Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 232: Jay Inslee Is Too Pure For This World

(+) Yeah! (+)

even if the MSM contributes to the problem of mass shootings, i don't believe at all that that is genuinely the reason why trump is attacking them now. if he were truly interested in analyzing the problem, he would also blame himself (and a number of other factors) instead of taking the easy "it's the MSM's fault" route. he probably thought about the victims for one microsecond before going back to thinking about himself again. "WAHHH CNN IS SO MEAN TO ME GOTTA GO TO TWITTER TO ATTACK THEM AGAIN."

though, admittedly, he also tweeted his usual "we need to change immigration laws" talking point as a response to the shootings. because the obvious solution to a white supremacist killing people is... to stop illegal immigrants??

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1158330513951735809
---

Corrik7 posted...

Smart to tie gun reform to immigration measures politically.

The El Paso shooter literally said he did it because of the Hispanic invasion, so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

The El Paso shooter literally said he did it because of the Hispanic invasion, so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer.

Yeah, he isn't literally doing that. He had been trying to immigration reform for awhile now prior.

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Smart to tie gun reform to immigration measures politically.

The El Paso shooter literally said he did it because of the Hispanic invasion, so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer.

Yeah, but its not Trumps fault, Tony. If the mainstream media didnt broadcast Trumps calls for violence against a steady stream of enemies, then no one would be able to carry out his implied desires. Duh. Trump is infallible and his only flaw is not doing more to unite the country.
---

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

The El Paso shooter literally said he did it because of the Hispanic invasion, so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer.

Yeah, he isn't literally doing that. He had been trying to immigration reform for awhile now prior.

The shooter said he was inspired by Trumps position on immigration, tell me how hes not.
---

You are using something came before as a reference to what is a result of something that happened after it.

He was already trying to get immigration reform through prior to the attack.

He is not trying to get immigration reform through because of the attack.

You can't argue something is a result of something when the cause came after the supposed result.

No logical sense.
ChaosTonyV4 posted...

The shooter said he was inspired by Trumps position on immigration, tell me how hes not.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Someone told me the other day 8chan is the largest video game forum on the internet. That surprised me. I assumed resetera (obviously not counting Reddit). Is that true?

I would very highly doubt its true but I cant prove it

But at the very least you would expect /v/ on 4chan to be bigger than /v/ on 8chan
---

I just checked out 4chan for the first time in like 12 years (not that I ever posted there). How the hell do people make enough sense of this place to even become radicalized? The layout is literally unreadable to me.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

I just checked out 4chan for the first time in like 12 years (not that I ever posted there). How the hell do people make enough sense of this place to even become radicalized? The layout is literally unreadable to me.

Is it as bad as reddit's?

---

Corrik7 posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

I just checked out 4chan for the first time in like 12 years (not that I ever posted there). How the hell do people make enough sense of this place to even become radicalized? The layout is literally unreadable to me.

Is it as bad as reddit's?

Way worse.
---

Corrik7 posted...

You are using something came before as a reference to what is a result of something that happened after it.

He was already trying to get immigration reform through prior to the attack.

He is not trying to get immigration reform through because of the attack.

You can't argue something is a result of something when the cause came after the supposed result.

No logical sense.
ChaosTonyV4 posted...

The shooter said he was inspired by Trumps position on immigration, tell me how hes not.

1. Trump says "Hispanics are invading".

2. Guy shoots up Wal-Mart because of (and this is a quote) "the Hispanic invasion".

3. Trump says "Hey, let's do something about the shooting--and might as well tie immigration to it."
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

1. Trump says "Hispanics are invading".

2. Guy shoots up Wal-Mart because of (and this is a quote) "the Hispanic invasion".

3. Trump says "Hey, let's do something about the shooting--and might as well tie immigration to it."

False quotes pretty sure and also entirely out of order. Nice try.

---

Corrik7 posted...

False quotes pretty sure and also entirely out of order. Nice try.

If you're having trouble finding the tweets where Trump refers to immigration as "an invasion," it's because they've mysteriously been deleted. There is plenty of reporting on it, though.
---

https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056

The El Paso shooter said he wanted to stop the immigrant "invasion" of America.

As recently as May, the President used the exact same words: "It's an invasion.

Then

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1158330512341164032

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1158330513951735809

We cannot let those killed in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, die in vain. Likewise for those so seriously wounded. We can never forget them, and those many who came before them. Republicans and Democrats must come together and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying....

....this legislation with desperately needed immigration reform. We must have something good, if not GREAT, come out of these two tragic events!

Literally called it an invasion.

Shooter said he did it because of the "Hispanic invasion" in his manifesto (which you can google, I'm not posting it here).

Trump then says "hey, let's do something about it--and immigration".

Corrik7 posted...

False quotes pretty sure and also entirely out of order. Nice try.

I await your apology.
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

False quotes pretty sure and also entirely out of order. Nice try.

If you're having trouble finding the tweets where Trump refers to immigration as "an invasion," it's because they've mysteriously been deleted. There is plenty of reporting on it, though.

It's on video, he said it at a rally.
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

If you're having trouble finding the tweets where Trump refers to immigration as "an invasion," it's because they've mysteriously been deleted. There is plenty of reporting on it, though.

"Hispanics are invading."?

---

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

1. Trump says "Hispanics are invading".

2. Guy shoots up Wal-Mart because of (and this is a quote) "the Hispanic invasion".

3. Trump says "Hey, let's do something about the shooting--and might as well tie immigration to it."

False quotes pretty sure and also entirely out of order. Nice try.

1. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1010900865602019329
"We cannot allow all of these people [hispanics/mexicans/central americans/etc] to invade our Country"
June 2018

2. This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas
The manifesto, a few days ago

3. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1158330512341164032
"and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying the legislation with desperately needed immigration reform"
After the attack, obviously

So the order is correct and the "quotes" (which contextually don't imply exact quotation anyway) are almost exactly correct, and the one quote that was explicitly said to be a direct quote, was, in fact, a direct quote.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1157965796695597056

Then

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1158330512341164032

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1158330513951735809

Literally called it an invasion.

Shooter said he did it because of the "Hispanic invasion" in his manifesto (which you can google, I'm not posting it here).

Trump then says "hey, let's do something about it--and immigration".

I await your apology.

You are seriously trying to lol use an inaccurate transitive property to act like you are right?

He has been trying to do immigration reform for a long time now. The new part is about trying to tie gun reform to it. What are you even talking about.

Yes, he is not doing what a mass shooter said because he is trying to do the literal same thing he has been trying to do for a long time now beforehand alrdy still.

Your order should be.

1. We need immigration reform.
2. Stalled out in Congress.
3. We need immigration reform.
4. Not agreed upon.
5. Mass shooter kills people with dumb anti Hispanic manifesto or whatever it was. Haven't read it.
6. We need immigration reform still and we should tie gun reform to it also after this last tragic attack.

The literal only part that is an effect of the cause of the shooting is trying to add gun reform to it.

---

If everyone on Board 8 was assigned a Suikoden Star of Destiny, he would definitely be the Neutron Star.
---

NFUN posted...

1. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1010900865602019329
"We cannot allow all of these people [hispanics/mexicans/central americans/etc] to invade our Country"
June 2018

2. This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas
The manifesto, a few days ago

3. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1158330512341164032
"and get strong background checks, perhaps marrying the legislation with desperately needed immigration reform"
After the attack, obviously

So the order is correct and the "quotes" (which contextually don't imply exact quotation anyway) are almost exactly correct, and the one quote that was explicitly said to be a direct quote, was, in fact, a direct quote.

So like I said. False quotes and out of order events to create a narrative. It is unequivocally false.

The first quote is not what was quoted. You even inserted works you wanted it to be in his first tweet to try and make it work. Like you cannot make this shit up.

"We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came. Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order. Most children come without parents..."

He is talking about illegal immigrants and false asylum seekers.

But, in either case, he did not say what you said he did to try and make your out of order connect a dot.

---

Corrik7 posted...

out of order events to create a narrative

NFUN posted...

June 2018

NFUN posted...

The manifesto, a few days ago

NFUN posted...

After the attack, obviously

---

Corrik7 posted...

False quotes

NFUN posted...

the "quotes" (which contextually don't imply exact quotation anyway)

NFUN posted...

[...]

if you can't understand the concept of a paraphrase i don't know how to help you
---

NFUN posted...

if you can't understand the concept of a paraphrase i don't know how to help you

It doesn't paraphrase to what you said.

Also, I think you misunderstand Tony's argument.

His argument is that Trump is only going for immigration reform because he is trying to give into the demands the shooter killed people for.

"so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer."

He isn't doing a service or kindness to a mass murderer. He is trying to do what he has always been trying to do all along. Not even debatable.

---

Dude I literally linked a VIDEO where Trump calls it an invasion multiple times.
---

undefined posted... Dude I literally linked a VIDEO where Trump calls it an invasion multiple times.

Yeah, nowhere does he say "Hispanics are invading" tho the comment has nothing at all to even do with the argument that he is obliging a mass murderer by trying to do the reform he was always trying to do.

---

Oh, this is totally legal. No. This is legal. We are stopping people at the border. This is an invasion, and nobody is even questioning that.
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

Oh, this is totally legal. No. This is legal. We are stopping people at the border. This is an invasion, and nobody is even questioning that.

and tell me WHERE in that quote does he say "hispanic"???
---

NFUN posted...

if you can't understand the concept of a paraphrase i don't know how to help you

Notice how in that same post I called out which was an exact quote.

Trump was talking about immigration on the Southern border.

He wasn't talking about Canadians on the Northern border.

He wasn't talking about Asians being smuggled into the country through ports on the West Coast.

He was talking about Hispanic people.

Use your brain.
---

Corrik7 posted...

His argument is that Trump is only going for immigration reform because he is trying to give into the demands the shooter killed people for.

"so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer."

He's not saying that, he's saying the President and the mass murderer agree on this issue and Trump is literally still doing what the mass murderer wants anyways.

Do you disagree? What exactly do you think Trump's "immigration reform" is?
---

I think Corrik's claim here is that Trump did in fact describe this pattern of immigration as an invasion. However it was not motivated by race at all but instead purely by the fact that there are illegal immigrants trying to enter the country.

Why that would matter even if we assume that does match Trump's intent is a complete and utter mystery to me. (Remember that large portions of the US population apparently do interpret his comments in terms of race--regardless of whether or not you yourself do)
---

While I think hes being a pedantic jackass, Corriks extremely literal interpretation of events is correct. Its not really capitulating to a terrorist to continue to push an agenda you were already pushing, even if said agenda was what inspired the terrorist to attack in the first place.
---

HeroDelTiempo17 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

His argument is that Trump is only going for immigration reform because he is trying to give into the demands the shooter killed people for.

"so the President is literally obliging a mass murderer."

He's not saying that, he's saying the President and the mass murderer agree on this issue and Trump is literally still doing what the mass murderer wants anyways.

Do you disagree? What exactly do you think Trump's "immigration reform" is?

So if you want to save the environment your entire life and when u are 48 someone unleashes a plague to kill half the planets population with a manifesto of how it will save the environment.

You are "obliging" (providing kindness and service) the person by still wanting to save the environment afterwards?

This

Argument

Doesn't

Make

Logical

Sense
---

If I'm against carbon emissions my entire life, and then some guy releases a manifesto saying "we need to do something about climate change" and murders like two dozen coal miners

I'm not gonna go

"Hey guys, let's work to keep another mass shooting from happening--and maybe at the same time shut down coal mining?"

I'm going to keep those issues separate because I'm not a monster. I can still be against coal mining without LITERALLY saying the words "marrying" the issues of the shooting and the thing the shooter was inspired by.
---

pyresword posted...

I think Corrik's claim here is that Trump did in fact describe this pattern of immigration as an invasion. However it was not motivated by race at all but instead purely by the fact that there are illegal immigrants trying to enter the country.

I am saying that the quotes are simply wrong, but it was extraneous anyways to the argument he is obliging a mass murderer by pushing the same reform he has always been prior.

The quotes refer to illegal immigrants and false asylum seekers. Whether they are european, Canadian, Arab, Asian, etc.
---

Espeon posted...

While I think hes being a pedantic jackass, Corriks extremely literal interpretation of events is correct. Its not really capitulating to a terrorist to continue to push an agenda you were already pushing, even if said agenda was what inspired the terrorist to attack in the first place.

I do agree with this. That said, I'd be good if he made some kind of statement that legal immigrants are Americans regardless of skin, and anyone who goes on a killing spree is unamerican and doing things wrong or something along those lines.
---

If immigration reform and a gun bill get tied together and passed, how is that NOT an inspiration for another crazy to murder in the name of some other political position Trump holds?
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If I'm against carbon emissions my entire life, and then some guy releases a manifesto saying "we need to do something about climate change" and murders like two dozen coal miners

I'm not gonna go

"Hey guys, let's work to keep another mass shooting from happening--and maybe at the same time shut down coal mining?"

I'm going to keep those issues separate because I'm not a monster. I can still be against coal mining without LITERALLY saying the words "marrying" the issues of the shooting and the thing the shooter was inspired by.

Again. That isn't what is said.

What was said is this.

Your order should be.

1. We need immigration reform.
2. Stalled out in Congress.
3. We need immigration reform.
4. Not agreed upon.
5. Mass shooter kills people with dumb anti Hispanic manifesto or whatever it was. Haven't read it.
6. We need immigration reform still and we should tie gun reform to it also after this last tragic attack

The bold should be what is "obliging" your mass murderer to make logical sense because it is what is new to the scenario after the attack.

But since I don't think gun reform is a new issue or would be obliging the mass murderer, I think your argument fails.
---

Oh ok you guys were arguing about Trump's actions after the attack?

If so my earlier post doesn't really apply.
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

Espeon posted...

While I think hes being a pedantic jackass, Corriks extremely literal interpretation of events is correct. Its not really capitulating to a terrorist to continue to push an agenda you were already pushing, even if said agenda was what inspired the terrorist to attack in the first place.

I do agree with this. That said, I'd be good if he made some kind of statement that legal immigrants are Americans regardless of skin, and anyone who goes on a killing spree is unamerican and doing things wrong or something along those lines.

I agree that I wish he stressed all Americans are Americans and valued citizens regardless of race, gender, and so on. And, made it super clear to those who can't seem to grasp it on both sides that he is referring to illegal immigrants with his comments regarding to the border, with no reference implied to race, gender, and so on.
---

Corrik7 posted...

So if you want to save the environment your entire life and when u are 48 someone unleashes a plague to kill half the planets population with a manifesto of how it will save the environment.

You are "obliging" (providing kindness and service) the person by still wanting to save the environment afterwards?

Well no, but since you want to go full cartoonish supervillain. If part of your "saving the environment" was explaining how the world is overpopulated and humans are a stain on the earth and need to be reigned in, and the manifesto cites you directly, then you go "what a shame but he had the right idea and I stand by my goals" yes, you would be obliging them.

In actuality Trump didn't do anything that extreme. He merely said that Mexican immigrants are rapists, murderers, and drug dealers with the caveat that "some" are good people to maintain plausible deniability.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If immigration reform and a gun bill get tied together and passed, how is that NOT an inspiration for another crazy to murder in the name of some other political position Trump holds?

People can make up any crazy justification in their mind to commit an attack if they wish to.

You are basically saying "hey, Trump can't do immigration reform now because if he does he is obliging a mass murderer". That's not a realistic stance to have.
---

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If immigration reform and a gun bill get tied together and passed, how is that NOT an inspiration for another crazy to murder in the name of some other political position Trump holds?

People can make up any crazy justification in their mind to commit an attack if they wish to.

You are basically saying "hey, Trump can't do immigration reform now because if he does he is obliging a mass murderer". That's not a realistic stance to have.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I'm going to keep those issues separate because I'm not a monster. I can still be against coal mining without LITERALLY saying the words "marrying" the issues of the shooting and the thing the shooter was inspired by.

---

NFUN posted...

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If immigration reform and a gun bill get tied together and passed, how is that NOT an inspiration for another crazy to murder in the name of some other political position Trump holds?

People can make up any crazy justification in their mind to commit an attack if they wish to.

You are basically saying "hey, Trump can't do immigration reform now because if he does he is obliging a mass murderer". That's not a realistic stance to have.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I'm going to keep those issues separate because I'm not a monster. I can still be against coal mining without LITERALLY saying the words "marrying" the issues of the shooting and the thing the shooter was inspired by.

Yeah, he thinks we should have gun reform too. Awesome. In my scenario, I think it would be awesome if you added some anti-plague prevention's into your environmental plan too.
---

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If I'm against carbon emissions my entire life, and then some guy releases a manifesto saying "we need to do something about climate change" and murders like two dozen coal miners

I'm not gonna go

"Hey guys, let's work to keep another mass shooting from happening--and maybe at the same time shut down coal mining?"

I'm going to keep those issues separate because I'm not a monster. I can still be against coal mining without LITERALLY saying the words "marrying" the issues of the shooting and the thing the shooter was inspired by.

Again. That isn't what is said.

What was said is this.

Your order should be.

1. We need immigration reform.
2. Stalled out in Congress.
3. We need immigration reform.
4. Not agreed upon.
5. Mass shooter kills people with dumb anti Hispanic manifesto or whatever it was. Haven't read it.
6. We need immigration reform still and we should tie gun reform to it also after this last tragic attack

The bold should be what is "obliging" your mass murderer to make logical sense because it is what is new to the scenario after the attack.

But since I don't think gun reform is a new issue or would be obliging the mass murderer, I think your argument fails.

Literally what are you even talking about?

You conveniently forgot the part where Trump called it an invasion, multiple times.

Then you admit you didn't read the manifesto, where the shooter specifically called it out as an invasion.

Then YOU rearranged #6, where he said "we should do gun background checks AND we should marry it to immigration reform".

Corrik, please explain what the shooting has to do with immigration? Why would immigration reform be married to a bill in response to the shooting?
---

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If immigration reform and a gun bill get tied together and passed, how is that NOT an inspiration for another crazy to murder in the name of some other political position Trump holds?

People can make up any crazy justification in their mind to commit an attack if they wish to.

You are basically saying "hey, Trump can't do immigration reform now because if he does he is obliging a mass murderer". That's not a realistic stance to have.

NFUN already pointed it out, but I said the opposite of that.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If I'm against carbon emissions my entire life, and then some guy releases a manifesto saying "we need to do something about climate change" and murders like two dozen coal miners

I'm not gonna go

"Hey guys, let's work to keep another mass shooting from happening--and maybe at the same time shut down coal mining?"

I'm going to keep those issues separate because I'm not a monster. I can still be against coal mining without LITERALLY saying the words "marrying" the issues of the shooting and the thing the shooter was inspired by.

Again. That isn't what is said.

What was said is this.

Your order should be.

1. We need immigration reform.
2. Stalled out in Congress.
3. We need immigration reform.
4. Not agreed upon.
5. Mass shooter kills people with dumb anti Hispanic manifesto or whatever it was. Haven't read it.
6. We need immigration reform still and we should tie gun reform to it also after this last tragic attack

The bold should be what is "obliging" your mass murderer to make logical sense because it is what is new to the scenario after the attack.

But since I don't think gun reform is a new issue or would be obliging the mass murderer, I think your argument fails.

Literally what are you even talking about?

You conveniently forgot the part where Trump called it an invasion, multiple times.

Then you admit you didn't read the manifesto, where the shooter specifically called it out as an invasion.

Then YOU rearranged #6, where he said "we should do gun background checks AND we should marry it to immigration reform".

Corrik, please explain what the shooting has to do with immigration? Why would immigration reform be married to a bill in response to the shooting?

For the 40th time, his word "invasion" in your misquote has literally nothing to do with "obliging" a mass murderer.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik7 posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

If I'm against carbon emissions my entire life, and then some guy releases a manifesto saying "we need to do something about climate change" and murders like two dozen coal miners

I'm not gonna go

"Hey guys, let's work to keep another mass shooting from happening--and maybe at the same time shut down coal mining?"

I'm going to keep those issues separate because I'm not a monster. I can still be against coal mining without LITERALLY saying the words "marrying" the issues of the shooting and the thing the shooter was inspired by.

Again. That isn't what is said.

What was said is this.

Your order should be.

1. We need immigration reform.
2. Stalled out in Congress.
3. We need immigration reform.
4. Not agreed upon.
5. Mass shooter kills people with dumb anti Hispanic manifesto or whatever it was. Haven't read it.
6. We need immigration reform still and we should tie gun reform to it also after this last tragic attack

The bold should be what is "obliging" your mass murderer to make logical sense because it is what is new to the scenario after the attack.

But since I don't think gun reform is a new issue or would be obliging the mass murderer, I think your argument fails.

Literally what are you even talking about?

You conveniently forgot the part where Trump called it an invasion, multiple times.

Then you admit you didn't read the manifesto, where the shooter specifically called it out as an invasion.

Then YOU rearranged #6, where he said "we should do gun background checks AND we should marry it to immigration reform".

Corrik, please explain what the shooting has to do with immigration? Why would immigration reform be married to a bill in response to the shooting?

Because it is a smart political choice. I don't agree it should be done, but politically it is wise.

You either have Democrats on the record of stalling gun reform or you have Democrats and Republicans working together to get reform done on two subjects that many Americans agree are issues.
---

No but the murderer and Trump agreeing its an invasion and then Trump marrying gun reform to immigration IS.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

No but the murderer and Trump agreeing its an invasion and then Trump marrying gun reform to immigration IS.

Trump called illegal immigration and false asylum bands an invasion. The shooter called Hispanics an invasion (not sure how he justified this in his manifesto), and I am going to assume shot and murdered American citizens of what he hoped were Hispanic race.

Which is not an agreement. It is a fundamental perversion of what was said actually. He may have took what was said and warped it in his head to mean what he wanted it to mean to provide reasoning to carry out his attack. However, there is not an agreement there from what I see.

There is a common word usage however.

I don't think adding gun reform to immigration reform is a kindness or service to the shooter though, so the claim Trump is obliging the mass shooter seems incorrect.
---

Corrik, What youre describing is the equivalent of if George W. Bush came out in the wake of 9/11 and pushed for a bill combining airport security with a complete withdrawal of all defenses, funding, and support from Israel.

It doesnt matter if Trump was pushing immigration before a terrorist, inspired by his violent, anti-Hispanic rhetoric (and dont tell me its just anti-illegal immigrants, because your average person cant tell the difference on sight alone), shot up a mall to terrorize Hispanics. By trying to push these two issues together, it comes across as the political equivalent of saying if he didnt have guns, these people wouldnt have died, BUUUUUUUT the shooter wouldnt have felt the need to commit murder if not for all the illegals invading, so both issues are to blame.
---