Current Events > Im confused...didn't Trump HAVE to condemn both sides?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Maybe somebody can fill me in. Im trying to understand exactly what happened.

Is it true that the violence was started by the counter-protesters, that had clubs and attacked the protesters?

If that is true, then that was...well...wrong. You can't attack somebody asserting their free speech with clubs no matter how vile the speech is....

So if this IS true and maybe it's not (Was Trump lying? The articles don't seem to talk about this, is it a media spin, trying to avoid this, or is Trump lying?) but if it IS true....

How could the president NOT condemn people who attacked somebody asserting free speech?

I mean we, as the common people, can say 'whatever idc, it's nazis' and that's fine, but the PRESIDENT can't do that.

I'm just very confused because if Trump is telling the truth he can't just forgive the violence that was started, so he WOULD be right there is blame on both sides if people attacked legal protesters with clubs.

I'm Jewish and obviously not a nazi defender, but I do think the law should be the law and not influenced by feelings, and if somebody is within their legal rights, even if you think its vile, you shouldn't be able to attack them because you don't like what they're saying. Even if what they're saying is that they're a nazi.

Then there was the car attack which obviously was horrible, and SHOULD be condemned which goes without saying, but if the violence was started by the left then there IS blame on both sides.

So can somebody set this straight with me?
---

This topic should go well.
---

The liberals are 100% to blame in this case
---

Use google, and find out. No one comes to CE looking for clarity on actual current events.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

Use google, and find out. No one comes to CE looking for clarity on actual current events.

I have and no article is being very clear on this
---

delicious bait that I will leave on the floor
---

the statue could have been Trump's son

HHH is the game posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Use google, and find out. No one comes to CE looking for clarity on actual current events.

I have and no article is being very clear on this

Just stop

HHH is the game posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Use google, and find out. No one comes to CE looking for clarity on actual current events.

I have and no article is being very clear on this

Several articles have been quite clear on this. Go back and do some more reading.
---

That_Happened posted...

delicious bait that I will leave on the floor

I am dead serious. I've read ten articles and none of them are going into what Trump said.

the media often is biased and Ive lost respect for CNN after they attacked that kid who posted a meme, so I can't trust them to be unbiased in ANYTHING regarding Trump...

So can somebody who has been following this fill me in on if Trump was telling the truth or wasn't, and if he WAS, why what he said was wrong?

To be honest I don't get the terrorism claim either. It seems like a lot of people wanting to say that terrorism can come from anybody, even white people. Again, maybe true, but there seems to be a HUGE difference between a clash between two groups becoming very heated, and violent, and then this act occurring, then somebody RANDOMLY driving their car through a group of people....
---

If this is truee he still could have blamed the "Nazis"........



if he planed to run as Democrat in reelection.
---

hollow_shrine posted...

HHH is the game posted...

hollow_shrine posted...

Use google, and find out. No one comes to CE looking for clarity on actual current events.

I have and no article is being very clear on this

Several articles have been quite clear on this. Go back and do some more reading.

They made it sound like the violence was from the right, Trump claims there was violence from the left.
---

Im confused.

You sure are. If you are trying to establish a moral equivalency between a group that gathered to hate and another group that gathered to protest hate, then you really are lost.
---

HiddenLurker posted...

If this is truee he still could have blamed the "Nazis"........



if he planed to run as Democrat in reelection.

but he CAN'T though. If there is free speech, even vile speech, you can't just attack them...one is in first amendment rights, but I don't know of any amendment that allows you to attack people violently....so as president, he really CANNOT.
---

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Eating-Popcorn-Soda.gif
---

Trump lies all da time doe



Do dose images of a neo nazi crashing into a group of people lie?
---

Super Saiyan 3 Goku posted...

Im confused.

You sure are. If you are trying to establish a moral equivalency between a group that gathered to hate and another group that gathered to protest hate, then you really are lost.

No, there isn't, until it comes to the violence part.
---

People also don't seem to like that he seemed to equate the message from both sides as being equally bad. One of the message is far far more hateful than the other.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Just go watch his speech. It's on YouTube.

Right. That's why I bring this up. I watched his speech, and am curious if he was lying, because nobody seems to agree with him, and everybody seems to be mad. So my question is, are they mad at Trump because he LIED (the violence was not started by the left, but they were just defending themselves for example), or are they mad because they disagree with his statement that there could be shared blame
---

Can you imagine if back in 2009 the Tea Party was throwing bricks and urine, assaulting people with clubs and pepper spray, and rioting over left wing speeches that they didn't like? For example, what if they broke shit, attacked people, and left threats to get a Van Jones speech shut down "by any means necessary"?
---

tennisdude818 posted...

Can you imagine if back in 2009 the Tea Party was throwing bricks and urine, assaulting people with clubs and pepper spray, and rioted over left wing speeches that they didn't like? For example, what if they broke shit, attacked people, and left threats to get a Van Jones speech shut down "by any means necessary"?

Right. Well that's my point. I HATE seeing hypocricy and its really disappointing me to see that the left behaves like the right when the shoes are reversed. now I think most can agree though that in THIS case, the protest they were attacking was legitimately very vile. (Though I know there have been instances with people just being controversial speakers where the left has rebelled against, which made me disappointed and upset).

I don't think many would say that the things these protesters were saying was at all equivalent to what the left might have done.

But the fact is that if the right did this the left would be furious. And legally we can't just say "well it was really vile so we are right to attack them with clubs"
---

HHH is the game posted...

then somebody RANDOMLY driving their car through a group of people....

Randomly?

A white nationalist drove his car into a group of anti-racism protesters...at a rally started by white nationalists. If that's "random" then it's the greatest coincidence that ever happened.
---

Tell me who were the good people on the side of the Nazi .
---

That_Happened posted...

HHH is the game posted...

then somebody RANDOMLY driving their car through a group of people....

Randomly?

A white nationalist drove his car into a group of anti-racism protesters...at a rally started by white nationalists. If that's "random" then it's the greatest coincidence that ever happened.

Pretty sure TC has already spent the whole topic showing his reading comprehension isn't exactly on point, no reason to think he's going to make that connection.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Some points that are worth noting (correct me if I'm wrong):

1. The white supremacists showed up with weapons and riot shields to "peacefully protest"
2. Only some of the anti-protestors showed up with weapons as a response to the white supremacists with weapons
3. Some of the anti-protestors were military veterans (in wheelchairs), some just had signs, etc.
4. Trump took 2 days to 'condemn' the neo-nazis claiming that he wanted to wait to get "all the facts."
5. When he finally did condemn them, he said that there were good guys in the white supremacist's crowd and that they 'alt-left' is to blame for the violence.

What it sounded like to me is he said BOTH are to blame for the violence.

Honestly I just hate when people act like hypocrites. I hate when people condemn one side and then do the same thing.

And what I'm finding out and is making me very disillusioned is that in a lot of ways the left is no better than the right.

This is an extreme example. Not really the main point.

But things like complaining about the popular vs electoral vote when you KNOW that if the shoes were reversed and the right did it the left would call them crybabies.

I always kind of thought of the left as the 'good guys' and I still agree with them on issues, but a lot of things I saw everybody complaining about and agreed with (god the right are such crybabies) when the time comes, the left doesn't do anything different, they don't 'be the better man' like I would have expected them to be, and now Im realizing that everybody is a crybaby and everybody thinks they're right.

Everybody is so sure that they're right and they don't care about objective facts or looking at things neturally or logically they just wanna scream their viewpoint and if you don't agree you're wrong or the devil, and they don't want to discuss things.

It bothers me because Im just losing faith in pretty much all people <_<.

Now in this case its an extreme example because we can all come together in saying that nazi viewpoints are pretty evil. I don't think there's many on either side arguing that. But I also think we should acknowledge that you can't just attack protesters who have a legal permit. If you can't acknowledge there was violence on both sides its upsetting to me. Trump should be bringing this up as the President. If they both started the violence it should be acknowledged
---

Unquestionable posted...

That_Happened posted...

HHH is the game posted...

then somebody RANDOMLY driving their car through a group of people....

Randomly?

A white nationalist drove his car into a group of anti-racism protesters...at a rally started by white nationalists. If that's "random" then it's the greatest coincidence that ever happened.

Pretty sure TC has already spent the whole topic showing his reading comprehension isn't exactly on point, no reason to think he's going to make that connection.

Um...I know, that's what I'm saying. This wasn't some random act of terror. There was a violent clash between two parties and he got even more violent. I don't see how that is comparable to a terrorist driving a car through a crowd of random pedestrians. Hate crime sure, but terrorrism? That seems to be furthering an agenda to me. And everybody will stick on it because they want to prove they're right.
---

HHH is the game posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

Can you imagine if back in 2009 the Tea Party was throwing bricks and urine, assaulting people with clubs and pepper spray, and rioted over left wing speeches that they didn't like? For example, what if they broke shit, attacked people, and left threats to get a Van Jones speech shut down "by any means necessary"?

Right. Well that's my point. I HATE seeing hypocricy and its really disappointing me to see that the left behaves like the right when the shoes are reversed. now I think most can agree though that in THIS case, the protest they were attacking was legitimately very vile. (Though I know there have been instances with people just being controversial speakers where the left has rebelled against, which made me disappointed and upset).

I don't think many would say that the things these protesters were saying was at all equivalent to what the left might have done.

But the fact is that if the right did this the left would be furious. And legally we can't just say "well it was really vile so we are right to attack them with clubs"

That's true. If somebody has really bad ideas, let them speak. Nazism will not rise in America. If you attend a rally that is sympathetic to Nazis (real ones, not the Antifa definition that would include Ben Shapiro and Ron Paul), your career and reputation will be destroyed.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

HHH is the game posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Just go watch his speech. It's on YouTube.

Right. That's why I bring this up. I watched his speech, and am curious if he was lying, because nobody seems to agree with him, and everybody seems to be mad. So my question is, are they mad at Trump because he LIED (the violence was not started by the left, but they were just defending themselves for example), or are they mad because they disagree with his statement that there could be shared blame

Probably both. At this point, he botched one of the easiest things a politician can do: Denounce the Nazis and that behavior.

But denouncing the nazis and their behavior and averting his eyes from the fact that they were attacked with clubs during a legal protest (IF THIS IS TRUE) would be...wrong.
---

No it wouldn't.

They're Nazis who showed up with weapons.

History told us very, very clearly that ignoring them is a terrible idea. It kind of led to WW2.
---

He basically did a "but Obama" in response to a terrorist attack. Which took him days to condemn, when he responds instantly to the most minor infraction in a blind fury in twitter, even at 3am.
---

Antifa should be condemned in general. It's even okay to talk about the violence at Charlottesville from Antifa. But it wasn't their side that murdered someone and gloated about it on social media. And they don't have the same vile history in this country that the neo nazis do. Before have talking about what Antifa or other counter protestors did wrong, there should be strong and immediate condemnation of the neo nazis and the other white supremacist groups which Trump failed to do.
---

As hideous and disgusting as the alt-right, Neo-Nazis, and the white supremacists message is, the left, mainly Antifa, did go there looking for a fight. It's outright unacceptable and damn vile that a person had to die expressing her first amendment right.

Anybody that thinks that only one side is to blame is either delusional or just plain trolling. It's like blaming just one side for all the gang violence inside an inner city. Is it the Cripts fault, is it the Bloods fault, or is it both sides fault?
---

DirkDiggles posted...

As hideous and disgusting as the alt-right, Neo-Nazis, and the white supremacists message is, the left, mainly Antifa, did go there looking for a fight. It's outright unacceptable and damn vile that a person had to die expressing her first amendment right.

Anybody that thinks that only one side is to blame is either delusional or just plain trolling. It's like blaming just one side for all the gang violence inside an inner city. Is it the Cripts fault, is it the Bloods fault, or is it both sides fault?

Perhaps. But how would you feel if he said "both sides are bad" in response to any other terror attack? He calls other terrorists sad and thugs, but in this case "some of them are good people" - it is a severe change in language to his usual kind. And for a group of people with nazis among them.
---

DirkDiggles posted...

the left, mainly Antifa, did go there looking for a fight.

Neo nazis show up with weapons and yelling that "jews will not replace us," and you see this as "not looking for a fight?" Amazing. You can't threaten people with guns at your waist and then when the other side swings at you say "I don't know why they're attacking me!"
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Antifa should be condemned in general. It's even okay to talk about the violence at Charlottesville from Antifa. But it wasn't their side that murdered someone and gloated about it on social media. And they don't have the same vile history in this country that the neo nazis do. Before have talking about what Antifa or other counter protestors did wrong, there should be strong and immediate condemnation of the neo nazis and the other white supremacist groups which Trump failed to do.

Well I think the thing is that the violence on both sides escalated which LED to the murder so without the escalation the murder might not have happened. Obviously the murder is an act that should be condemned the MOST but there is STILL blame on both sides for getting to that point
---

Funkydog posted...

DirkDiggles posted...

As hideous and disgusting as the alt-right, Neo-Nazis, and the white supremacists message is, the left, mainly Antifa, did go there looking for a fight. It's outright unacceptable and damn vile that a person had to die expressing her first amendment right.

Anybody that thinks that only one side is to blame is either delusional or just plain trolling. It's like blaming just one side for all the gang violence inside an inner city. Is it the Cripts fault, is it the Bloods fault, or is it both sides fault?

Perhaps. But how would you feel if he said "both sides are bad" in response to any other terror attack? He calls other terrorists sad and thugs, but in this case "some of them are good people" - it is a severe change in language to his usual kind. And for a group of people with nazis among them.

but most terror attacks don't start this way. Most terror attacks involve people peacefully going about their day and then suddenly getting blown up. THIS was something different....this was two sides that were at each others throats with violence
---

HHH is the game posted...

Well I think the thing is that the violence on both sides escalated

Don't create a neo nazi rally where you threaten minorities with weapons and riot gear, and this situation disappears altogether.
---

HHH is the game posted...

but most terror attacks don't start this way. Most terror attacks involve people peacefully going about their day and then suddenly getting blown up. THIS was something different....this was two sides that were at each others throats with violence

And one side, with Nazis in their number, escalated it from violence to a terror attack. Many people were likely their to peacefully protest (or counter protest). Their may have been faults on both sides, but trying to say the side with nazis in them "aren't all bad" or trying to make it seem like both were equally at fault can't look like anything but bad. Coupled with the fact it took him days, and condemnation from his party to say it, before he leapt back to his previous rhetoric and seemed to refuse to condemn them again is also fueling the anger from all sides against him.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

Antifa should be condemned in general. It's even okay to talk about the violence at Charlottesville from Antifa. But it wasn't their side that murdered someone and gloated about it on social media. And they don't have the same vile history in this country that the neo nazis do. Before have talking about what Antifa or other counter protestors did wrong, there should be strong and immediate condemnation of the neo nazis and the other white supremacist groups which Trump failed to do.

The history of socialism is much bloodier than the history of fascism. If "punch a Nazi" leads to a counter culture of "punch a commie", things will get much more violent.
---

The talk about counter-protestors attacking the car before it rammed into them is a lot of shit at least. Have a look at the different angles on video.

On his speeches, I think it's more the way that Trump handled them. The fact that he took so long to condemn the neo-Nazis by name played right into their hands. A lot of them believed that he was on their side, and when he refused to call them out specifically, they took that as implicit support (see the Daily Stormer response to the speech, for example).

If he'd specifically condemned the neo-Nazis straight away and then condemned all violence, I don't think so many people would have criticized him. The fact that he took so long initially, and then backtracked again, emboldened the neo-Nazis.

Only one side (between the neo-Nazis and counter-protesters, that is) has given support for Trump (and criticizing them would at least answer that question) and only one has an ideology that is inherently violent, hateful, racist, etc. (at least to the extent that it is).

And yeah, what Asherlee said.

Also, some info on Antifa: https://www.democracynow.org/2017/8/16/antifa_a_look_at_the_antifascist / https://www.democracynow.org/2017/8/16/part_2_antifa_a_look_at

The free speech argument is an interesting one in this instance. I'm generally for it, but when you're dealing with such an ideology, parliamentary democracy isn't always sufficient. It wasn't in Germany, in Italy, in Spain, etc. You may think that what happened in those countries could not happen in America, but that is underestimating fascism in much the same way as people did in those countries. Hitler only had a handful of supporters in the early days, and we know how things progressed there.

Do I support violence? Not if it can be helped. I do support standing up to the neo-Nazis though, counter-protesting, etc.

Funkydog posted...

DirkDiggles posted...

As hideous and disgusting as the alt-right, Neo-Nazis, and the white supremacists message is, the left, mainly Antifa, did go there looking for a fight. It's outright unacceptable and damn vile that a person had to die expressing her first amendment right.

Anybody that thinks that only one side is to blame is either delusional or just plain trolling. It's like blaming just one side for all the gang violence inside an inner city. Is it the Cripts fault, is it the Bloods fault, or is it both sides fault?

Perhaps. But how would you feel if he said "both sides are bad" in response to any other terror attack? He calls other terrorists sad and thugs, but in this case "some of them are good people" - it is a severe change in language to his usual kind. And for a group of people with nazis among them.

In a vacuum, I'd agree. But this attack happened in the context of a year of escalating violence between antifa and the groups it counter-protests against, not all of whom are white identitarians.

Surely anyone who saw the footage of the guy taking a bike lock to the head knew it was only a matter of time before someone was killed.

This has been building for a while. The only appropriate response is to call out the violence on all sides. Unless of course, you're pushing for more violence, which admittedly a lot of people are.

HHH is the game posted...

And what I'm finding out and is making me very disillusioned is that in a lot of ways the left is no better than the right.

Trump complained about the electoral college. and the left as been complaining about that for the past 30 years.

I always kind of thought of the left as the 'good guys' and I still agree with them on issues, but a lot of things I saw everybody complaining about and agreed with (god the right are such crybabies) when the time comes, the left doesn't do anything different, they don't 'be the better man' like I would have expected them to be, and now Im realizing that everybody is a crybaby and everybody thinks they're right.

Nazis are not right.
---

HHH is the game posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

Antifa should be condemned in general. It's even okay to talk about the violence at Charlottesville from Antifa. But it wasn't their side that murdered someone and gloated about it on social media. And they don't have the same vile history in this country that the neo nazis do. Before have talking about what Antifa or other counter protestors did wrong, there should be strong and immediate condemnation of the neo nazis and the other white supremacist groups which Trump failed to do.

Well I think the thing is that the violence on both sides escalated which LED to the murder so without the escalation the murder might not have happened. Obviously the murder is an act that should be condemned the MOST but there is STILL blame on both sides for getting to that point

I watched the video of the guy driving his car through the crowd and I didn't see anything that should have escalated it to that point other than the driver himself being a piece of shit. It's not like he was an the middle of an all-out brawl and pulled a weapon amidst the chaos or anything like that, in which case what you're saying would be more reasonable.
---