Donald Trump: ‘I don’t know why anyone needs an AR-15’
(www.emilypostnews.com)
Comments (30)
sorted by:
"Trump told aides as he flew on Marine One to the White House in August 2019, according to a person who heard his comments."
Washington Post Story and a "person"
I'd put that close to the Gorillas channel in actual remarks.
I know you have TDS, but at least be honest and selective with your criticism.
This is the kind of shit we rightly mocked the smear merchants for for years; it's through the Washington Post, and all anonymous sources.
Have you not seen this video?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yxgybgEKHHI
I don't care who is the source for this, a man who said "take the guns first then due process after" is no friend of the second amendment.
Your claim isn't that he's not a friend to the Second Amendment, though. You claimed he said "I don't know why anyone needs an AR-15."
I didn't believe any of the other media lies, why would I believe this bullshit? This is "those familiar with his thinking" levels of sourcing.
It's dishonest bullshit.
A man who says takes the guns first is not capable of saying I don't know why anyone needs an Ar-15?
This is a shitty defense.
Trump was a NY Democrat for decades. Is it so far-fetched that he would be for gun-control?
Not what I said. I've never said he didn't say it, and I can't...for the exact same reasons I can't say that he did; terrible sources and biased reporting. There's nothing here saying anything either way, so it's bullshit until proven otherwise.
You could write the exact same article, but substitute the AR-15 quote for Trump saying "I love raping" or something equally offensive and outrageous. Can I prove he didn't say that? No...but I'm certainly not going to believe he did! Because the media loves to smear him, and there's no evidence of their claims.
Again, completely irrelevant. You made a specific claim, but it's backed up by the exact same style of reporting that did nothing but lie about him for years. Why would I start believing this crap now?
Is it possible he said it? Of course; it's possible he said anything. Is it any more possible or believable now that the Washington Post said anonymous sources said it happened? Nope, in fact I'm less likely to believe it now.
You don't seem to be getting my argument. There's nothing saying he said this, there's a history of lies about him, and none of his past statements (including very bad ones like you've linked) make it any more or less believable. The core evidence is lacking, so any 'well he did this so' falls flat because, again, it's all just imaginary until proven otherwise.
He really said that?
He's an ex-New York Democrat. It wouldn't be surprising.
But I trust anonymous "reports" about as much as I trust the parents of joggers who were "good boys". And he also didn't actually do anything to ban AR-15s so meh.
I would wait for corroboration of some sort, but I could see him being dumb enough to say that. He's far from flawless.
he did ban bump stock. or atleast tried too.
He did, after the very suspicious LV shooting.
I'd ban bump stocks. Assault weapon bans are bullshit, but I don't think it's unreasonable to demand that a gun not malfunction and empty the magazine without the user's active input. If you're holding a gun and you put a bullet in someone's brain, it should be because you made the conscious decision to do so.
Bump stocks are just a horrible idea in general. What kind of lunatic thinks putting Cruise Control on a gun is a good idea? I'd sleep more soundly knowing my neighbor owns an M249 SAW than a glock with a bump stock.
I just find it an odd thing to ban. You can use one as a toy. It seems harmless in that capacity. It is useless as a weapon and the only one that supposedly used one was the Las Vegas "shooter"
I can't speak specifically of bump stocks, but people have been killed because an inexperienced user's instinctive response to the noise and recoil of firing an automatic weapon was to hold on tight even as muzzle rise pulled the gun off target.
I wouldn't point it (the bump stock gun) anywhere where there's basically anything downrange for a long ways. Like most things, there's probably unsafe and safe ways to operate it. I probably wouldnt' recommend firing an automatic weapon as your first gun. You can work your way up to that.
If you were in a range, you'd have to fuck up pretty bad to shoot someone. I'm sure it happens.
Nothing in this article leads me in that direction, I'll say that.
3rd hand Trump conversations. Gotta love em
I also think Trump is pliable. It's entirely possible he thought better of that idea. In fact, that's kind of what the article says.
One bullshit source about a private conversation several years ago.
It's that you're trying to convince people who believe a 67yr old (at the time) magically became Conservative after spending his entire life being a NY liberal.
Personally, I didn't need a report to tell me he wanted to ban AR-15s when he made that clear before he was running for president.
LOL.
that's only slightly more credible than people familiar with his thinking
Pretending it's true: So what? There's a lot of things I think people don't need. We wouldn't even think about banning them. On the other hand there's a lot of push to ban stuff that people don't necessarily need in the past few years. Especially with regards to the climate-cultists.
Oh look, more uniparty bullshit to take down Donald Trump by any means necessary.
Can't get him through legal means? Smear him to distract and disenfranchise his base.
Deer are basically vermin; IDC what you shoot them with.
Some animals should be bow only just so that you know the people that bag them are hardcore lol