“Let’s put her with the rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her. OK, let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face.”

i-cant

  • CleverOleg [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    86·
    11 days ago

    The media just assumes Americans are too lazy to bother to listen to what was actually said. Trump is 1,000% correct here and in no way is this some sort of “threat” to Liz Cheney. War hawks like her and John Bolton love to bray for war but it’s not them who are taking bullets.

    • Justice@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
      30·
      11 days ago

      He’s correct because he knows how to measure the temperature of the room (aka most Americans, most PEOPLE, do not like or support “war” generically. It has to be repackaged, propagandized, and sometimes done covertly to convince enough people to not care or accept it as necessary and support it)

      The problem is (and not saying you did this) people hear him shit on Liz Cheney, Dick Cheney, Bolton, even Biden/Harris, etc. and they leap to this false conclusion that Trump is actually anti-war and not just speaking the words we (almost everyone not invested in Raytheon and shit) want to hear.

      In some hyper specific scenarios Trump was less pro-war, but in other ways he was just setting the inevitable conditions for war to break out (for example in Palestine by continuing to encourage a Saudi-Israeli alliance without regard to the fate of Palestinians).

      So, again, not saying you said or meant that. But I do hear and see some of the most annoying hoglets online saying that all the time. If Trump was anti-war he wouldn’t have just fired Bolton from his job he’d have fired him from a cannon directly into Tehran so they can prosecute him for all his various thousands of crimes. Or send him to Venezuela.

      Maybe send Hillary, Pelosi and Biden on a trip to Beijing with a little phone call to Xi while they’re en route that he gives his blessing to arrest them and prosecute.

      I actually wish Trump would do this shit because not only would it be hilarious and deserved by the “victims” (most of the politicians especially the national level ones deserve this in some way or another) but it would be actually, literally, “anti-war” as in removing the warhawk pieces of shit. He’d probably be the most popular president ever with normal people too and absolutely despised by the media and also the “deep state.” Ironic that he claims to want to drain the swamp, yet never even tried. I hope he does try! (Although this is prime “monkey’s paw” territory… Bolton lands in Iran around some anti-IRGC dissidents and manages to pull on old CIA adjacent ties in the region to organize them and overthrow the current government there and Bolton is made the new Shah…)

  • Lussy [any, hy/hym]@hexbear.netEnglish
    77·
    11 days ago

    “Let’s put her with the rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her. OK, let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face.”

    When the shittiest person you know is just spitting bars

    • REgon [they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      50·
      11 days ago

      That kinda stuff is why he won in '16
      He’s a stupid piece of shit, but at least he doesn’t have decorum or pretend it’s not about empire and money. In a just world he would be in a pit. But all the other politicians run around thinking about decorum and civility and triangulators and hemm and haww, and then there’s Trump who has figured out that if you call Ted Cruz a nasty weirdo shitbag, then people will like that, because that’s what we would do. At least he somewhat resembles a human being.
      Libs will hear him say this and gasp and look around the room waiting for everybody else to gasp too. “Can you imagine she should face consequences for being terrible? And he’s terrible too! Doesn’t he know that?”

      Edit: Shane Gillis has a bit about the first debate with Trump which is pretty descriptive.

  • AernaLingus [any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    48·
    11 days ago

    Full quote:

    She’s a radical war hawk. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, okay? Let’s see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face. You know, they’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, “Oh gee, we’ll—let’s send, uh, let’s send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy.”

    When he’s right, he’s right…but let’s not give him too much credit. Right after the “if it were up to her we’d be in 50 different countries” quote, he says,

    You know, it used to be you go to war, “to the victor belong the spoils,” right? In other words if you beat a country you own that country, you take the oil, you… We go to war, we bomb the crap out of it, then we leave. You know, it’s almost like, what are we doing? What, what’s going on we, we bombed the whole Middle East and then we left. What did we get? We got nothing.

    More importantly, though, in the midst of his 15 minute rambling answer to Tucker’s question (which was simply “Is it weird for you to see Liz Cheney […] running against you with Kamala Harris?” lmao) we’ve got the obligatory Trump talking about big strong guys (starts at 2:14:26)

    I had two people, Secret Service guys, both extremely rough…guys… One was like a karate champion, one was a weightlifter. […talks about how someone accused him of putting them in a chokehold…] to think that I would be taking on two nice young guys, simultaneously!

    Dude love his big tough guys, I can’t fault him for that

    edit: here’s a transcript if anyone wants to peruse it (much easier to read than the YouTube auto captions that don’t have capitalization or punctuation)

  • RustyVenture [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
    45·
    11 days ago

    We really don’t have to hand it to him, but honestly, whether we go by the actual context of his ramblings or the one libs keep dreaming up, it shouldn’t matter when these murderous creeps are involved. Send the Cheneys and Boltons to the front or send them to the wall. Either way, justice will have been done.

    • BoxedFenders [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      39·
      11 days ago

      Imagine telling a liberal in 2008 that the DNC would be using an endorsement from the Cheneys as a campaign strategy for their 2024 candidate. It would sound absurd beyond reason. And yet, here we are.

      • RustyVenture [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
        14·
        11 days ago

        Liberals oppose every war except the current one, etc.

        I have no doubt they’d find a way to square that circle in their minds. “Cheney might not be perfect, but we have to stop Palin from being one heartbeat away from the presidency!!!”

    • SadArtemis [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
      36·
      11 days ago

      Honestly it shows both how hypocritical the law in the imperial core always is, and how farcical and removed from any sense of human decency or public interest it is as well.

      I still stand by that no one should support Trump nor Harris (and those who do are complicit in genocide) but he’s 100000% right on this one.

    • Belly_Beanis [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
      24·
      11 days ago

      Trump says so much inflammatory and treasonous shit if democrats were actually serious people, they could have him executed.

      Like Clinton is still a former first lady and therefore gets lifetime protection from the secret service. In 2016 when Trump was threatening her, she would have been within her rights to have him brought up on charges. If I said the stuff Trump was saying, but about Michelle Obama or Barbara Bush, a SWAT team would kick in my door guns blazing, kill everything that moves.

  • Evilsandwichman [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
    25·
    11 days ago

    Isn’t it illegal for the average person to say that, and for them to then find themselves being investigated by whichever governmental institution? I mean he’s not wrong but surely that’s got to meet with consequences considering he’s not currently the president.