Current Events > How would Trump have reacted if Trayvon was killed during his presidency?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Undoubtedly better than Obama did.
---

Probably something more stupid or on par as what obama said
---

Man that was such a cringy moment for Obama.

"that could be my son" Yikes what a d bag.
---

as much as I despise Trump, this question is nothing but silly speculation.

The Admiral posted...

Undoubtedly better than Obama did.

literally but obama.
---

Giant_Aspirin posted...

literally but obama.

LOL. You can't cry "but Obama" in a topic about something Obama did.
---

Mr_Biscuit posted...

Wolf_J_Flywheel posted...

"Tragic situation, I have faith in the justice system and everyone should respect the outcome."

Doubt he'd do something so stupidly inflammatory like say the victim is representative of any other random black child being a "victim" like the previous administration.

Lol someone has never heard trump speak even once

And she said trump wouldn't make an inflammatory statement. I'm not sure he even knows who trump is.
---

CrimsonRage posted...

Outside of the questionable "could have been my son" comment, I still don't see what made Obama's response so bad. He took a side. Trump would have taken a side too. It wouldn't be different or better.

Trump's side would have the benefit of being the correct one once the facts came out.
---

darkjedilink posted...

CrimsonRage posted...

Outside of the questionable "could have been my son" comment, I still don't see what made Obama's response so bad. He took a side. Trump would have taken a side too. It wouldn't be different or better.

Trump's side would have the benefit of being the correct one once the facts came out.

That wouldnt have changed the national response at the time. When Obama made his statements the case was ongoing. If Trump had made a definitive stance one way or the other before all the facts were known and before the case was settled it was still going to piss off the side that didnt agree with him and it was still going to create a larger rift between the two sides.

And also, what facts are you talking about exactly? Just because there wasnt enough evidence to convict him of a crime doesnt mean one didnt occur. We know he approached Trayvon even though the dispatcher told him that wasnt necessary. We know that the instructions for the neighborhood watch group he was a part of were to call the police if they see anything suspicious, and not to follow or engage the suspicious person which he did anyway. He claims Trayvon attacked him and that he was defending himself but no one else was there. We have no idea who initiated the aggression and one of the people involved is dead and can therefore not defend himself or tell his side of the story.
---

The Admiral posted...

Giant_Aspirin posted...

literally but obama.

LOL. You can't cry "but Obama" in a topic about something Obama did.

you're deflecting to Obama in a question about Trump.

"is Trump a good President?"

"better than Obama"

that ... doesn't address the question at all. it's a deflection, which indicates the person responding either can't actually discuss the real issue or doesn't want to.
---

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

darkjedilink posted...

CrimsonRage posted...

Outside of the questionable "could have been my son" comment, I still don't see what made Obama's response so bad. He took a side. Trump would have taken a side too. It wouldn't be different or better.

Trump's side would have the benefit of being the correct one once the facts came out.

That wouldnt have changed the national response at the time. When Obama made his statements the case was ongoing. If Trump had made a definitive stance one way or the other before all the facts were known and before the case was settled it was still going to piss off the side that didnt agree with him and it was still going to create a larger rift between the two sides.

And also, what facts are you talking about exactly? Just because there wasnt enough evidence to convict him of a crime doesnt mean one didnt occur. We know he approached Trayvon even though the dispatcher told him that wasnt necessary. We know that the instructions for the neighborhood watch group he was a part of were to call the police if they see anything suspicious, and not to follow or engage the suspicious person which he did anyway. He claims Trayvon attacked him and that he was defending himself but no one else was there. We have no idea who initiated the aggression and one of the people involved is dead and can therefore not defend himself or tell his side of the story.

What do you mean, 'noone else was there?' 12 eyewitnesses testified that Trayvon started the fight. His girlfriend testified that Trayvon explicitly went to fight him.

That's after the FBI investigated the case for six months and determined no crime was committed.
---

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

darkjedilink posted...

CrimsonRage posted...

Outside of the questionable "could have been my son" comment, I still don't see what made Obama's response so bad. He took a side. Trump would have taken a side too. It wouldn't be different or better.

Trump's side would have the benefit of being the correct one once the facts came out.

That wouldnt have changed the national response at the time. When Obama made his statements the case was ongoing. If Trump had made a definitive stance one way or the other before all the facts were known and before the case was settled it was still going to piss off the side that didnt agree with him and it was still going to create a larger rift between the two sides.

And also, what facts are you talking about exactly? Just because there wasnt enough evidence to convict him of a crime doesnt mean one didnt occur. We know he approached Trayvon even though the dispatcher told him that wasnt necessary. We know that the instructions for the neighborhood watch group he was a part of were to call the police if they see anything suspicious, and not to follow or engage the suspicious person which he did anyway. He claims Trayvon attacked him and that he was defending himself but no one else was there. We have no idea who initiated the aggression and one of the people involved is dead and can therefore not defend himself or tell his side of the story.

You fucking liar. Go back, watch the case and stop spouting fucking falsehoods. You literal fucking liar. It's infuriating dealing with people like you. I can take the time to sort you out, prove you wrong on each and every point but I've done that countless times here and elsewhere. The brainwashing you were put through during the case by the lib rat media was thorough as fuck. I can only sort so many of you out and for everyone I do, there are dozens more even dumber. My advice to you my non-friend, shut your mouth because you know absolutely nothing about this case.

Lugenpresse posted...

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

darkjedilink posted...

CrimsonRage posted...

Outside of the questionable "could have been my son" comment, I still don't see what made Obama's response so bad. He took a side. Trump would have taken a side too. It wouldn't be different or better.

Trump's side would have the benefit of being the correct one once the facts came out.

That wouldnt have changed the national response at the time. When Obama made his statements the case was ongoing. If Trump had made a definitive stance one way or the other before all the facts were known and before the case was settled it was still going to piss off the side that didnt agree with him and it was still going to create a larger rift between the two sides.

And also, what facts are you talking about exactly? Just because there wasnt enough evidence to convict him of a crime doesnt mean one didnt occur. We know he approached Trayvon even though the dispatcher told him that wasnt necessary. We know that the instructions for the neighborhood watch group he was a part of were to call the police if they see anything suspicious, and not to follow or engage the suspicious person which he did anyway. He claims Trayvon attacked him and that he was defending himself but no one else was there. We have no idea who initiated the aggression and one of the people involved is dead and can therefore not defend himself or tell his side of the story.

You fucking liar. Go back, watch the case and stop spouting fucking falsehoods. You literal fucking liar. It's infuriating dealing with people like you. I can take the time to sort you out, prove you wrong on each and every point but I've done that countless times here and elsewhere. The brainwashing you were put through during the case by the lib rat media was thorough as fuck. I can only sort so many of you out and for everyone I do, there are dozens more even dumber. My advice to you my non-friend, shut your mouth because you know absolutely nothing about this case.

Do you have anything factual to refute what I just said? Everything I posted is correct. We have phone records and texts from Trayvon, we have the dispatch calls with Zimmerman. We have sworn testimony from members of the HOA and the neighborhood watch group that he was a part of. We have testimony of the police who first arrived on the scene. No one saw this altercation take place. When they arrived, Trayvon was dead. Zimmerman had injuries, so there was obviously a physical altercation before the shooting. But we have no idea who initiated the aggression. Thats what Zimmerman says happened. And Trayvon is dead and therefore cant dispute it.

Did Trayvon attack Zimmerman with no provocation or did Zimmerman attack Trayvon? We have no idea. It comes down to whether you believe Zimmermans account of what happened or not. The jury obviously did, or at least couldnt find enough evidence to convict him of the crime he was charged with. But thats not the same as him being innocent. I mean if a jury simply finding you not guilty means youre innocent then OJ didnt commit a double murder.

Sometimes juries get it wrong, sometimes prosecutors screw up by trying cases where the evidence isnt strong enough.

We can talk if you want to deal in facts but Im not going to waste my time responding to you if all youre going to do is hurl insults that dont even make sense.
---

Sparksfanboy posted...

Topic #90839 where Addy hates on black dudes scrafty.

How many topics in a row are you going to embarrass yourself in by crying racism when no one mentioned race?
---

Well, there's no way he could have been my son!...... right Melania? You don't have black on your side, right?"
---

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

Lugenpresse posted...

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

darkjedilink posted...

CrimsonRage posted...

Outside of the questionable "could have been my son" comment, I still don't see what made Obama's response so bad. He took a side. Trump would have taken a side too. It wouldn't be different or better.

Trump's side would have the benefit of being the correct one once the facts came out.

That wouldnt have changed the national response at the time. When Obama made his statements the case was ongoing. If Trump had made a definitive stance one way or the other before all the facts were known and before the case was settled it was still going to piss off the side that didnt agree with him and it was still going to create a larger rift between the two sides.

And also, what facts are you talking about exactly? Just because there wasnt enough evidence to convict him of a crime doesnt mean one didnt occur. We know he approached Trayvon even though the dispatcher told him that wasnt necessary. We know that the instructions for the neighborhood watch group he was a part of were to call the police if they see anything suspicious, and not to follow or engage the suspicious person which he did anyway. He claims Trayvon attacked him and that he was defending himself but no one else was there. We have no idea who initiated the aggression and one of the people involved is dead and can therefore not defend himself or tell his side of the story.

You fucking liar. Go back, watch the case and stop spouting fucking falsehoods. You literal fucking liar. It's infuriating dealing with people like you. I can take the time to sort you out, prove you wrong on each and every point but I've done that countless times here and elsewhere. The brainwashing you were put through during the case by the lib rat media was thorough as fuck. I can only sort so many of you out and for everyone I do, there are dozens more even dumber. My advice to you my non-friend, shut your mouth because you know absolutely nothing about this case.

Do you have anything factual to refute what I just said? Everything I posted is correct. We have phone records and texts from Trayvon, we have the dispatch calls with Zimmerman. We have sworn testimony from members of the HOA and the neighborhood watch group that he was a part of. We have testimony of the police who first arrived on the scene. No one saw this altercation take place. When they arrived, Trayvon was dead. Zimmerman had injuries, so there was obviously a physical altercation before the shooting. But we have no idea who initiated the aggression. Thats what Zimmerman says happened. And Trayvon is dead and therefore cant dispute it.

Did Trayvon attack Zimmerman with no provocation or did Zimmerman attack Trayvon? We have no idea. It comes down to whether you believe Zimmermans account of what happened or not. The jury obviously did, or at least couldnt find enough evidence to convict him of the crime he was charged with. But thats not the same as him being innocent. I mean if a jury simply finding you not guilty means youre innocent then OJ didnt commit a double murder.

Sometimes juries get it wrong, sometimes prosecutors screw up by trying cases where the evidence isnt strong enough.

We can talk if you want to deal in facts but Im not going to waste my time responding to you if all youre going to do is hurl insults that dont even make sense.

Yeah, actually I can disprove every single one of your points. Doing so would be pointless.
No one saw it take place? John Good. Look him up. You little liar. I really don't have the patience to deal with your kind anymor

he would probably try to flame black vs Hispanic hate and get them at each others throats.
---

Disprove them then please. Again, everything I said is correct. We already know there was a physical altercation, Zimmermans wounds are proof of that. No one saw how it started. No one actually saw the shooting. Okay, John Good saw a portion of the fight that we already know happened. Youre not addressing my point. We dont know how it started. Did Trayvon attack him out of nowhere? Did he attack Trayvon? Did he approach Trayvon and get into a verbal altercation with him? Did that verbal altercation then turn physical? Did Trayvon throw the first punch or did he? We dont know. Zimmerman says he was attacked and feared for his life.

We have no idea what circumstances of that fight were, only that they fought and at the end of it one person was dead. You clearly believe Trayvon was in the wrong and that Zimmerman was justified in what he did but thats simply your opinion. Bottom line is none of us know exactly what happened that night except for Zimmerman.
---

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

Disprove them then please. Again, everything I said is correct. We already know there was a physical altercation, Zimmermans wounds are proof of that. No one saw how it started. No one actually saw the shooting. Okay, John Good saw a portion of the fight that we already know happened. Youre not addressing my point. We dont know how it started. Did Trayvon attack him out of nowhere? Did he attack Trayvon? Did he approach Trayvon and get into a verbal altercation with him? Did that verbal altercation then turn physical? Did Trayvon throw the first punch or did he? We dont know. Zimmerman says he was attacked and feared for his life.

We have no idea what circumstances of that fight were, only that they fought and at the end of it one person was dead. You clearly believe Trayvon was in the wrong and that Zimmerman was justified in what he did but thats simply your opinion. Bottom line is none of us know exactly what happened that night except for Zimmerman.

You said almost nothing that was true. I'm actually considering taking the time to prove you wrong, and with each post I'm letting you dig your hole even deeper for maximum embarrassment. For one, I already proved one of your points wrong, and you moved the goal post.

He wouldn't say anything about it because the media's hate boner would never get off him long enough to acknowledge a punk kid who got shot picking a fight against an armed stranger.

ChaoticKnuckles posted...

Disprove them then please. Again, everything I said is correct. We already know there was a physical altercation, Zimmermans wounds are proof of that. No one saw how it started. No one actually saw the shooting. Okay, John Good saw a portion of the fight that we already know happened. Youre not addressing my point. We dont know how it started. Did Trayvon attack him out of nowhere? Did he attack Trayvon? Did he approach Trayvon and get into a verbal altercation with him? Did that verbal altercation then turn physical? Did Trayvon throw the first punch or did he? We dont know. Zimmerman says he was attacked and feared for his life.

This is intellectual dishonesty.

On two levels.

1. We have a system of innocent until proven guilty. so going "WE don't know what happened, all the facts we know show he did nothing wrong and we just don't know that he did anything wrong at all!" means Zimmerman is innocent.

2. "We don't have footage of this, therefore we don't know what happened." is stupidity. We have very strong evidence of what happened.

For starters Zimmermans account, which corberated by the witnesses you already mentioned, the police and all forensic evidence. As well as Trayvon and his girlfriend's conversations.

We know for a fact Trayvon got away from Zimmerman, got home, turned around and went after Zimmerman.

We know for a fact when the police arrived they incorrectly told Zimmerman that the entire incident was filmed and Zimmerman's reaction was immense relief and "Thank God!"

We also know for a fact Zimmerman did not lay a hand on Trayvon. We know for a fact Zimmerman got his ass kicked, shot Trayvon and then after shooting Trayvon tried to hold him down. The second zimmerman had the upper-hand he made zero attempt to assault Trayvon at all.

So your token of logic is that Zimmeran told the exact truth about everything EXCEPT After Trayvon went after the "Creepy Ass Cracker" and told his girlfriend so, he actually went to give Zimmerman a big hug and buy him flowers.

But instead Zimmerman for no reason whatsoever launched into a flying karate kick, missed, then Trayvon responded in self-defense of course by literally attempting to murder Zimmerman in the street. Upon which Zimmerman suddenly got LESS angry somehow and decided he didn't want to hurt Trayvon anymore because he was so impressed with Trayvon's ability to kill people.

That's not reasonable. It's literally religious logic "We just don't KNOW! I mean we do know, but we don't KNOW!" It's of equal merit to argue that Trayvon was abducted by aliens and the body they left behind was a fake decoy corpse. And Trayvon is now on planet Paris IV.

I mean you can't PROVE that didn't happen!?

We know more about what happened that night than we do about pretty much anything that wasn't filmed in all of history. We know beyond reasonable doubt nearly every single thing that happened based on overwhelming evidence and common sense.

Decrying that is no different to Fundamental Christians saying the world is 6,000 years old. Don't be that guy, be intelligent.

Especially when you'd be moot regardless due to innocent until proven guilty.
---

Imagine actually responding to a literal Nazi username.
---

BLAKUboy posted...

Imagine actually responding to a literal Nazi username.

Lying press isn't a Nazi username

haha, from the number of responses I figured there'd be an argument over the case ITT

Hey Unfair, you ever get tired of arguing in these threads? :P
---

MC_BatCommander posted...

Hey Unfair, you ever get tired of arguing in these threads? :P

Not really, I like educating people and boardening Horizons.

This is like one of the easiest scenarios to do it in since its such an open and shut issue.

Why do you dislike conversing with people?
---

Dislike conversing with people? I never implied that, relax man.
---

Fact Checking the George Zimmerman case.

This topic seems to come up quite a bit, so here's a list of debunked myths about the George Zimmerman trial. I'll refer the ignorant to this anytime these myths get posted so as to not have to write out the same thing all the time.

****

Claim: George Zimmerman approached Trayvon Martin.
False

I'll refer you to the testimony of Rachel Jeantel. She was the girl Trayvon was on the phone with in the minutes leading up to the confrontation with George Zimmerman. They were on the phone until the physical scuffle began according Rachel Jeantel. She was also dubbed the prosecution's star witness.

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/rachel-jeantel-testimony-trayvon-martin-trial/313792/
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-marshall-crotty/rachel-jeantel-star-witne_b_3519231.html

As it relates to this claim, Rachel Jeantel, who again, was the prosecution's star witness, not defense's, revealed that Trayvon Martin, after running from Zimmerman, was by his house, and later left the safety of his house to go back and confront George Zimmerman.

****

Claim: George Zimmerman continued to go after Trayvon Martin after the dispatcher told him it wasn't necessary.
False

Here is the testimony of Sean Nofky, the dispatcher who Zimmerman spoke with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fru9Oh67yo

Listen to the audio of the non-emergency phone call here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L04Vh4do6bY

At precisely 2:11, you can hear the door chime of Zimmerman opening his truck's door. This is the moment he starts following Trayvon. It comes right after he says to the dispatcher that Trayvon is running. At about 2:14 you hear the door shut. So he didn't start following him until a couple of minutes into the call. As he follows Trayvon, he's telling the dispatcher what Trayvon is doing, where he's going etc. You can hear the wind distorting the audio. At 2:24 is when the dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he's following him. Zimmerman replies yes, and at 2:26, Sean says to George, okay, we don't need you to do that. Zimmerman says okay, and his breath returns to normal, and the wind no longer distorts the audio. At 3:33, at the request of the dispatcher, Zimmerman begins to give his home address, then stops and says, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is.

****

Claim: There were no eyewitnesses to the confrontation.
False: There were several ear-witnesses, some of whom claimed to have seen the altercation, but later admitted during cross-examination that they didn't actually see anything and or that they had scene media coverage that molded their interpretation. There was only one eyewitness who did in fact see the altercation. His name was John Good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fgmWEfSf4

John Good testified during the trial that not only did he see the altercation, despite the darkness, he could positively identify who was on top and who was being beaten. He could accurately identify who was yelling for help. He identified George by his red jacket, and Trayvon by his hoodie. He said Trayvon was on top, punching Zimmerman repeatedly MMA style.

****

Claim: We don't know who initiated the confrontation:
False:

I'll refer you to the first claim in this list. Rachel Jeantel, Trayvon's own friend, stated during her testimony that it was Trayvon was initiated.

^ dis mother fucker right here taking you all to school, take notes
---

Sparksfanboy posted...

He'd probably tweet something like the following remoraid
"Cool gun Zimmerman! Want to bring it to the White House? We should inspire more kids like you to like violence. It's what makes America great."

Christ I hope you aren't the awful shit person you are on the internet.
---

Zimmerman wouldn't have been white and would have been found to be an illegal immigrant somehow.
---

Lugenpresse posted...

Fact Checking the George Zimmerman case.

This topic seems to come up quite a bit, so here's a list of debunked myths about the George Zimmerman trial. I'll refer the ignorant to this anytime these myths get posted so as to not have to write out the same thing all the time.

****

Claim: George Zimmerman approached Trayvon Martin.
False

I'll refer you to the testimony of Rachel Jeantel. She was the girl Trayvon was on the phone with in the minutes leading up to the confrontation with George Zimmerman. They were on the phone until the physical scuffle began according Rachel Jeantel. She was also dubbed the prosecution's star witness.

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/06/rachel-jeantel-testimony-trayvon-martin-trial/313792/
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-marshall-crotty/rachel-jeantel-star-witne_b_3519231.html

As it relates to this claim, Rachel Jeantel, who again, was the prosecution's star witness, not defense's, revealed that Trayvon Martin, after running from Zimmerman, was by his house, and later left the safety of his house to go back and confront George Zimmerman.

****

Claim: George Zimmerman continued to go after Trayvon Martin after the dispatcher told him it wasn't necessary.
False

Here is the testimony of Sean Nofky, the dispatcher who Zimmerman spoke with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Fru9Oh67yo

Listen to the audio of the non-emergency phone call here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L04Vh4do6bY

At precisely 2:11, you can hear the door chime of Zimmerman opening his truck's door. This is the moment he starts following Trayvon. It comes right after he says to the dispatcher that Trayvon is running. At about 2:14 you hear the door shut. So he didn't start following him until a couple of minutes into the call. As he follows Trayvon, he's telling the dispatcher what Trayvon is doing, where he's going etc. You can hear the wind distorting the audio. At 2:24 is when the dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he's following him. Zimmerman replies yes, and at 2:26, Sean says to George, okay, we don't need you to do that. Zimmerman says okay, and his breath returns to normal, and the wind no longer distorts the audio. At 3:33, at the request of the dispatcher, Zimmerman begins to give his home address, then stops and says, I don't want to give it all out. I don't know where this kid is.

****

Claim: There were no eyewitnesses to the confrontation.
False: There were several ear-witnesses, some of whom claimed to have seen the altercation, but later admitted during cross-examination that they didn't actually see anything and or that they had scene media coverage that molded their interpretation. There was only one eyewitness who did in fact see the altercation. His name was John Good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1fgmWEfSf4

John Good testified during the trial that not only did he see the altercation, despite the darkness, he could positively identify who was on top and who was being beaten. He could accurately identify who was yelling for help. He identified George by his red jacket, and Trayvon by his hoodie. He said Trayvon was on top, punching Zimmerman repeatedly MMA style.

****

Claim: We don't know who initiated the confrontation:
False:

I'll refer you to the first claim in this list. Rachel Jeantel, Trayvon's own friend, stated during her testimony that it was Trayvon was initiated.

I have pointed most of this out on this board numerous times. The resident lib racists either ignore it, or pretend it's fake.

One of them claimed that Jeantel was bought off by Zimmerman. I wish I was joking.
---

Unsugarized_Foo posted...

Zimmerman wouldn't have been white and would have been found to be an illegal immigrant somehow.

Zimmerman was only white to push a narrative of racism by the media.
---

Alright fair enough. If Im wrong Im wrong. I dont have any issue admitting that.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

He would have gotten into flame wars with Joy Reid on twitter over it.

Shit, he would have gotten into flame wars with Trayvon's FAMILY over it.
---

Are people seriously trying to argue ITT that Trump wouldn't have been divisive and would've kept his mouth shut?

Seriously?
---

Also holy crap there's someone @Lugenpresse who has a literal nazi username

Wtf
---

Doom_Art posted...

Lugenpresse

Literally not a Nazi username.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lying_press

Been around since the 1840's, dude.
---

You're one of those guys who's like "The swastika isn't a Nazi symbol" aren't you?
---