Didn’t see this coming. It’s the height of irony, and media reports have been awful thin.
Why is it the height of irony? Tell me which candidate hasn’t said they planned to bomb Muslims?
A mile from my dad’s house. And a mile (in the opposite direction!) to crime city. But considering that the “Muslim” got 65% percent of the vote in 2012, I don’t think his vote would’ve counted, no matter how “passionate”. And a felony conviction would make that even more certain.
I don’t know why this should be surprising at all.
Am I the only one uncomfortable about imputing any motivation in the absence of further information?
“Dinging” a candidate for the actions of their supporters somehow doesn’t seem right - unless and until more information is to hand about exactly why he did this.
Of course - Trump’s a turd, and I fully believe that the sorts of things he’s talking about ARE encouraging this sort of whacko and spurring them on,
HOWEVER - the mere fact that he is a Trump supporter, without further info, seems kinda…I dunno, wrong, to make the jump that appears to have been made in the OP… (i.e that it’s Trump’s fault or that the guy took encouragement from Trump)
It’s just another clown act in this election circus. I shouldn’t complain, I’ve been enjoying the show up to now, but I don’t see a single person running that would make a decent president for these times. Since none of them have any substance to their campaigns we’ll just see this endless cycle of hyperbole countered by false outrage.
This is not really an Elections topic.
Off to IMHO.
I think all crime reports should list the political leanings of the accused.
[li]Trump supporter arrested for Muslim bomb plot.[/li]
[li]Clinton supporter arrested for convenience store robbery.[/li]
[li]Rand Paul supporter arrested for DUI.[/li]
[li]Undecided voter arrested for drive-by shooting.[/li]
Sure. In all cases where the suspect has been very vocal about their support, and the politician’s or organization’s own rhetoric comports directly with the crime.
When did Donald Trump tell his supporters to bomb Muslims?
Many times, not in so many words, of course, to some ears. He depicted them as an existential threat to the United States. It was entirely predictable that somebody would take this as a call to violent action, in the same sense that Robert Dear was called to attack Planned Parenthood. (Of course Trump is far from the only one to be complicit in such anti-Muslim fervor, but William Celli made it clear that Trump is one he’s been listening to.)
So he didn’t tell anyone to do that yet he should be held responsible for the acts of a crazy man who interpreted his words to mean something else. Well then, let’s just hang Trump. While we’re at it we can kill the remaining Beatle because the Manson Family killed a bunch of people based on a song. That’s the only recourse I can imagine because we couldn’t possibly stop playing this stupid game of blaming politicians for the acts of insane people.
I thinks it’s reasonable to rebuke, and to an extent blame, demagogues for intentionally inciting and encouraging pointedly hostile ways of thinking that predictably spur insane people to do horrific things.
One of these is not like the others.
No. Nobody here has suggested that Trump (or anyone) be held responsible for the criminal acts of others.
I say only that, first, people are responsible for what they say, and as I’ve argued elsewhere, that necessarily implies a share of responsibility for the consequences–for people taking them seriously.
Second, in this particular case, the clear lines from Trump’s words, to Celli’s words, to Celli’s actions, make the news description of him as a Trump supporter both accurate and relevant.
This could destroy Trump’s appeal to the Xenophobic American Crazies.
“Taking them seriously” about what? You’re implying that Trump has called for violence, and I think that calls for a cite.
He’s called for registration and mass deportation/exclusion. It’s not a huge step from there to Kristallnacht.
I have to admit I’ve gone down this road myself. I’m finding the problem to be not with the sentiments in this thread but with the media which should be taking a higher road than this. Trump and others have said plenty of things that can be criticized and even condemned in their own right, we’d be better off sticking to that, but in the political climate the rules are only there as a prop for affected indignation, if the politicians can use that sort of rhetoric so can we. I’m just going to try to find a line that I’m comfortable with for my own use.
That’s why it’s been underreported. Those are lucrative franchises for the news.