politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
So walk me through how that conversation goes in your head. Trump is just this side of senile, so he definitely couldn't have come up with a convoluted plot involving his attempted assassination, so it 100% would have had to be a suggestion of someone else. So let's walk through the conversation that must have happened for this to have been a fake assassination attempt.
"So Mr. Trump, I think that the best thing to do to ensure you're going to win the next election is to have someone shoot very near you. Maybe the bullet will graze you, maybe it'll hit the teleprompter and send shards of glass your way. But either way, it'll be a very close thing, and you'll suffer a minor injury along the way."
Do you honestly think that Donald Trump, the guy who got out of the draft because of bone spurs, the guy who gets queasy at the sight of blood, the guy who has spent the last 2 months talking about how he'd cling to a battery to get electrocuted instead of taking his chances with a shark, would be ok with being shot at? Seriously?
Because if that's what you think, you and I don't occupy the same universe.
Be creative. Let's say you are a decision maker in Trump's orbit. You think now is a good time to do something big to fire up your base.
Do you tell trump and risk bad acting or do you set it up without his knowledge? I believe the injury is genuine but that doesn't rule out the idea that the situation was set up to have a minimal chance of permanent injury to the candidate while giving him incredible PR and the chance to look strong.
I think that the idea that it was faked is so outlandish that it would require a good amount of evidence before the prospect could even be considered in serious conversation. There is zero evidence that it was faked. By far the most likely explanation is that someone who had a bone to pick with Donald Trump, and who was not particularly skilled at making shots 150 yards away climbed up onto a roof and grabbed the opportunity that lax security provided.
You start throwing in conspiracies about how it was an inside job, and everything becomes so much more complicated, logistics-wise. Complicated plots do happen, but to suggest that was the case here with zero evidence is laughable.
I ain't saying I believe this. I think it has a low but non zero plausibility level. It's also not 'faked', my hypothetical is a real guy really shooting at trump but with the scenario manipulated to limit permanent damage or death of the candidate.
It's more believable than a full faked assassination attempt with fake blood, given the proximity of bystanders and cameras.
I would think the smartest play would to be near him say 10 yards where it would "look" close enough. Actually take out the sacrifice. But then go down and act as hit with a blood pack or cut himself on the ear when he was on the ground. The graze is just an illusion. Kind of like the bullet catch trick if you are familiar with magic tricks.
I mean, he was very involved in professional wrestling for a number of years.