This is lacking context. He was paraphrasing something I believe is implied to have been said (or at least believed) by Bukele(the president of El Salvador)
this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2024
528 points (100.0% liked)
politics
22655 readers
3571 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Trump was talking about this country dumping all their criminals in the USA. He said:
"He liked to say he did something with a social experiment. A criminal is a criminal as they generally say a criminal and we don’t have time to figure it out, but we’re not going to take criminals and we’re going to get rid of the criminals that we've been given by all these countries from all over the world."
Now if you want to give him the benefit of the doubt and interpret that "criminal is a criminal" line as something he is quoting from someone else, you go right ahead. I do not give him the benefit of the doubt though. Even if he is quoting someone else, he is not disputing the point. He appears to be accepting it as fact and his response is that he's going to get rid of those criminals.
/Apologies for deleting and then un-deleting, I hit enter too soon while transcribing and wanted to avoid confusion.
Trump / Vance 2024: A criminal is a criminal as they generally say a criminal
It's kind of Gilbert and Sullivan-esque. G&S would have a field day with trump.
Yeah that's fair, I'm not giving him the benefit of the doubt so much as just how I heard it(based on his voice, he wasn't talking normally- instead he sounded like he was quoting), but there's definitely two possible ways to interpret it.
Shouldn't he be getting rid of himself then?
One would think so, but he's clearly not that self aware.
He's not a criminal in his mind. Because he's a nutter.
Exactly what benefit is being given to him by allowing his complete lack of self awareness?
Lol, context doesn't help him at all. It sounds like he's referring to the USA based on the words immediately around the statement.
So this is just another one of demented don's stupid slips of his tangled tongue.
To completely oblivious yet thunderous applause? I bet it was.
That’s the thing about living in your own reality, you’ve got no awareness of when your reality intersects with the real world.
They’ll probably play this on Fox News, and not a soul will see the irony.
Trump could literally go up there and say "oogity boogity, shoo shoo macgoo wiggity wam wam" and his supporters would cheer like crazy. They're brainwashed.
I Approve This Message
Kamala Harris
I sure hope she doesn't approve that message. I think with enough supports (food, housing, education, etc.), most people who commit crimes would stop. That, of course, is not enough for assholes like Trump. He's racking them up like he's going for the record.
As a DA, her record shows a focus on keeping non-violent criminals out of jail, and violent criminals in it.
She started the back on track program as well.
So her position, I think, is pretty clear. I don't agree with the drug crime approach, but in general I approve of her approach as a DA/AG.
That said - I do thoroughly hope she takes that clip, notes that she has zero criminal convictions, and a (hopefully running) tally of Trump's convictions, and then signs off with "I am Kamala Harris and I approve this message".
Honestly, the clip of him saying "they're gonna say 'im a prosecutor and he's a felon'" and then her endorsing that message is so much more direct and unnuanced. Doesn't need to be cut or contextualized. The entire 10 second clip is the whole thing.
And it's a great clip.
No reason to make it the only one though.
True.
The worry with letting your opponent make your case for you is that it means you need to give your opponent screentime.
The more you need to rely of the person being spoken to to think about what your opponent is saying as opposed to just listening, the more you risk the viewer agreeing with what you're showing them as opposed to parsing it as hypocrisy.
If someone isn't looking, and they just hear trump yelling about how criminals are criminals and they never change, they don't get to see the contextualization that he has dozens of felony convictions and Harris has precisely zero.
It's why trump talking about her credentials as a prosecutor and him being a felon, in a dumb voice to boot, is such a perfect setup: there's no way to misinterpret it.
So while more clips are definitely feasible, a clip making trump sound tough on crime might not be ideal for the sound bite circuit.
Which is why it needs the context of the convictions as I mentioned. Just stick it right on top of him on screen.
The joke here is that Trump is literally a convicted felon.
every time i say there's no fucking way anyone will ever do something dumber than that, he proves me wrong the next day
Nice, does this mean the people given 10 month sentences for Jan 6th are going back to jail for life? Thats what he means, right?