All Things Trump: Is it over yet?

[pErvinalia]

What's happened to you man? You use to put up a good show of holding up your end of an argument.

It's impossible to debate people like you and 42. You operate on an altogether different set of principles to everyone else.

I've covered what you actually posted and how it doesn't match the dictionary definition

You never asked me for dictionary definition. You asked me to define it as I'm using it. Which I've done multiple times, despite you bizarrely claiming that I haven't. And to make my point I've just quoted dictionaries/encylopedias showing how it matches my use.

(while putting aside the fallacious nature of appeals to the dictionary), how an act of protest, demonstration, opposition and/or resistant is political regardless of the motivation for doing it,

This is a sloppy argument. There's no reasoning you have provided to link the two. I put it to you that for an act to be political there needs to be some politics underpinning the act. Where's his manifesto or violent rhetoric against the government? I'm happy to accept that there might be some, but until someone posts it, it's lacking.

how the use of political violence by anyone other than the sate is terrorism because the state gets to define that legally,

This is just disingenuous. In no way, given his history with empty rhetoric, can Cunt be thought to have been talking about legally defined terrorism. He was using it in a rhetorical sense, not based in any reality, like all his argument similarly are.

and how political violence without justification is just plain-old ordinary illegal violence. Is this how it ends - politics reduced to thumb-typing tweet-sized assertions and tl;drs?

The problem is that it's an exceedingly simple point. Despite your walls of 42 like text, it's not actually necessary to type an essay to make a simple point. That you inexplicably keep missing the point is not my problem. That's for you to deal with.

[pErvinalia]

To make it as clear as possible, I don't see this as terrorism as there is no attempt to attack civilians, no attempt to cause widespread fear/terror, and no apparent political motive.

[Cunt]

It was easy to call it terrorism as it was an attack on vulnerable people who presented no threat.

It was also easy because I don't call them 'concentration camps'. See, the concentration camps were different, because they weren't places people crossed deserts to desperately get into.

The lack of funding is caused by Democrat political shitflinging. Then it's used by them to tell their base that these are 'concentration camps'. Then it's ok to firebomb government employees and immigration detainees.

Kind of makes me think that accusing someone falsely, of being a Nazi, should fit the definition of 'hate-crime' or 'hate-speech'.

[Cunt]

1984 is not far away. Today ICE what tomorrow. I would really be worried living in America. It is very disconcerting to say the least. The Mussolini clone wants to be dictator. Hitler has the "SS" Trump has the ICE. Who is objecting?

Which countries are not welcoming as many immigrants as the US? Maybe they should ALL be lined up and declared racists!

I'm sure your perfect society takes in more legal, and illegal immigrants per capita, but I mean all those other loser countries.

[pErvinalia]

Kind of makes me think that accusing someone falsely, of being a Nazi, should fit the definition of 'hate-crime' or 'hate-speech'.

That was particularly nonsensical.

[Sean Hayden]

Actually, you need at least 3 gold stars to get into Scot's country. It's entirely merit based.

[pErvinalia]

Incoming Dutch immigrants are the best immigrants.

[Cunt]

Kind of makes me think that accusing someone falsely, of being a Nazi, should fit the definition of 'hate-crime' or 'hate-speech'.

That was particularly nonsensical.

Do you think it is a hate-crime, or hate-speech, to falsely accuse someone of being a nazi?

[Tero]

Trade:
What did we get for this trade war? U.S. steel and aluminum industries were not rebuilt. Tariffs failed to leverage a significantly better deal with Canada and Mexico. The new U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement is a continuation of NAFTA with a few modernizing twists, like new paint and double-hung windows on an already comfortable home. While the USMCA will increase dairy exports, much of that gain had already been negotiated as part of the TPP. The president spins the USMCA as the best deal ever. It’s a good deal that Congress should pass because it continues the phenomenal success of the original NAFTA. But with the president’s loss of 40 seats and control in the U.S House of Representatives, ratification is uncertain.
https://www.dispatch.com/opinion/201907 ... ade-policy

[Tero]

[Seabass]

[laklak]

King never, ever tips. S'truth. He lives here and all the servers in all the restaurants hate him.

[Cunt]

King never, ever tips. S'truth. He lives here and all the servers in all the restaurants hate him.

Progressives can't get into the tipping 'groove', because it is near immune to the enforced 'fairness' of government oversight.

Titties can still earn more tips.

[Hermit]

It was easy to call it terrorism as it was an attack on vulnerable people who presented no threat.

Willem van Bronsen did not attack people, vulnerable or not. He set an unoccupied, parked car on fire. The car was nowhere near other people.



He also attempted to ignite a propane tank. The tank was near a storage shed, but nowhere near people either.



His was not an act of terrorism.

It was also easy because I don't call them 'concentration camps'. See, the concentration camps were different, because they weren't places people crossed deserts to desperately get into.

Looks like you added another entry to your Dictionary of Definitions Privately held by the Member from Yellowknife. Here is the public one:

The American Heritage Dictionary defines the term concentration camp as: "A camp where persons are confined, usually without hearings and typically under harsh conditions, often as a result of their membership in a group which the government has identified as dangerous or undesirable."

Some people in those concentration camps run by, or on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security had to drink water out of toilet bowls when they were thirsty. That would be a harsh condition, don't you agree? There is no excuse for that, and you can't blame the Democrats. The Department of Homeland Security's budget for 2019 is $49.4 billion dollars. US $17.3 billion of that is allocated to Customs and Border Protection. Trump's budget request for that year was US $16.7 billion, so Customs and Border Protection received US $600 million more than the President asked for. Try and figure out how many gallons of drinking water that could buy.

[Cunt]

Some people in those concentration camps run by, or on behalf of the Department of Homeland Security had to drink water out of toilet bowls when they were thirsty. That would be a harsh condition, don't you agree? There is no excuse for that, and you can't blame the Democrats.

Wow, a sheltered life truly can make one stupid. I thought everyone knew this appliance.

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

See, in detention centres, to save on costs, they combine the toilet and sink. To get a 'fountain' drink, you have to block the right hole, or hold a button.

When I looked further into the detention center 'toilet-drinking' story, it seems that the woman in question didn't know how to work it, so drank directly from the bowl until she was taught.

I won't read more of your contribution, because it was likely equally shallow.

If you want open borders, start with your own home. If you don't, then you have to accept that some detentions will happen, and some politicians will oppose funding them, then tour them and call them concentration camps.