2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

Timberrrrrrrr

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Plenty of evidence there but you're ignoring it, one of the businesses had already burned down so therefore, there was an obvious threat that his other business premises would be burned down.

Or do you believe that violent rioters stop their rioting and destruction after they've burned down one business like all the other times that there has been rioting :rolleyes: .

So show it please, show us there was an imminent threat to that business that it needed armed children to shoot dead two people.

LessOutragePlz

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So show it please, show us there was an imminent threat to that business that it needed armed children to shoot dead two people.

"Upon arrival, Kyle and others stood guard at the mechanic's shop across from the auto dealership to prevent further damage or destruction"

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61686

"The witness told The Vicki McKenna Show during an interview on 1310 WIBA on Friday that Rittenhouse and others, including military veterans, responded to a call on social media from a business owner to help protect his business which had already been partially destroyed during the prior nights of rioting."

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61687

His business had already been partially destroyed, so his other businesses needed to be protected due to the threat of them also being destroyed.

How is that logic difficult to follow, one business being burned down presents a threat to his other businesses when the rioters were once again out in force intent on causing further damage and destruction.

He's not some evil murder that was waiting for an opportunity to kill people. He was helping injured people on the night.

https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1299250471069085696?s=20

He also helped to extinguish a dumpster fire on the night by providing a fire extinguisher.

https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1299804984926564352?s=20

Overheal

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

Plenty of evidence there but you're ignoring it, one of the businesses had already burned down so therefore, there was an obvious threat that his other business premises would be burned down.

Or do you believe that violent rioters stop their rioting and destruction after they've burned down one business like all the other times that there has been rioting :rolleyes: .

Me and my friend, who owns business property in Chicago, have been having this same conversation. Your right to defend your property extends to your property. Were the people on the private property? Were they on a public street, or publicly accessible easement, driveway, lot, etc?

If I had as imminent a concern as I would if I owned property in Portland, Chicago, Kenosha, etc. my first choice would be surveillance, which is cheaper than ever. $300 for a Nest camera is cheaper than most firearms, of the escalation of legal fees associated with choosing armed confrontation as your first layer of protection. My parents in FL had their licence plate stolen on their driveway, they don't patrol the front yard with AR-15s they have a camera. In the case of Kenosha board up your windows and give your property a low profile, not a high profile. During the LA riots shopkeepers were on their rooftops like it was a battlements, it was as much a threat to stay away as an invitation to open warfare. If your shop is secured properly you can wait inside, monitor your surveillance and there is a far higher probability you will be left alone than if you go marching the streets with a rifle and getting into shouting matches with protesters.

Dyr

Carfacemandog wrote: »

Exactly as I said, Trump claims to be against white suoremacists... while praising attendees of a white supremacist organised rally as 'very fine people'.

You said he didnt condemn white supremacistswhen he very clearly and explicitly did.

Hang onto the narrative though, despite everything

Overheal

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

"Upon arrival, Kyle and others stood guard at the mechanic's shop across from the auto dealership to prevent further damage or destruction"

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=61686

He continued: "Later in the day, they received information about a call for help from a local business owner, whose downtown Kenosha auto dealership was largely destroyed by mob violence. The business owner needed help to protect what he had left of his life's work, including two nearby mechanic's shops. Kyle and a friend armed themselves with rifles due to the deadly violence gripping Kenosha and many other American cities, and headed to the business premises. The weapons were in Wisconsin and never crossed state lines."

This doesn't make it clear that the local business owner was the owner of the mechanic's shops, which if he isn't means Rittenhouse was trying to guard property he had no affiliation with.

extra gravy

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

He was protecting a business not some crazed vigilante that went out with the intention to kill people even though that's what a lot of people on this thread believe.

How do you know what his intentions were? That may or may not be established after a full investigation. Swallowing everything his legal team is saying is also fairly naive.

Overheal

extra gravy wrote: »

How do you know what his intentions were? That may or may not be established after a full investigation. Swallowing everything his legal team is saying is also fairly naive.

I could totally see why a Medic is clearly just like obviously out for a killing spree and a frappuchino.

Igotadose

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

"A local business owner, whose downtown Kenosha auto dealership was largely destroyed by mob violence. The business owner needed help to protect what he had left of his life's work, including two nearby mechanic's shops"

That is part of a statement released by his legal team

So what? Jeffrey Dahmer had legal teams too.

Lets dumb this down.

Murderer kills someone. Is chased by a group who bravely attempt to disarm him. He murders another. Others finally tackle him, his weapon goes off and someone else is wounded.

Two murders, one attempted. Simples. He has no right to commit murder and it was premeditated.

One of his business had already been destroyed so logic would dictate that his other businesses were under imminent threat. So Kyle and his friend were defending his other businesses.

Or are we not following logic anymore?

No legal right to defend, requested or not.. He's not a cop.

Carfacemandog

Bambi wrote: »

You said he didnt condemn white supremacistswhen he very clearly and explicitly did.

Hang onto the narrative though, despite everything

Nowhere there did he name check Spencer nor the organisers (of which Spencer was one) because they were still trying to pretend this rally was not a neo nazi one - which is was. If Obama had done the exact same for a hypothetical ISIS rally in the US it would likely have been the end of his presidency (and rightly so).

What I also said that you're wriggling to get out of, is that Spencer endorsed Trump in 2016 and had his infamous "Heil Trump!" conference after he won, and Trump never once denounced said support (nor support from any of the neo nazis who endorsed him if I recall). Instead, he hired Spencer's colleague and white supremacist college buddy Steven Miller to a high ranking advisory role.

You were eager to bring up Spencer endorsing Biden, I can see now why you're eager to not discuss Trumps reaction to Spencer endorsing him previously.

Don't worry though, we can all see you're very loyal. So good job there.

Leroy42

LessOutragePlz wrote: »

He was protecting a business not some crazed vigilante that went out with the intention to kill people even though that's what a lot of people on this thread believe.

We can argue that point all we want but it will be up to a judge and jury to decide if he is guilty of any crimes.

Again, so you agree that should a protestor think that another protestor is in harms way due to police action that they are reasonable to attack the police?

They would be protecting their friends after all?

Surely if the public are let make these decision then that is vigalantism? He was their judge, jury and executioner of the people he killed, they will never get their day in court.

So which is it? Is law and order important or do individuals get to decide when and where it applies?

Professor Moriarty

Leroy42 wrote: »

Again, so you agree that should a protestor think that another protestor is in harms way due to police action that they are reasonable to attack the police?

They would be protecting their friends after all?

Surely if the public are let make these decision then that is vigalantism? He was their judge, jury and executioner of the people he killed, they will never get their day in court.

So which is it? Is law and order important or do individuals get to decide when and where it applies?

By that poster's logic, when Kyle was beating up a girl, the girl's 17 year old brother could shoot him dead with a semi automatic rifle. Protecting an innocent citizen, supporting the police, keeping the peace and all that jazz.

Overheal

Rep. Steve Scalise faked content in a Biden attack ad. He inserted the words "for police" into a question a disabled reporter asks, who speaks with an assistance device.

Taking advantage of someone's disability to produce libelous content. Scalise is in hot water.

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1300075359929544705?s=20

Overheal

https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1300154855546392577?s=20

hotmail.com

Has Joe Biden spelled out his policies on what he's going to do to tackle crime, police brutality, the causes of crime?

AllForIt

briany wrote: »

Trump's supporters will always vote for him. The question is what reason has he given swing voters to vote for him? If you'd been talking about this in Jan, the economy was running along nicely. This could have been enough by itself.

Since then, the George Floyd protests/riots and coronavirus have shown a worrying inability to lead. Or rather a desire not to be a unifying leader but instead taking sides and pointing fingers. These are not the actions of a dignified statesman or a true leader for all Americans.

I actually think the riots are going in his favour rather than not. But yeah there's a lot to weight up.

Timberrrrrrrr

hotmail.com wrote: »

Has Joe Biden spelled out his policies on what he's going to do to tackle crime, police brutality, the causes of crime?

Has Trump spelled out his? Last time he was asked he couldn't answer and went off on a ramble about sleeping in Washington.

AllForIt

hotmail.com wrote: »

Has Joe Biden spelled out his policies on what he's going to do to tackle crime, police brutality, the causes of crime?

Hardly, because it could be construed he's targeting the black community which is the last thing he wants to do right now.

AllForIt

Overheal wrote: »

Me and my friend, who owns business property in Chicago, have been having this same conversation. Your right to defend your property extends to your property. Were the people on the private property? Were they on a public street, or publicly accessible easement, driveway, lot, etc?

If I had as imminent a concern as I would if I owned property in Portland, Chicago, Kenosha, etc. my first choice would be surveillance, which is cheaper than ever. $300 for a Nest camera is cheaper than most firearms, of the escalation of legal fees associated with choosing armed confrontation as your first layer of protection. My parents in FL had their licence plate stolen on their driveway, they don't patrol the front yard with AR-15s they have a camera. In the case of Kenosha board up your windows and give your property a low profile, not a high profile. During the LA riots shopkeepers were on their rooftops like it was a battlements, it was as much a threat to stay away as an invitation to open warfare. If your shop is secured properly you can wait inside, monitor your surveillance and there is a far higher probability you will be left alone than if you go marching the streets with a rifle and getting into shouting matches with protesters.

If there were a gang of people outside your house, on the road say, not your property, would you just ignore it. Not feel there's any problem as they are not currently on your property.

Surveillance won't do anything to STOP marauding face covered gangs doing what they are intent on doing.

Tell me how

hotmail.com wrote: »

Has Joe Biden spelled out his policies on what he's going to do to tackle crime, police brutality, the causes of crime?

Here are Joes Plans. You can find what you are looking for in there.

• Build Back Better: Jobs and Economic Recovery for Working Families
• Build Back Better: Racial Equity Across the American Economy
• Build Back Better: 21st Century Caregiving and Education Workforce
• Build Back Better: Sustainable Infrastructure and a Clean Energy Future
• Ensure the Future is “Made in All of America” by All of America’s Workers
• Joe Biden’s Roadmap to Reopening Schools Safely
• The Biden Agenda for Women
• The Biden Plan for Full Participation and Equality for People With Disabilities
• Joe’s Leadership in Times of Crisis: COVID-19
• Joe Biden’s Proposals to Set Up Support for Deserving Small Businesses
• The Biden 4-Point Plan for Our Essential Workers
• The Biden Plan to Scale Up Employment Insurance
• The Biden Plan for Bankruptcy Reform
• The Biden Plan for Combating Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Lift Every Voice: The Biden Plan for Black America
• The Biden Plan for Central America
• The Biden Plan for Immigration
• The Biden Plan for Veterans
• The Biden Plan for Military Families
• The Biden Plan for Encouraging Unions and Empowering Workers
• The Biden Plan for Campaign Finance and Government Reform
• The Biden Plan For Education Beyond High School
• The Biden Plan for Ending Gun Violence
• The Biden Plan for Violence Against Women
• The Biden Plan for Criminal Justice Reform
• The Biden Plan for Rural America
• The Biden Plan for Older Americans and Retirement
• The Biden Plan for Health Care
• The Biden Plan for Restoring American Leadership
• The Biden Plan for Climate Change
• The Biden Plan for K-12 Education
• The Biden Plan for Housing
• The Biden Plan for LGBTQ+ Equality
• The Biden Plan for Opioids and Substance Use Disorders
• Joe Biden's Agenda for The Catholic Community
• Joe Biden’s Agenda For Students
• Joe Biden's Agenda for The Black Community
• Joe Biden’s Agenda for the AAPI Community
• Joe Biden's Agenda for the Indian American Community
• Joe Biden's Agenda for the Jewish Community
• Joe Biden’s Agenda for Muslim-American Communities
• Joe Biden’s Commitment to Indian Country
• Joe Biden's Agenda for the Latino Community
• The Biden Plan to Invest in Middle Class Competitiveness
• The Biden Plan for Environmental Justice
• Joe Biden and the Arab American Community: A Plan for Partnership

Can you give us a link to Trumps?

Overheal

AllForIt wrote: »

If there were a gang of people outside your house, on the road say, not your property, would you just ignore it. Not feel there's any problem as they are not currently on your property.

Surveillance won't do anything to STOP marauding face covered gangs doing what they are intent on doing.

That's the thrust of it yes. If lethal force is an option on the table, I am not going to go escalate a confrontation by engaging people that have not stepped foot on my property.

hotmail.com

Tell me how wrote: »

Here are Joes Plans. You can find what you are looking for in there.

• Build Back Better: Jobs and Economic Recovery for Working Families
• Build Back Better: Racial Equity Across the American Economy
• Build Back Better: 21st Century Caregiving and Education Workforce
• Build Back Better: Sustainable Infrastructure and a Clean Energy Future
• Ensure the Future is “Made in All of America” by All of America’s Workers
• Joe Biden’s Roadmap to Reopening Schools Safely
• The Biden Agenda for Women
• The Biden Plan for Full Participation and Equality for People With Disabilities
• Joe’s Leadership in Times of Crisis: COVID-19
• Joe Biden’s Proposals to Set Up Support for Deserving Small Businesses
• The Biden 4-Point Plan for Our Essential Workers
• The Biden Plan to Scale Up Employment Insurance
• The Biden Plan for Bankruptcy Reform
• The Biden Plan for Combating Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Lift Every Voice: The Biden Plan for Black America
• The Biden Plan for Central America
• The Biden Plan for Immigration
• The Biden Plan for Veterans
• The Biden Plan for Military Families
• The Biden Plan for Encouraging Unions and Empowering Workers
• The Biden Plan for Campaign Finance and Government Reform
• The Biden Plan For Education Beyond High School
• The Biden Plan for Ending Gun Violence
• The Biden Plan for Violence Against Women
• The Biden Plan for Criminal Justice Reform
• The Biden Plan for Rural America
• The Biden Plan for Older Americans and Retirement
• The Biden Plan for Health Care
• The Biden Plan for Restoring American Leadership
• The Biden Plan for Climate Change
• The Biden Plan for K-12 Education
• The Biden Plan for Housing
• The Biden Plan for LGBTQ+ Equality
• The Biden Plan for Opioids and Substance Use Disorders
• Joe Biden's Agenda for The Catholic Community
• Joe Biden’s Agenda For Students
• Joe Biden's Agenda for The Black Community
• Joe Biden’s Agenda for the AAPI Community
• Joe Biden's Agenda for the Indian American Community
• Joe Biden's Agenda for the Jewish Community
• Joe Biden’s Agenda for Muslim-American Communities
• Joe Biden’s Commitment to Indian Country
• Joe Biden's Agenda for the Latino Community
• The Biden Plan to Invest in Middle Class Competitiveness
• The Biden Plan for Environmental Justice
• Joe Biden and the Arab American Community: A Plan for Partnership

Can you give us a link to Trumps?

All them say plans.

Specifically. Does he plan a greater redistribution of wealth for example, to alleviate poverty, the main cause of crime.

This would of course, rid the need of the heavy police state America lives with.

Tell me how

hotmail.com wrote: »

All them say plans.

Specifically. Does he plan a greater redistribution of wealth for example, to alleviate poverty, the main cause of crime.

This would of course, rid the need of the heavy police state America lives with.

You asked for policies, what do you think plans are?

So, you think the solution to the crime problems in America need a massive, dare I say it, socialist, actually, maybe even closer to a communist approach in order to resolve them.

Interesting concept. Do you think Trump is saving that for his 2nd term, or why didn't he do it over the last 4 years.

Hego Damask

Overheal wrote: »

https://twitter.com/mviser/status/1300154855546392577?s=20

He is only denouncing it now as the polls are shifting, there has been non stop 3 months of this crap and he has said nothing - in fact he has fueled it.

But alas, I am not being fair, the poor senile old fool is not even writing any of this, he is barely aware of what day of the week or year it is , never mind that the democrats want to burn America to the ground and turn it into a third world ****hole.

AllForIt

Overheal wrote: »

That's the thrust of it yes. If lethal force is an option on the table, I am not going to go escalate a confrontation by engaging people that have not stepped foot on my property.

I agree with that to an extent. But the point is people want to STOP ppl coming on their property in the first place. You're not factoring in the human intimidation and fear factor side of it, when you don't know in advance what the the gangs intentions are. Once they are on your property...it's too late.

edit: I don't agree with lethal force, just some force. At least some to put them off.

Carfacemandog

Hego Damask wrote: »

He is only denouncing it now as the polls are shifting, there has been non stop 3 months of this crap and he has said nothing - in fact he has fueled it..

Then how do you explain his denouncing the violence as early as May, just days after the protests began? https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2020/05/31/george-floyd-protests-saturday/#46d9c3037651

“Protesting such brutality is right and necessary. It’s an utterly American response. But burning down communities and needless destruction is not. Violence that endangers lives is not. Violence that guts and shutters businesses that serve the community is not.”

AllForIt

Tell me how wrote: »

So, you think the solution to the crime problems in America need a massive, dare I say it, socialist, actually, maybe even closer to a communist approach in order to resolve them.

A communist approach might be to introduce mandatory military service, if that's what you meant. Maybe not a bad idea.

Overheal

hotmail.com wrote: »

All them say plans.

Specifically. Does he plan a greater redistribution of wealth for example, to alleviate poverty, the main cause of crime.

This would of course, rid the need of the heavy police state America lives with.

Build Back Better: Jobs and Economic Recovery for Working Families
The Biden Plan for Full Participation and Equality for People With Disabilities
Joe Biden’s Proposals to Set Up Support for Deserving Small Businesses
The Biden 4-Point Plan for Our Essential Workers
The Biden Plan to Scale Up Employment Insurance
The Biden Plan for Bankruptcy Reform
The Biden Plan for Encouraging Unions and Empowering Workers
The Biden Plan For Education Beyond High School
The Biden Plan for Ending Gun Violence
The Biden Plan for Criminal Justice Reform
The Biden Plan for K-12 Education
The Biden Plan for Opioids and Substance Use Disorders
Joe Biden’s Agenda For Students

Overheal

Hego Damask wrote: »

He is only denouncing it now as the polls are shifting, there has been non stop 3 months of this crap and he has said nothing - in fact he has fueled it.

Supply evidence please.

Overheal

AllForIt wrote: »

I agree with that to an extent. But the point is people want to STOP ppl coming on their property in the first place. You're not factoring in the human intimidation and fear factor side of it, when you don't know in advance what the the gangs intentions are. Once they are on your property...it's too late.

edit: I don't agree with lethal force, just some force. At least some to put them off.

That's not their prerogative.

AllForIt

Overheal wrote: »

That's not their prerogative.

So, the police should do it then. But are they.

You must admit that's very hard to manage, where on the one hand you have 'peaceful' protests but on the other non-peaceful protests. How to tell which is which until it's too late.