I hope this link at least closes down the aspect of this discussion regarding the interpretation on Trump's words:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/14/trump-condemns-white-supremacists-vows-justice-will-be-delivered-in-charlottesville-attack.html

Why wouldn't Trump hate and condemn all these anti Jewish hate groups? He whole heartedly supported his daughter converting to Judaism. He paid for her wedding of her marrying a practicing Jew, welcomed the Jewish husband into his home and family and absolutely adores his grandson being raised as a Jew. I have seen enough anti Jew hatred in my life to know that if Trump was an anti Semite he would not even acknowledge Ivonka, her husband and especially his grandson as being human. Nevertheless love them as any father/grandfather would love his family.

Anyone who has any type of Google Foo powers would know this and would not even question Trumps' not specifying particular hate groups when he condemned the actions in Charlottsville.

I hope this link at least closes down the aspect of this discussion regarding the interpretation on Trump's words:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/14/trump-condemns-white-supremacists-vows-justice-will-be-delivered-in-charlottesville-attack.html

Why wouldn't Trump hate and condemn all these anti Jewish hate groups? He whole heartedly supported his daughter converting to Judaism. He paid for her wedding of her marrying a practicing Jew, welcomed the Jewish husband into his home and family and absolutely adores his grandson being raised as a Jew. I have seen enough anti Jew hatred in my life to know that if Trump was an anti Semite he would not even acknowledge Ivonka, her husband and especially his grandson as being human. Nevertheless love them as any father/grandfather would love his family.

Anyone who has any type of Google Foo powers would know this and would not even question Trumps' not specifying particular hate groups when he condemned the actions in Charlottsville.

Too late.  All the majority of people are going to remember is the initial assertions that Trump didn't denounce anything.  Sort of like why you have to be careful on the first number you release on an estimate.  No matter how it changes, even in the buyer/payer's favor, they are going to remember the initial number.  Just like many times in the rush to report on incidents like mass shootings, the media often gets things wrong or even just speculating and that becomes "truth".  It then takes a long time for the truth to come out and by that time, the damage has been done.  And that's only for people who even take the time to try to research for themselves. 

Too late.  All the majority of people are going to remember is the initial assertions that Trump didn't denounce anything.  Sort of like why you have to be careful on the first number you release on an estimate.  No matter how it changes, even in the buyer/payer's favor, they are going to remember the initial number.  Just like many times in the rush to report on incidents like mass shootings, the media often gets things wrong or even just speculating and that becomes "truth".  It then takes a long time for the truth to come out and by that time, the damage has been done.  And that's only for people who even take the time to try to research for themselves.

Sad but true. And in Google, this posting is going to show up as "Why won't Trump denounce the KKK.?" It sounds like the assumption is already made, Trump won't denounce the KKK, just wondering why.

Here is another good analysis of the NYT article stating the Left was violent and then the left pushing the author to retract his/her statement.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19673/ny-times-reporter-admits-antifa-protesters-james-barrett?utm_source=dwemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=081417news&utm_campaign=position2#

NY Times Reporter Admits Antifa Protesters In Charlottesville Were 'Hate-Filled' And Violent Before Left Forces Her To Backtrack

I think Trumps initial statement was a rare example of a President trying to quell the hate and violence. Period.
Seems like a valiant effort to me.
Too bad the populist media doesn't see it that way.

Country has no place for white supremacists/white nationalists in my opinion.
But it also has no place for black rioters ( Not racist, just when's the last time there was a white riot, or Latino or Asian or Middle Easterner riot that ripped up a whole section of a city ?)
Or violent Antifa terrorists
Or radical Islam terrorists
Etc.

Reminds me of the Billy Joel song "We didn't start the fire" where he lists all kinds of things that divided this country (and the World) both on the Left and the Right.
You cannot support one side of a 2 headed monster.
You can only fight the hate.

I think Trumps initial statement was a rare example of a President trying to quell the hate and violence. Period.
Seems like a valiant effort to me.
Too bad the populist media doesn't see it that way.

Country has no place for white supremacists/white nationalists in my opinion.
But it also has no place for black rioters ( Not racist, just when's the last time there was a white riot, or Latino or Asian or Middle Easterner riot that ripped up a whole section of a city ?)
Or violent Antifa terrorists
Or radical Islam terrorists
Etc.

Reminds me of the Billy Joel song "We didn't start the fire" where he lists all kinds of things that divided this country (and the World) both on the Left and the Right.
You cannot support one side of a 2 headed monster.
You can only fight the hate.

True about who is causing damage.  As an asian, I would feel safer at a KKK rally vs. BLM/Antifa gathering.  I just gotta put on a MAGA hat and I'm be honorary red neck.

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/videos/chappelles-show-clayton-bigsby-the-black-white-supremist/82404406/

I think Trumps initial statement was a rare example of a President trying to quell the hate and violence. Period.
Seems like a valiant effort to me.
Too bad the populist media doesn't see it that way.

Country has no place for white supremacists/white nationalists in my opinion.
But it also has no place for black rioters ( Not racist, just when's the last time there was a white riot, or Latino or Asian or Middle Easterner riot that ripped up a whole section of a city ?)
Or violent Antifa terrorists
Or radical Islam terrorists
Etc.

Reminds me of the Billy Joel song "We didn't start the fire" where he lists all kinds of things that divided this country (and the World) both on the Left and the Right.
You cannot support one side of a 2 headed monster.
You can only fight the hate.

SNIP

I posted in this or another thread about Trump not starting the fire.  That Billy Joel song was what I was thinking. 

Much, of not all of this unrest and stuff coming to boiling points I believe has a LOT to do with what Obama started and fostered.  Like some evil mastermind now sitting back and watching things implode.  What makes me even more sick are people saying how great a President he was. . . sigh. . .

In all honesty,  this incident rests solely on the mayor of the city.
He knew there was going to be a march with an approved route. 
He knew there was going to be an anti protest against the marchers. 
Routes were changed at the last minute.
Police were in the wrong places not keeping the groups separated. 
Trump had nothing to do with any of it. 
It's like blaming the president for the actions of one mayor. 
Oh wait.

They tried to get the protest moved to a safer location a few miles away but the group along with the ACLU sued and the courts didn't let the mayor change the location, according to the news story I heard this morning. It was out of the mayor's control.

I don't think people are blaming Trump for the protest though.

They tried to get the protest moved to a safer location a few miles away but the group along with the ACLU sued and the courts didn't let the mayor change the location, according to the news story I heard this morning. It was out of the mayor's control.

I don't think people are blaming Trump for the protest though.

no they not blaming him for the protest, just what happened there because his comments wasn't good enough for them

I'd write "Are you happy now?" But I'm almost certain that no matter what Trump does and/or says, he could stand there for an hour reading and condemning the names of organizations and individuals whose values and beliefs you object to, and you'd still find fault. Or should I say "posit another unbiased and objective question which is of mere intellectual interest to you as you are neutral in all such matters"?

From Trump's remarks today (after which he kept going and going on and on about how bad "it" all was/is):

As I said on Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America.

And as I have said many times before: No matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. We must love each other, show affection for each other, and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry, and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans.

Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.

Really? You think I am offended or am just trying to attack Trump? See, this is how polarized we have become, say one bad thing about Trump and all of a sudden one is just out to get Trump. Take off your blinders and see this for what it truly is, so many other republicans already have.

Can you not truly see how Trump's choice of words could have saved him all this headache? I am not claiming Trump to be racist or suggesting he likes the KKK. I don't know if it is just the weird way Trump thinks or whether he just likes a good scandal or what. Most normal individuals are going to specifically distance themselves if claims have been made that they are part of some bad group or ideology. If someone accused you of rape, would you reply that rape is bad and walk away? Of course not, you would deny it! Even republicans are coming out against Trump on this one because it is so clearly an odd behavior for him to not mention the white supremacists specifically. The problem is not that he condemned all violence, that is fine. The problem is that he did not specifically distance himself from a group that openly supports him and that people on the left claim he has ties to. This would be normal basic human behavior but for some reason I do not understand he completely avoided putting a stop to it.

People jumped all over Obama for the crazy pastor of the church he went to so this is like the pot calling the kettle black. Conservatives jump on Obama for all the dumb things he said but now no one is allowed to call out Trump's stupid comments for fear of just being labeled a Trump hater or fake news.

Sad but true. And in Google, this posting is going to show up as "Why won't Trump denounce the KKK.?" It sounds like the assumption is already made, Trump won't denounce the KKK, just wondering why.

Here is another good analysis of the NYT article stating the Left was violent and then the left pushing the author to retract his/her statement.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19673/ny-times-reporter-admits-antifa-protesters-james-barrett?utm_source=dwemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=081417news&utm_campaign=position2#

NY Times Reporter Admits Antifa Protesters In Charlottesville Were 'Hate-Filled' And Violent Before Left Forces Her To Backtrack

I think this point absolutely needs to be made that the anti-kkk protestors were violent as well. His initial speech was just very poorly worded. I don't know if he made it up on the fly or if he didn't know everything that had happened or what.

I think he would have done much better had he specifically denounced that white supremacists and their ideology, transition into the importance of free speech no matter how unpopular, and finished with condemning the violence by the protestors and saying that we are a civilized society who does not hurt and kill people because they say things we don't like. That way he works to clear his name but doesn't let anyone off the hook for the violence and reinforces his "law and order" angle.

Unfortunately for EEF, he violated the alt-right safe space here.

That way he works to clear his name but doesn't let anyone off the hook for the violence and reinforces his "law and order" angle.

Not sure if you saw my previous posts but there is no name to clear here. Fake news. Nothing burger. All made up by the MSM and you are spewing out the same. He condemned everyone and everything with his first comment. That was all that was needed. Anything else = made up in your and the MSM minds.

To use your example if you accuse me of rape 100 times don't you think I am not going to listen to you any more? And ignore you? And since any type of denial I would give would never be good enough for you, why would I even try? Sound familiar? The old saying about the little boy crying wolf so many times people stopped listened comes to mind here.

I understand you are trying to discuss a topic here. And I get it that you listen to the MSM and parrot them and try to justify it by saying republicans back you up. But they are all Trump's enemies that have and will continue to spew this crap. If it was not this it would have been something else like the previous 1,000 things they are currently trying to bad mouth the president about. Like most others here we don't listen to this fake news nothing burgers any more. JMHO

Unfortunately for EEF, he violated the alt-right safe space here.

The alt-right are Nazi supporters and WS. Are you calling all of us Nazi supporters? Is that what you are saying here? I know of none of the members here anything close to alt-right types.

I'd write "Are you happy now?" But I'm almost certain that no matter what Trump does and/or says, he could stand there for an hour reading and condemning the names of organizations and individuals whose values and beliefs you object to, and you'd still find fault. Or should I say "posit another unbiased and objective question which is of mere intellectual interest to you as you are neutral in all such matters"?

From Trump's remarks today (after which he kept going and going on and on about how bad "it" all was/is):

As I said on Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America.

And as I have said many times before: No matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. We must love each other, show affection for each other, and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry, and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans.

Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.

Really? You think I am offended or am just trying to attack Trump? See, this is how polarized we have become, say one bad thing about Trump and all of a sudden one is just out to get Trump. Take off your blinders and see this for what it truly is, so many other republicans already have.

Can you not truly see how Trump's choice of words could have saved him all this headache? I am not claiming Trump to be racist or suggesting he likes the KKK. I don't know if it is just the weird way Trump thinks or whether he just likes a good scandal or what. Most normal individuals are going to specifically distance themselves if claims have been made that they are part of some bad group or ideology. If someone accused you of rape, would you reply that rape is bad and walk away? Of course not, you would deny it! Even republicans are coming out against Trump on this one because it is so clearly an odd behavior for him to not mention the white supremacists specifically. The problem is not that he condemned all violence, that is fine. The problem is that he did not specifically distance himself from a group that openly supports him and that people on the left claim he has ties to. This would be normal basic human behavior but for some reason I do not understand he completely avoided putting a stop to it.

People jumped all over Obama for the crazy pastor of the church he went to so this is like the pot calling the kettle black. Conservatives jump on Obama for all the dumb things he said but now no one is allowed to call out Trump's stupid comments for fear of just being labeled a Trump hater or fake news.

Did you go out of you way to prove my point? I don't think anyone could have written anything more convincing than what you wrote (to prove my point). Is that what passes for a "logical" argument in your world of "unbiased neutral objectivity" ("blinders", "weird", "normal", "odd", "stupid", etc.). Give me a fuckin' break.

Unfortunately for EEF, he violated the alt-right safe space here.

Hardly. He violated the "comments other than logical coherent  ones may be commented upon as such by others" policy.

Are Mika and Joe back from their honeymoon yet?

I did not call you Nazis. Jesus, where did you get that from? To me, alt-right refers to supporters of Breitbart and Info Wars and other real news. I tell you this, if the GOP retains both the House and Senate next year, I'm only watching alt-right media. If not, then I have told you so rights.

I did not call you Nazis. Jesus, where did you get that from? To me, alt-right refers to supporters of Breitbart and Info Wars and other real news. I tell you this, if the GOP retains both the House and Senate next year, I'm only watching alt-right media. If not, then I have told you so rights.

I suggest you look up the basic definition of alt-right before you decide that your definition which is not correct is okay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alt-right

"The alt-right, or alternative right, is a loosely defined group of people with far-right ideologies who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of white nationalism, principally in the United States, but also to a lesser degree in Canada and Europe...."

http://www.dailywire.com/news/9441/actual-conservatives-guide-alt-right-8-things-you-michael-knowles

"Racism is not a fringe element of the Alt-Right; it’s the movement’s central premise."

Alt-right means whatever you want it to mean, there's no official definition for it.   Conservative that is different from the mainstream conservative. Seems like anyone is called alt-right nowadays to make them look bad.

The alt-right are Nazi supporters and WS. Are you calling all of us Nazi supporters? Is that what you are saying here? I know of none of the members here anything close to alt-right types.

"Alt right" doesn't mean anything... it's a made up term that can mean anything to anyone... you know, like "assault weapon". Just a meaningless term of emotional intent. Total bullshit.

And even if people are espousing ideas that other people find abhorrent, so what? Is this the fucking United States of America or not? Anything remotely resembling "political" speech is supposedly protected, no matter how much anyone or everyone else dislikes it.

"Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write."
Voltaire, letter to M. le Riche, February 6, 1770

More commonly known by the paraphrased translation: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Didn't anyone see the attempted "press conference" by one of the organizers of the (despised) event? An event, by the way, whose focus was to protest the removal of statues of historical figures from public property. The guy was shouted down before he could utter one complete sentence and then was literally physically attacked and had to flee for safety. That's what the "alt-Left" (I suppose?) considers "freedom of speech" (and thought)? It's just "politically correct" bullshit, and the vast majority of media are not just complicit, but promoters and promulgators.

If I offended you, then I apologize.