Posted on 03/20/2016 2:01:02 PM PDT by drewh
Garrison’s cartoon
Thousands including many Catholics thought they were responding via Trump in effect telling the pope to go to hell . But it was intended and used, as a left handed Trump endorsement. which the media not Trump engineered and Trump after learning the facts should have apologized and condemed this, instead used it..
Pope Francis responded to accusation loaded questions by a Reuters news agency reporter and did not believe those accusations. So the pope never mentioned Trumps name . Here in abstract; replied using the term One, to generalize his example and began with; If actually one said and continued with : One does, one did, one believes :It was meant to be a generalized position applied to anyone when answering the questions that were presented to him .Yet the US media turned this statement vy Pope Francis :
Those that only focus on building walls and not bridges are not Christian. into: Those who build walls not bridges like Trump are not Christian. Turning a generalized position into a personal attack by no less the pope
If they voted that way because of that reason They were mislead by machinations of the media not rejection of actions voters thought were made by the pope.
Now rhis headline... So typical of this guy ! His rights ! Only Trumps rights ! He could and should have made and broaden it beyond just including himsef. And made that claim when he announced cancellation of his Chicago Rally. They are pulling this krap off at too many universities and other political rallys but particularly on college campuses.
If he had done that he would have been way ahead plus demonstrate defence of the amemdments expressed in the preamble of the constitution.
( I like Trump, but I don't agree with everything he says. )
NOTE: June 16, 2016. To help the reader of this message to better understand my message, he should keep this date in mind. This was the first day of Trump's campaign and also the day that he uttered his now famous phrase "they're rapists."
Back to my question: So when do you---the anti-Trump person---believe that 69 year old Trump first became a racist?
Do you think that it occurred a long time ago, or did it occur more recently, say, about 9 months ago on June 16, 2016, the first day of Trump's campaign, when he startled the world by suddenly announcing on national tv that Mexicans "they're rapists"?
Myself: I find it difficult to believe that 69 year old Trump who has no history of being a racist before June 16, 2016 woke up on June16, 2016--- the first day of his campaign---and suddenly turned into this crazy 69 year old racist who, according to anti-Trump people, hates all Mexicans. It makes no sense to me.
So, I would like to ask an anti-Trump protester: When do you think that Trump first started to believe that ALL Mexicans were criminals, drug dealers, and rapists?
1. That is, how long do you believe that 69 year old Trump has been a racist? Just for a few months or for most of his 69 years?
2. Maybe you believe that Trump became a terrible racist way back during his teenage years at a military school?
3. Do you have any evidence---like written material or eyewitness testimony---that 69 year old Trump was a racist way back even in military high school?
4.. Or, maybe you believe that Trump quietly developed his racist views during his first two college undergraduate years when he studied at Fordham Catholic University in New York before transferring to the famous Wharton finance school in Philadelphia for his last two years of undergraduate studies? Yes, it must have been those horrible Catholic priests who first taught Trump to be a racist. Yeah, right.
5. Or, maybe you believe that Trump developed his racist views----especially against Mexicans----his junior and senior years at the famous Wharton School in Philadelphia? Do you have any evidence that young Trump held racist views---especially against Mexicans----while at Wharton? Like the testimony of former classmates, or some papers he wrote for some classes.
6. Or, maybe you believe that 69 year old Trump developed his racist views about Mexicans while working the past 30 years in the construction industry, when he worked so much with Mexicans and other minorities and came to hate them.
7. So, again, I would like to ask an anti-Trump protester the following question: When do you believe 69 year old Trump first started expressing his racist views----especially his racist views about Mexican immigrants?
8. Finally, I challenge anti-Trump protesters with this statement: If you cannot find any evidence whatsoever that Trump has a history of hating Mexicans during his 69 years BEFORE June 16, 2016---the first day of Trump's campaign---then it would be absurd for you to conclude that 69 year old Trump suddenly turned into a crazy 69 year old racist OVERNIGHT on June 16, 2016.
...and hillary or colonel sanders will be oh so much more powerful and smart!
we already know canadian ted is establishment so he has ZERO chance of winning against the true establishment pick Cankles the cuckholded hag.
TRUMP OR BUST!
They aren’t largely to blame, they are totally to blame. If the democrats and gop wouldn’t send agitators and disrupters into his events, there wouldn’t be any of these violent incidents.
And no doubt the protesters are whining that Trump is violating their First Amendment rights when the only party that can violate anyone's Constitutional rights is the government.
How is stating a certain fact which I ma sure you can understand amount to crying?\\\
Your hatred, bitterness, and anger are clouding your judgment so much you clearly are now embarrassing yourself with these comments.
Once again, Trump reveals his utter lack of understanding of the Constitution. Only the government can violates your 1st Amendment rights - another private citizen can’t. They may interfere with your ability to speak, and they may even violate the law in the process, but that isn’t a violation of the 1st Amendment.
Time and time again, you reveal your gross lack of understanding of both the Constitution, federal law, and private property.
- Your First Amendment rights end at my doorstop.
- It is against the law to disrupt an event with Secret Service protection.
- Trump's rallies and speeches are private events for his supporters.
He actually said "Klu Klux Klan." I wish someone would tell him how to pronounce that. It's like listening to Bush say "nucular."
The part about a heightened standard to sue public figures is constitutionally mandated. Just as is the right of a public speaker not to be drowned out by protesters.
so then the private individual can own as many slaves as he likes?
you’re mistaken. private people can be and are sued for infringements of constitutional rights as can counties, cities and state governments.
If Trump supporters did that the liberal media would howl at the moon 24/7. I just wonder what kind of chicanery and violence these agitators will pull on election day.
******
CORRECTION: My mistake. I meant June 16, 2015, not 2016.
“Democrats are against free elections and free speech. They are, however, for free everything else.”
Anything that buys them votes they are for.
He has been charged, and arrest records are public information. He should get some jail time. He was not being threatened, just saw a chance to get in a cheap shot. Typical thug.
They wouldn’t play it
His and ours ... the right to peaceably assemble and address our grievances is being infringed. Look for the Dept of Just Us to intervene in 5,4,3,2 ... 2 ... 2 ... 2
If I break into your house and steal your gun am I violating your 2nd amendment rights or am I burglarizing?
Don’t make a fool of yourself and stay silent . It would be better ....for you .
You seem to ignore that Trump is talking about political meetings during a campaign ....!!
Did you miss that little “detail” ?
So go back and say hello to Bernie , Ill-hary , or Teddy
Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts, 388 U.S. 130 (1967)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.