Please point us to the posts where I wrote that. Exactly that and more than once, since you claim I keep posting that.
I am asking you do do that because your misquote is similar to what many Trumpbots do. They misquote. They change the subject and never debate honestly.
Are you doing the same thing?
Sure, no problem.
Trump has condoned violence against protesters on more than one occasion
Here's one. Condone violence could be many things, including punch. You don't have to quibble over the words, since you used a broad category "condone violence" that fits.
Trump has created an environment that condones HIS SUPPORTERS attacking protesters.
...condones (look up word) violence by his supporters ATTACKING (punch, kick, hit, stab, shot, scream at...ad infinitum) protestors.
The one who was hit by the 68 YO man was being led out of the arena and the Trump guy sucker punched him.
THERE'S that word punch!
BTW, about the supporter who punched a protester: Trump didn't denounce him.
Punch again, you're on a roll. By Trump not "denouncing him, isn't that implying approval?
Nope. He was condoning.
Condone--means to approve.
Post 240: IREST MY CASE: But what has happened at Trump speeches is that he has told his followers to punch protesters, not for violence, but for protesting.
1. Savedbygrace: "But what has happened at Trump speeches is that he has told his followers to punch protesters, not for violence, but for protesting."
2. Savedbygrace: "Trump said to hit or beat the protesters, and did not qualify it to only be applied to self defense."
What do I win?