Looks like you could use some guidance on when and when not to use quotation marks:
http://www.thepunctuationguide.com/quotation-marks.html
HTH
While I appreciate you looking at this as closely as you are, does it make sense to look at a transcript and try to divine the intent when we can see the actual delivery. Either way there was a little pause, we can all agree on.
[quote=“JohnT, post:280, topic:762283”]
As President, you’re allowed to say this **zero **times. That is the issue - it goes to character and temperament.[/QUOTE]
john T has memorized hillary talking point for a rebut.
give him a treat 
when & if i need your tutelage , i’ll let ya know. 
FWIW, even though his speech on Tuesday was apparently a prepared speech, the lines in question appeared to have been an off-the-cuff side remark, and probably weren’t actually in his written script.
It’s not just quotation marks. The QUOTE feature here works well–if you use it right.
I love it when people are ignorant and proud of it. “lookit me, i dont even have to use them captals!”
In other news, Reagan’s daughter is not impressed with Trump, and calls attention to that.
I’m not familiar with his daughter, but that is one dumb comment.
So you are suggesting that the media have the duty to censor politicians, and refuse to broadcast anything they deem is a danger to the country?
He made this comment once, true. He has made the comment multiple times (at least twice) that he’d like to see her secret service agents disarmed.
He still isn’t spending much on ads, because he counts on all the free media he generates through being Trump and saying outrageous things. If the media hadn’t reported this, he would have to up his game and say something worse.
… and that’s because…?
I believe her point was that there are crazy people in the world, and it does not take much to set them off on a path to violence. Perhaps public figures should think before they speak, and not actually say things which may well be taken to encourage violence against political foes.
This does not seem particularly “dumb” to me.
i’m suggesting exactly what i wrote.
That’s right-What right does the general public have to know what dangerous ideas he is planting in the heads of his followers? The media should just report on the disastrous aftereffects. :rolleyes:
I’ll take that as a yes.
Well, I guess we shouldn’t make movies or say anything, because, you know, some crazy loon might think the message is to don a scuba suit, grab a bow and arrow and hunt down people with freckles.
What you said makes much more sense. Her trying to tie it to her father’s shooter is just dumb as fuck.
if you reread 10 times , maybe it’ll sink in. ??
You will regret this insult to the freckled. Our Day is coming!
We will build a wall of sunlamps to keep you out…
`if "real danger " existed , you certainly wouldn’t continue broadcasting that danger, over-n-over.’
I’ve reread that 10 times, and I can’t think of any other interpretation. You’re saying the media shouldn’t (or wouldn’t) report and publicize a candidate’s speech if the speech posed a danger to the public.