Is it plausible in your mind that a person going to a Trump rally in 2023 might say “kill 'em all” about political adversaries given all the other instances of the exact same thing being said we’ve seen over the past 6 years?
Is it plausible in your mind that the reporter representing an intentionally right wing news outlet that mentioned “leftists” and “globalists” to the person he was interviewing might share the same sentiment?
If you can answer yes to those, then I really don’t know what you’re defending here. The video was crystal clear, that microphone wasn’t picking up all kinds of hooting and hollering, it was a dude interviewing another dude. The simple fact that the reporter egged him on and then agreed with “kill 'em all” should have made you question your position immediately. Like, that’s not even a dog whistle, that’s a clearly audible call for antisemitism and anti-left politics.
Did you miss the part where I specifically said that those mics are specifically designed to pick up voices in only one direction for the purpose of picking up voices in loud environments?
What the fuck is even happening here? I completely agree with you except that I’m like, “yeah it was loud 🤷🏻♂️” and I’m a monster for that?
I am truly dumbfounded. Disgusted, even.
You’re purposely ignoring huge chunks of my comments to make me a bad guy.
I’m not ignoring anything. I’m simply wondering what exactly you’re even arguing anymore. You’ve got two people in this video agreeing “kill 'em all”. What’s your concern? You caught downvotes because everybody but you seemed to pretty clearly see what the interviewee and interviewer were agreeing about. You were corrected, you edited your comment a couple times, but kept pushing the idea that maybe the reporter didn’t know.
Now you see that they did in fact know. Don’t bother keep defending the reporter, we know what he said and what he meant by it. You’re the only one here that was confused by it.
I’m not defending anybody. I never was. I was just saying that yeah, seems like it could be pretty loud. Maybe it was a misunderstanding, so let it go because you’ll never win that argument with the people who watch this garbage.
However there are other shitty things in this very same video you could nail him for if you’re actually involved in an ongoing conversation with someone who you’re trying to turn from this way of thinking. Which I am.
So I don’t give a fuck if he meant or not. That’s not the ammunition I’m going to use when I have to once again talk to my brother who is balls deep in this bullshit.
But you’re so fucking desperate for a gotcha that you’re looking for an enemy anywhere you can find it. You’re playing right in to the divisionary tactics.
You think I came in here with an agenda. I did not. I had no idea who this guy is or what his organization is.
I’ve explained myself enough. You’re not having a discussion in good faith and I don’t think I’m out of line to tell you to fuck off at this point. So fuck off.
Sure got sensitive. I’m over here wondering why you were making excuses for the reporter in post after post, and you’re over there complaining about “tribalism” and downvotes. In a post about a guy calling for death to political opponents. Then you came back with the classic “two sides” argument, which is when I think you knew you’d just resigned yourself to this.
You talk about me not having a discussion in good faith, I think if you go back and read my comments to you, you’ll see I asked pretty simple questions and tried to figure out why you’re so desperate to die on the “maybe he didn’t hear right” hill when he demonstrably did. And so did everybody else but you. I’ not looking for a gotcha or anything else, I’m trying to figure out why that one particular thing has you twisted in knots when it’s so incredibly clear that the reporter heard, understood, and agreed with what the interviewee said. It’s just weird thing for you to still be defending when there’s so much evidence that this guy didn’t make a mistake. He only apologized because he got caught.
Anyway. I see your feelings are raw over this. So. Bye.
Don’t care. You’re picking and choosing what you want to hear to make me a villain. Yeah that’s kind of fucking annoying. Your tribe has decided that I’m the enemy so I am to you. Nothing I say will change that. And yeah. It’s fucking annoying and pointless to continue.
Now fuck off. You’re a fucking loser. I hope a bird shits on you.
I’m sorry to interject, but is it a normal response to blurt out a list of people and groups when you don’t understand what is being said?
When you’re at a party, and someone says something you can’t hear, have you ever just blurted out the names of people at the party?
I don’t understand your thinking here. He either heard him and agreed, or didn’t understand him and decided the best course of action was to just list out names of the opposition. Only one of those makes any sense.
And I have to say, when I heard this without a primer, I fully understood what was being said. As did my wife.
I’m really not interested in discussing this any more. I get it I’m a terrible person. You can find your answer in one of the many comments I’ve already made. I’m done explaining myself to a bunch of people who aren’t willing to listen.
Let me ask you some questions.
Is it plausible in your mind that a person going to a Trump rally in 2023 might say “kill 'em all” about political adversaries given all the other instances of the exact same thing being said we’ve seen over the past 6 years?
Is it plausible in your mind that the reporter representing an intentionally right wing news outlet that mentioned “leftists” and “globalists” to the person he was interviewing might share the same sentiment?
If you can answer yes to those, then I really don’t know what you’re defending here. The video was crystal clear, that microphone wasn’t picking up all kinds of hooting and hollering, it was a dude interviewing another dude. The simple fact that the reporter egged him on and then agreed with “kill 'em all” should have made you question your position immediately. Like, that’s not even a dog whistle, that’s a clearly audible call for antisemitism and anti-left politics.
Yes and yes.
Did you miss the part where I specifically said that those mics are specifically designed to pick up voices in only one direction for the purpose of picking up voices in loud environments?
What the fuck is even happening here? I completely agree with you except that I’m like, “yeah it was loud 🤷🏻♂️” and I’m a monster for that?
I am truly dumbfounded. Disgusted, even.
You’re purposely ignoring huge chunks of my comments to make me a bad guy.
I’m not ignoring anything. I’m simply wondering what exactly you’re even arguing anymore. You’ve got two people in this video agreeing “kill 'em all”. What’s your concern? You caught downvotes because everybody but you seemed to pretty clearly see what the interviewee and interviewer were agreeing about. You were corrected, you edited your comment a couple times, but kept pushing the idea that maybe the reporter didn’t know.
Now you see that they did in fact know. Don’t bother keep defending the reporter, we know what he said and what he meant by it. You’re the only one here that was confused by it.
I’m not defending anybody. I never was. I was just saying that yeah, seems like it could be pretty loud. Maybe it was a misunderstanding, so let it go because you’ll never win that argument with the people who watch this garbage.
However there are other shitty things in this very same video you could nail him for if you’re actually involved in an ongoing conversation with someone who you’re trying to turn from this way of thinking. Which I am.
So I don’t give a fuck if he meant or not. That’s not the ammunition I’m going to use when I have to once again talk to my brother who is balls deep in this bullshit.
But you’re so fucking desperate for a gotcha that you’re looking for an enemy anywhere you can find it. You’re playing right in to the divisionary tactics.
You think I came in here with an agenda. I did not. I had no idea who this guy is or what his organization is.
I’ve explained myself enough. You’re not having a discussion in good faith and I don’t think I’m out of line to tell you to fuck off at this point. So fuck off.
Sure got sensitive. I’m over here wondering why you were making excuses for the reporter in post after post, and you’re over there complaining about “tribalism” and downvotes. In a post about a guy calling for death to political opponents. Then you came back with the classic “two sides” argument, which is when I think you knew you’d just resigned yourself to this.
You talk about me not having a discussion in good faith, I think if you go back and read my comments to you, you’ll see I asked pretty simple questions and tried to figure out why you’re so desperate to die on the “maybe he didn’t hear right” hill when he demonstrably did. And so did everybody else but you. I’ not looking for a gotcha or anything else, I’m trying to figure out why that one particular thing has you twisted in knots when it’s so incredibly clear that the reporter heard, understood, and agreed with what the interviewee said. It’s just weird thing for you to still be defending when there’s so much evidence that this guy didn’t make a mistake. He only apologized because he got caught.
Anyway. I see your feelings are raw over this. So. Bye.
Don’t care. You’re picking and choosing what you want to hear to make me a villain. Yeah that’s kind of fucking annoying. Your tribe has decided that I’m the enemy so I am to you. Nothing I say will change that. And yeah. It’s fucking annoying and pointless to continue.
Now fuck off. You’re a fucking loser. I hope a bird shits on you.
Only one of us resorted to name calling and having a tantrum. So, I guess enjoy the block list.
I’m not looking for any parting words. Fuck off.
I’m sorry to interject, but is it a normal response to blurt out a list of people and groups when you don’t understand what is being said?
When you’re at a party, and someone says something you can’t hear, have you ever just blurted out the names of people at the party?
I don’t understand your thinking here. He either heard him and agreed, or didn’t understand him and decided the best course of action was to just list out names of the opposition. Only one of those makes any sense.
And I have to say, when I heard this without a primer, I fully understood what was being said. As did my wife.
I’m really not interested in discussing this any more. I get it I’m a terrible person. You can find your answer in one of the many comments I’ve already made. I’m done explaining myself to a bunch of people who aren’t willing to listen.