Trump KAG rally in Minneapolis, MN TONIGHT

[gfm7175]

We're talking about a dang rally here. Keep it simple.
Thousands of human beings have a right to attend any Party's candidate rally without having to fear leaving
their rally faced with violence, vulgarity, destruction, etc.
If opposing fans of a different candidate want to show up, then show up with your "vote for XYZ" signs
and walk around on the other side of street peacefully and then EVERYBODY SIMPLY GO HOME TO BED!
Geeeeeeeeeesh.....it's like teaching little kids on how to behave. DANG!!!!

Seriously... It's quite sad...

[gfm7175]

Hello gfm7175,



Thanks for making my point.

(Sorry, I'm not responding to the whataboutism aspect of your post, your debate board weapons of mass distraction.)

Here, you are declaring a self-proclaimed victory from the outset without discussing the issue in depth.

You are also making use of your favorite buzzword for whenever you dislike what someone is saying ("whataboutism").

I didn't "whatabout" anything; I simply dived deeper into why security costs for Trump's rallies are higher. You just want to stop at "they are higher and Trump won't pay what others are deeming he ought to pay". There's more to it than that.

[Stretch]

Here, you are declaring a self-proclaimed victory from the outset without discussing the issue in depth.

You are also making use of your favorite buzzword for whenever you dislike what someone is saying ("whataboutism").

I didn't "whatabout" anything; I simply dived deeper into why security costs for Trump's rallies are higher. You just want to stop at "they are higher and Trump won't pay what others are deeming he ought to pay". There's more to it than that.

[Stretch]

Dems don't have to be concerned with children of the corn appearing in black, masked, screaming
obscenities, frothing at the mouth, with sticks & bottles, torching articles of clothing, threatening
police and animals with harm, etc. In general? Satanic ritual behavior.

[PoliTalker]

Hello and goodbye Threedee,

Your entire premise is whataboutism, you idi....

I'm sorry. We are done now. You have had plenty of time to understand the conditions I impose on my fellow posters under which I will respond. I am here to talk and learn about politics and to learn what motivates people to hold their specific views. I have learned all I need to know about your motivation. I like to talk to the point. I am not interested in following you off the point while you try to distract from the issue. And if you don't like being called out for trying to change the subject as an agenda that's just too bad. I am certainly not going to talk to somebody who loses their cool and goes off on me. Not now, not ever. Welcome to my Ignore list. It has been interesting, but I am preserving my peace of mind, because nobody else is going to do that for me. We have called one another 'friend,' but you have just treated me in a way I would never treat a friend. Our friendship just ended. You become the latest example to anyone reading this that I mean exactly what I say in my Signature, and I stand squarely behind it.

It hurts to lose a friend, but if that person never really was one then it is better to go separate ways.

Far too many people here have never learned to preserve their peace of mind and have WAY too much pent up frustration which they like to look for a target to unload on. The internet is full of frustrated people who do not know how to socialize in person so they choose this impersonal medium precisely for that purpose. I see all of that and want no part of it. I want the best of what's on the internet and I am not interested in the worst. btw, as soon as I got the part where you called me an idiot, I stopped reading. Whatever else you wrote, I didn't read, no longer care about and will never read. Hopefully you do have a good life. I hope I have some small positive influence on your life if not now then in future retrospect. I just don't want you to be part of my life any more. Sorry it has to be like this but goodbye forever. Poof.

[PoliTalker]

Hello gfm7175,

Here, you are declaring a self-proclaimed victory from the outset without discussing the issue in depth.

You are also making use of your favorite buzzword for whenever you dislike what someone is saying ("whataboutism").

I didn't "whatabout" anything; I simply dived deeper into why security costs for Trump's rallies are higher. You just want to stop at "they are higher and Trump won't pay what others are deeming he ought to pay". There's more to it than that.

I don't see why that matters. A point had been made previously that Obama was charged less for security. If there are reasons that Trump was charged more, then it is justified for Trump to pay more. A bill was incurred by Trump and it needs to be paid by Trump. Why should the people of Minneapolis pay for security costs associated with Trump?

And to think that Trump just got all this money donated by his followers after the impeachment inquiry was announced. He's got the money. He needs to pay. If he doesn't pay then he is a cheapskate, which is nothing new. He has done this his entire life. He doesn't care about other people. He likes to skate through life on the cheap by screwing other people. Any payment he can reneg on he will do. Contractors went out of business because they trusted him to pay for the work he ordered. He calls them schmucks. He's terrible. What a bad choice for a leader. Minneapolis was smart to demand up front payment. It was a mistake for them to back down. They will never see that money.

And I only use the new word 'whataboutism' where it applies. You cannot find an example of me using that word where it did not apply.

[TOP]

The mayor of Minneapolis purposefully riled up the neighborhood mobs...he can pay for whatever extra costs the city had to incur....

[Minister of Truth]

Hello and goodbye Threedee,



I'm sorry. We are done now. You have had plenty of time to understand the conditions I impose on my fellow posters under which I will respond. I am here to talk and learn about politics and to learn what motivates people to hold their specific views. I have learned all I need to know about your motivation. I like to talk to the point. I am not interested in following you off the point while you try to distract from the issue. And if you don't like being called out for trying to change the subject as an agenda that's just too bad. I am certainly not going to talk to somebody who loses their cool and goes off on me. Not now, not ever. Welcome to my Ignore list. It has been interesting, but I am preserving my peace of mind, because nobody else is going to do that for me. We have called one another 'friend,' but you have just treated me in a way I would never treat a friend. Our friendship just ended. You become the latest example to anyone reading this that I mean exactly what I say in my Signature, and I stand squarely behind it.

It hurts to lose a friend, but if that person never really was one then it is better to go separate ways.

Far too many people here have never learned to preserve their peace of mind and have WAY too much pent up frustration which they like to look for a target to unload on. The internet is full of frustrated people who do not know how to socialize in person so they choose this impersonal medium precisely for that purpose. I see all of that and want no part of it. I want the best of what's on the internet and I am not interested in the worst. btw, as soon as I got the part where you called me an idiot, I stopped reading. Whatever else you wrote, I didn't read, no longer care about and will never read. Hopefully you do have a good life. I hope I have some small positive influence on your life if not now then in future retrospect. I just don't want you to be part of my life any more. Sorry it has to be like this but goodbye forever. Poof.

Good riddance you fucking liar.

We were never friends, FYI. All I know about you is that you are a dishonest hack.

[Life is Golden]

Dems don't have to be concerned with children of the corn appearing in black, masked, screaming
obscenities, frothing at the mouth, with sticks & bottles, torching articles of clothing, threatening
police and animals with harm, etc. In general? Satanic ritual behavior.

Haha. Children of the corn. Good one!

[gfm7175]

I didn't "whatabout" anything; I simply dived deeper into why security costs for Trump's rallies are higher. You just want to stop at "they are higher and Trump won't pay what others are deeming he ought to pay". There's more to it than that.

Hello gfm7175,

I don't see why that matters.

I would think that the reasons why security costs are higher would be quite relevant.

A point had been made previously that Obama was charged less for security.

He was. Obama was charged MUCH less for security at the same location, an amount that was in line with what other cities have currently been charging Trump. It seems to me like Minneapolis just wants to "stick it to Trump", as almost all of the other cities have been asking for MUCH less than what Minneapolis is asking for.

If there are reasons that Trump was charged more, then it is justified for Trump to pay more.

There are, but none that justify Trump paying more...

A bill was incurred by Trump and it needs to be paid by Trump. Why should the people of Minneapolis pay for security costs associated with Trump?

Because there is no FEC requirement for candidates to pay for State/Local government expenses incurred due to campaign events. I know I know, the following is more "whataboutism" according to you, but this is nothing new that Trump is doing. Obama, for example, skipped paying many of his security bills as well. Current Democrat Party primary campaigns are also doing the same thing. If you are outraged over Trump not paying for security costs, then you need to show that same outrage towards Obama (and current Dem Party campaigns) for not paying HIS/THEIR security costs in order to be consistent with your own position. Maybe you didn't know about Obama and company doing the same thing, but I am now informing you of that. But, to end with my initial point, and the point that matters, the FEC does not require political campaigns to reimburse State/Local governments for costs incurred due to campaigning.

And to think that Trump just got all this money donated by his followers after the impeachment inquiry was announced.

Correct, but irrelevant. Campaign donations are irrelevant to the discussion at hand, which is about political campaigns paying for security costs at their events.

He's got the money.

Yup. So? Obama had the money too. So do the current Dem Party primary candidates...

He needs to pay.

But Obama doesn't have to?? Current Dem Party primary candidates don't have to?? This is where your "political blinders" are in full display for everyone to see.

But to directly answer your assertion, no... He doesn't "need" to pay anything. Political campaigns are not required to reimburse State/Local governments for costs incurred due to campaign events. That applies to Trump, that applies to Obama, that applies to ANY campaign.

If he doesn't pay then he is a cheapskate, which is nothing new.

By your own line of reasoning, you are calling Obama (and many other political campaigns that have done, and are currently doing, the same thing) a "cheapskate".

He has done this his entire life.

Actually, he has generally been quite charitable throughout his life.

He doesn't care about other people. He likes to skate through life on the cheap by screwing other people. Any payment he can reneg on he will do. Contractors went out of business because they trusted him to pay for the work he ordered. He calls them schmucks. He's terrible. What a bad choice for a leader.

Anti-Trump rant dismissed on sight, due to its irrelevance to this discussion, which is about political campaigns paying for security costs at their events.

Minneapolis was smart to demand up front payment.

They have no legal leg to stand on, as I have explained above.

It was a mistake for them to back down.

They have no legal leg to stand on, as I have explained above.

They will never see that money.

Correct. They are not legally entitled to that money though, as I have explained above.

And I only use the new word 'whataboutism' where it applies. You cannot find an example of me using that word where it did not apply.

In your post #90, in response to my post #82.

[Trumpet]

Good riddance you fucking liar.

We were never friends, FYI. All I know about you is that you are a dishonest hack.

The only liar is Trump.

[Trumpet]

Unpaid bills pile up in ten cities after Trump rallies

At least ten cities say they were not paid for providing security for President Trump’s rallies, and now the Mayor of Minneapolis has insisted that the administration pay for security prior to the upcoming rally in his city. Katy

https://www.msnbc.com/katy-tur/watch...es-71008837581

[Cypress]

Kag literally sounds like the name of a ruthless Klingon warrior

It is hard to believe Trumpf minions sat around brainstorming ideas, and Kag was the very best acronym they could come up with

[gfm7175]

Unpaid bills pile up in ten cities after Trump rallies

At least ten cities say they were not paid for providing security for President Trump’s rallies, and now the Mayor of Minneapolis has insisted that the administration pay for security prior to the upcoming rally in his city. Katy

https://www.msnbc.com/katy-tur/watch...es-71008837581

The FEC does not require political campaigns to reimburse State/Local governments for costs incurred due to campaign events.

Current Dem Party candidates are doing the same thing. Obama did the same thing. Be angry at them too...

[ziggy]