Posted on 08/15/2017 8:23:39 AM PDT by Hadean
There is no shortage of theories about why President Trump was so cagey in blaming “many sides” for the white supremacist-fueled violence in Virginia.
Some suggested the president did not want to alienate whites who voted for him out of a sense of racial grievance. Others said he was offering his white nationalist supporters a wink and a nod. Yet another concluded advisers like Stephen K. Bannon must be influencing the president in dark ways.
But there is an alternate explanation, one that is espoused by many on the right...
In this version, a violent and dangerous left fringe is ignored by news media that would rather elevate far-right extremism as the nation’s more urgent threat. This view of the left as unhinged and anarchistic has become popular with some Republicans who insist that Democrats still refuse to accept Mr. Trump. They seek to stoke powerful emotions behind perceptions of excessive political correctness and media bias.
In his reluctance to pin the blame on any one element of the protests, Mr. Trump seems to have concluded what many other conservatives did about the tragedy in Charlottesville, Va.: As tragic as it was, it was incited by a small, unrepresentative group of bigots purporting to speak for the right whose antics would be exhaustively covered in the news.
“They think there were 300 or so racists who showed up to a rally, and who got exactly what they wanted: Violence, and violence in a way that inspires the nation’s elite to double down on iconoclasm in a way they hope grows their movement,” said Ben Domenech, the publisher of The Federalist, an online magazine.
A headline on The Federalist on Monday summed up that sentiment: “White Supremacists Were Not the Only Thugs Tearing Up Charlottesville.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“He used the right words. It included everyone.....there were antagonists on BOTH sides.”
Exactly. Nothing confusing about it unless you are the one trying to confuse the issue. That being the NYT.
For the NY Crimes there’s only one side that is virtuous - all leftist, communists, BLM, Antifa, liberals, democrats etc.
Oh good we’ve all been waiting for the latest dispatch from the New York Faggot Times.
They want to turn it into another covfefe moment; I could tell precisely what he meant. I guess they are disingenuous or dense.
Or a biased mind that won’t accept its own responsbility
stuffing words into President Trump’s mouth, refusing to name Antifa, and taking the left’s narrative and regurgitating it as gospel truth...
KKK, Antifa, BLM, they all be hatin.
Trump communicates poorly. He needs to call them ALL out and let them ALL squeal.
Possibly. Could also be that the left reacted to a march and took advantage of the situation to send in armed resistance. We have to be able to deal with either possibility.
Antifa started this current cycle of violence. The white nationalists were happy to respond in kind. But take Antifa out of Charlottesville, and it would have been a non-story. And then there is the violence of BLM, against which Obama only gave tepid condemnations at best. Yet we didn’t hear shrieks from the media about that. Makes you believe that the media is ok with violence as long as it is done by groups they agree with.
Maybe he watched the video of both well armed sides beating the crap out of each other without any police intervention...
“white supremacist-fueled violence”
Fake news.
oh yes the New York Times Reporter that tweeted out that the left was being violent in Charlotte ...had her mind corrected later on Twitter
oh and you might want to talk to that right-wing group the Virginia ACLU that got these people permission by order of a judge to allow this March and said the cops were stood down by the mayor and cause the whole thing
1984 stuff daily
the thing is you can be sure there will be lawsuits and its will not be the neo-nazis that are just sued ... the city's going to get sued
“He used the right words. It included everyone.....there were antagonists on BOTH sides.”
Really? Because it looks to me like one side had a permit and was exercising its constitutionally protected right to free speech, while the other side presented itself with the specific intent and purpose of denying the first side its constitutional rights by attacking them violently.
What places the first side on the same moral plane with the second? Is exercising constitutional rights morally equivalent to denying them by violence?
Even if the first side moved to defend itself after the felonious assault by the second, that was just the exercise of another of their rights.
No, the only way the first side is at fault is in holding and speaking opinions that others find objectionable. That’s it. That’s the only thing they did wrong.
Well-reasoned and right on point. However will be lost on the millions of owners of deaf ears, who’ve been indoctrinated into the elitist club of White self-hate.
If it is at all useful, everyone is invited to pass it along.
Today's media is worse and more dangerous than internet bloggers. The public's appetite for national political and social entertainment instead of real credible "news" is something we fought a war in the 40's to put a stop to.
Every story we are told in the media needs a long pause and a "We'll see" period of analytics inside each head before it's validated. Nine out of ten turn out to be something other than that which is told.
The president has always been a blue-collar populist and Democrat supporter. It’s in the record. He’s never been anything like a conservative. Don’t expect him to magically morph into William F. Buckley, Jr. It isn’t going to happen. Years ago in New York there used to exist Democrats who were true blue labor union pro-American. They are gone now. So in a sense DJT is an anachronism. It was a large part of his appeal at the ballot box in 2016. But a conservative he’s not.
One lit match near to seven tons of dynamite next to a welders torch is a “match fueled catastrophe” in the eyes of the media.
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.