things.
Or we have a group who’s been tasked with running a 40-50k member association who contributes to their salary and tasks them with making decisions and doing what they believe is in the associations best interest.
For some of us this is not a tough choice.
Which part do you disagree with?
That Trump instigated it or that it was an insurrection? Or both?
And when answering, keep in mind that the intent matters for both the person(s) instigating it AND the people executing it.
this thread isn’t drifting anywhere. You started it and you wanted an explanation.
I gave you one.
Because Diesel doesn’t like the explanation so he wants to re-ask the same question by continuing to question the logic of the people who made the endorsement as to why they made it to the 40-50k people who pay them to give them the best direction possible.
I understand you and Diesel don’t like the handful of cards your holding right now. I’m surprised with the change at the top of the ticket you both don’t feel better.
But to pitch tantrums about Orange Man hasn’t worked for you for 3.6 years and isn’t working now.
At some point great intellectuals like you and Diesel are going to have to start to properly communicate what you are for rather than what you are against. And why the person at the top of your ticket represents a different and better path forward for the country that the previous person who your party threw off the ticket after giving him 14M votes.
Or you and Diesel can just continue to whine and wonder why logical people charged with endorsing the best candidate for their group would do so.
The answer is the same as why the Teamster President will endorse the Dem candidate but decided his rank and file is so important to him that he should speak at the RNC to cover his positions.
The other answer is… if you and Diesel were successful enough in the world to be in charge of a 40-50k association many more people would take you as seriously as they do this leadership group and then you could espouse your views to such a group.
But I’ll leave you and Diesel to commiserate with each other and wallow in loser talk/logic
have a nice day.
Many interesting, if quite tangential, topics.
From your post, is it safe to say that you have no interest in discussing the topics you brought up? I would be delighted to respond in detail, but l need not if you more prefer insults and one-way communication.
Harris is a strong advocate for defunding the police and is on record saying things like more police in neighborhoods doesn’t make residents more safe.
I’ll take you at your word for that.
We have a binary choice this November, we have to vote for who is running, not who we want to run.
Trump is charged with multiple serious crimes. And he is a convicted felon. And he is on record for telling his supporters to overturn a lawful election. And invade a building where over 170 police officers were assaulted, some very severely. Where the insurrectionists were hoping to murder people. And where one moron beat the sh*t out of a police officer with a flagpole with a ‘blue lives matter’ flag.
The cop union likely did it because Kamala Harris is a well-known defund-the-police advocate and even donated to the bail fund setup for those MSP Burn, Loot, Murder folks that did manage to get tossed in clink for at least the night, after their “fiery but mostly peaceful” protests.
Or the cop union did it because they see leadership in Trump that might look away from not so polite tactics nor US constitution and law compliant tactics of rounding up the usual suspects and then some others. Bad policing is a thing and bad policing might just result from Trump’s exuberant “just lock em up” leadership delivery.
I get that you come to this from past recent experience, and, that you are quite familiar with how the federal government always tends to over swing in correction mode, but there is the potential there. Some say Stop and frisk worked until it didn’t when brought to square with freedoms afforded us citizens.
Harris is a strong advocate for defunding the police and is on record saying things like more police in neighborhoods doesn’t make residents more safe.
I’ll take you at your word for that.
We have a binary choice this November, we have to vote for who is running, not who we want to run.
Trump is charged with multiple serious crimes. And he is a convicted felon. And he is on record for telling his supporters to overturn a lawful election. And invade a building where over 170 police officers were assaulted, some very severely. Where the insurrectionists were hoping to murder people. And where one moron beat the sh*t out of a police officer with a flagpole with a ‘blue lives matter’ flag.
While that may be true, Trump is much more likely to support policies that allow police officers to violate citizen’s rights without consequence. Harris is more likely to support policies that include accountability for abuse of power. It’s not surprising to me that they endorsed Trump.
What the fuck! I thought you left. Go away with your Bull Shit!!
Trump enjoys violence committed by authorities whether it be
The police : He supports increased police immunity. He’s encouraged police to treat criminal suspects more harshly. He wanted to shoot peaceful protestors in the legs (they only shot rubber bullets.) He cheered when members of the media were injured by police during protests.
The military: He said we should kill the wives and children of our enemies and he pardoned American war criminals.
The CIA: He campaigned on increased torture during interrogations (water boarding and “much worse”). He implied that water boarding was not actually torture because “some people say . . .”
Let’s see …
Orange moron starts insurrection that results in 174 police officers being assaulted, with many injured. And a few officers end up dead.
Now the National Assoc. of Police endorses said moron (and convicted felon).
Is there some crazy hidden logic here?
If one accepts your premise above
Then your question is valid
If one does not
then the endorsement makes perfect sense
I guess one just needs to look at your logic (crazy hidden or not) and view of the world vs. the leadership of this association’s logic (crazy hidden or not) and view of the world and decide which seems more rational.
We have your posting history here to determine your side of things.
Or we have a group who’s been tasked with running a 40-50k member association who contributes to their salary and tasks them with making decisions and doing what they believe is in the associations best interest.
For some of us this is not a tough choice.
Which part do you disagree with?
That Trump instigated it or that it was an insurrection? Or both?
And when answering, keep in mind that the intent matters for both the person(s) instigating it AND the people executing it.
The highlighted part. And whether I disagree with it or not doesn’t matter. Apparently either the head of the police assoc disagrees, or they agree and think that the alternative is such a disaster to their members that they are willing to overlook it and endorse TFG anyway
DSW didn’t create this post because I said anything. He’s flabbergasted by the position of the police. I’m laying out for him why their viewpoint may be different than his.