|
Secret Service Denies Protection To Trump for Wisconsin Rally (Page 4/5) |
|
olejoedad
|
OCT 04, 01:26 PM
|
|
Yeah, there are a lot of Liberals who have shut their brains off from information.
|
|
|
ray b
|
OCT 04, 01:37 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
Yeah, there are a lot of Liberals who have shut their brains off from information. |
|
you mistake lie rejection with valid info the rump sect spews lying without any filters but very little real data
many in the rump cult can't tell any difference so they repeat the lies as facts from the rump and get upset when the truth is revealed so they hate the ones who site facts they do not like
|
|
|
ray b
|
OCT 04, 01:40 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by olejoedad:
The American public has been victimized daily since 01/21/2021. |
|
typical rump cult BS broad charges with ZERO SUBSTANCE
NEVER SAID WHO HOW WHAT WHY
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
OCT 04, 06:43 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by ray b:
typical rump cult BS broad charges with ZERO SUBSTANCE
NEVER SAID WHO HOW WHAT WHY |
|
Perhaps you're one of the lucky few that hasn't been affected by this Administration, or don't know people who have.
Always good to hear your thoughts, ray b.
|
|
|
Doug85GT
|
OCT 04, 08:09 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by NewDustin:
You missed the one piece of information tying those things together: Candidates (other that Trump) don't hold rallies during the UN General Assembly because they know the Secret Service is taxed. I'm not going to challenge you to find another candidate who has tried to do so, because you won't. Trump did something similar in 2019 when he was President (except at small-scale, indoor venues), and it was a logistical nightmare; AND they weren't dealing with repeated assassination attempts at the time.
Trump already uses public funding for secret service security more than any other candidate in history. Setting aside you all's apparent newfound support for public money in elections, Trump is not being treated unfairly if he isn't allowed to hold even more rallies than other candidates on days they wouldn't get protection either.
Is your expectation that he be given unlimited public resources other candidates are not entitled to?
|
|
So you can't dispute the fact that Trump held even more rallies in two previous election, including during UNGA, without any of them being cancelled by the Secret Service.
No, I do not accept you trying to move the goal post. You can argue your strawman all you want. I won't indulging you.
|
|
|
cliffw
|
OCT 05, 03:47 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by NewDustin: You missed the one piece of information tying those things together: Candidates (other that Trump) don't hold rallies during the UN General Assembly because they know the Secret Service is taxed. |
|
Of course you can prove that. Do candidates have to ask permission to hold a rally ? Does the SS tell their protected assignment's that they need to ask for permission for protection ?
We know, you are not an America first person. The UN takes a back seat in my opinion. Let's put it in Moscow. I mean Russia Russia Russia.
quote | Originally posted by NewDustin: Trump already uses public funding for secret service security more than any other candidate in history. Setting aside you all's apparent newfound support for public money in elections, Trump is not being treated unfairly if he isn't allowed to hold even more rallies than other candidates on days they wouldn't get protection either. |
|
Tell me again ... why is he not allowed to hold more rallies than any other candidate ? What is 'the Donald' SS tab, dollar wise, compared to Obama's ?
quote | Originally posted by NewDustin: Is your expectation that he be given unlimited public resources other candidates are not entitled to? |
|
Please, please, give us a break. Air Force 1, Air Force 2, flying around gathering voter support and funds.
|
|
|
NewDustin
|
OCT 06, 01:09 AM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by Doug85GT: So you can't dispute the fact that Trump held even more rallies in two previous election, including during UNGA, without any of them being cancelled by the Secret Service.
No, I do not accept you trying to move the goal post. You can argue your strawman all you want. I won't indulging you. |
|
I'm not moving the goalpost, I can link to what I said earlier or you can you check up higher in the thread. What I've said has been the same: Donald Trump isn't being mistreated because he wasn't allowed to have a rally when no one else was allowed to have one either. He gets to have more rallies than any other candidate, and isn't being shorted on the ability to host them. Nobody is cheating by only letting him hold 3-10x more rallies than anyone else.
I think you misunderstand strawman if you think I've engaged in it here; it's when you mischaracterize someone else's argument. Otherwise, whose argument have I misrepresented? I'll acknowledge it immediately if you point it out.
quote | Originally posted by cliffw: Of course you can prove that. Do candidates have to ask permission to hold a rally ? Does the SS tell their protected assignment's that they need to ask for permission for protection ?
|
|
Yes to the first, no(?) the second. I'm pretty sure federal law tells Presidential candidates they must accept secret service protection, but I'm not positive. I found rallies that both Trump and Hillary held during the 2016 cycle though, so you should have looked into that and caught what I missed on my first pass looking into it. I'm not sure it matters, though, because I also found the secret service has been chirping for some time that they are 'at a breaking point.' Given the multiple assassination attempts, and the fact that their shortages have nothing at all to do with money; they can't just put more people they don't have and can't find on the job, and they know they're risking an assassination.
quote | Originally posted by cliffw: We know, you are not an America first person. The UN takes a back seat in my opinion. Let's put it in Moscow. I mean Russia Russia Russia. |
|
This may surprise you, but I have absolutely nothing to do with where the Secret Service staffs. I also haven't given an opinion on whether or not I approve of the way they are used, or how that agency is handled in general. If you're interested in the latter, I think I agree...that "Moscow Russia Russia Russia" bit went over my head...but it's hard to justify staffing some of the events they are without addressing their shortages. I think rallies should probably be low on the "**** we need to protect" list too, though, and that forcing their protection on candidates is part of the issue with the agency.
But for the "America First" bit, you're correct. Populism always ends up too close to pandering and condescension for my taste. I'm generally a harder sell than "hey dummy, tired of those elites gettin' one over on ya?"
quote | by cliffw: Tell me again ... why is he not allowed to hold more rallies than any other candidate ? What is 'the Donald' SS tab, dollar wise, compared to Obama's ? |
|
I didn't say that. I said when Trump hits the limitations of SS staffing it isn't because of some grand conspiracy to cheat him out of a single rally. Do you know why the SS is short staffed? Do you think this is a matter of not enough money?
quote | by cliffw: Please, please, give us a break. Air Force 1, Air Force 2, flying around gathering voter support and funds. |
|
You know that's strictly regulated and all has to be paid back by the campaign, right? It's not unlimited, and it's not free. That's not true for the Secret Service protection, btw, that's all free. But this isn't even a matter of money, and is not something they could simply fund better and hire more people.
|
|
|
Doug85GT
|
OCT 06, 11:19 AM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by NewDustin: I'm not moving the goalpost, I can link to what I said earlier or you can you check up higher in the thread. What I've said has been the same: Donald Trump isn't being mistreated because he wasn't allowed to have a rally when no one else was allowed to have one either. He gets to have more rallies than any other candidate, and isn't being shorted on the ability to host them. Nobody is cheating by only letting him hold 3-10x more rallies than anyone else.
I think you misunderstand strawman if you think I've engaged in it here; it's when you mischaracterize someone else's argument. Otherwise, whose argument have I misrepresented? I'll acknowledge it immediately if you point it out. |
|
Then show where anyone else but you said that Trump is entitled to unlimited public resources.
You moved the goal post by demanding proof of anyone else but Trump. You completely ignore the last two election cycles where Trump held rallies during UNGA disproving your assertion. "Give me any proof that does not disprove me."[This message has been edited by Doug85GT (edited 10-06-2024).]
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
OCT 06, 01:06 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by Doug85GT:
(snip)
"Give me any proof that does not disprove me."
|
|
Hmmm, somehow that phrase sounds very familiar to me ......who was it that used similar phraseology?
|
|
|
NewDustin
|
OCT 07, 12:33 PM
|
|
quote | Originally posted by Doug85GT:
Then show where anyone else but you said that Trump is entitled to unlimited public resources.
You moved the goal post by demanding proof of anyone else but Trump. You completely ignore the last two election cycles where Trump held rallies during UNGA disproving your assertion. "Give me any proof that does not disprove me."
|
|
I think you're mistaken...I asked if the assertion was that Trump was entitled to unlimited public resources that other candidates were not entitled to. I was asking to clarify what limitations they thought should exist.
For the second part, you are citing evidence I already provided and are missing half of it that supports your point. I'd suggest you go back and read this:
quote | Originally posted by Me, just up above there: I found rallies that both Trump and Hillary held during the 2016 cycle though, so you should have looked into that and caught what I missed on my first pass looking into it. I'm not sure it matters, though, because I also found the secret service has been chirping for some time that they are 'at a breaking point.' Given the multiple assassination attempts, and the fact that their shortages have nothing at all to do with money; they can't just put more people they don't have and can't find on the job, and they know they're risking an assassination. |
|
|
|
|
|