Trump says Clinton bodyguards should disarm and ‘let’s see what happens to her’
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally at the James L. Knight Center today in Miami.
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton smiles while speaking at the Black Women’s Agenda’s 29th Annual Symposium today in Washington.
MIAMI » Donald Trump suggested today that Hillary Clinton’s Secret Service bodyguards “should disarm immediately” because of her support for gun control, saying: “Let’s see what happens to her, OK? It would be very dangerous.”
Trump’s comment, which the Clinton campaign called an invitation to commit violence against the Democratic presidential nominee, came at a Miami rally thick with racial politics on the day he finally conceded that President Barack Obama was born in the United States.
After falsely accusing Clinton of opposing the Second Amendment (she supports the right to own firearms, but supports tighter gun controls), the Republican nominee said his rival “goes around with armed bodyguards like you have never seen before.” He suggested that that her Secret Service agents “drop all weapons.”
“I think they should disarm immediately,” Trump, who also travels with a large Secret Service detail, told a crowd of several thousand at an arena in downtown Miami.
“What do you think, yes? Take their guns away. She doesn’t want guns. Let’s see what happens to her,” he said. “Take their guns away, OK? It would be very dangerous.”
Critics called Trump reckless and dangerous last month for telling a North Carolina crowd there was nothing they could do about Clinton naming judges if she’s elected, “although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”
Don't miss out on what's happening!
Stay in touch with top news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!
Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said Trump’s comments tonight, in view of past remarks, fit “a pattern of inciting people to violence.”
“This kind of talk should be out of bounds for a presidential candidate, just like it should be out of bounds for a presidential candidate to peddle a conspiracy theory about the president of the United States for five years,” Mook said in a written statement.
Trump, whose conspiracy theories about Obama’s birth helped make him deeply unpopular among blacks, made no reference to the matter at his Miami rally.
But he faulted Clinton and other Democrats for questioning his devotion to the cause of improving the lives of black residents of urban areas with “no jobs,” “the worst education” and streets so dangerous it’s impossible to walk around without “getting shot.”
“They talk all the time about racist, racist — the only word they know,” he said.
Trump told the crowd he employed many people at his resorts in the Miami area — “a lot of African-American employees, a lot of Hispanic employees.”
He added, “And they’re very happy. They like Donald Trump.”
Trump’s derogatory remarks about Mexicans, Muslims, women and other groups have led critics in both parties to call him a racist and misogynist. Over the last month, he has tried to remake his image by casting himself as a champion of poor blacks and Latinos, whom he says Democrats have neglected.
“I just left Little Haiti,” Trump said at the Miami rally, alluding to a quick meeting with supporters who, with no evidence, accused President Bill Clinton of plundering Haitian earthquake relief programs.
“The love is unbelievable. It’s unbelievable. There’s no racist — there’s no nothing. It’s love,” he said.
But Trump pressed forward today with his portrayal of Obama as a president who is treated with less respect than his predecessors, saying leaders of Cuba, Saudi Arabia and China had failed to greet him properly on trips abroad.
“Air Force One has never been treated so badly in its long and incredible history,” Trump said. “Air Force One used to land, and people would respect the people inside, and they’d come out and there would be all sorts of hoopla. Not anymore.”
Many in Trump’s audience were Cuban Americans, a cornerstone of Republican support in Florida. They cheered enthusiastically as Trump faulted Obama for the thaw in U.S. relations with Cuba.
“All of the concessions that Barack Obama has granted the Castro regime were done through executive order, which means the next president can reverse them,” he said. “And that I will do, unless the Castro regime meets our demands.”
Among them, he told the cheering crowd, would be “religious and political freedom for the Cuban people and the freeing of political prisoners.”
——
©2016 Los Angeles Times
102 responses to “Trump says Clinton bodyguards should disarm and ‘let’s see what happens to her’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Donald a foooommmppppOOOOPPPPssisssssss.
Gotta agree with TheDonald, Hillary is against guns but probably wants her bodyguards to have these weapons. You gotta ask yourself, if she wants protection but won’t carry a gun herself, why be for not letting Regular JoeSixPacks pack the arm? That’s the problem with the career politicians, entitlement in which us regular people won’t possibly have. Democrats, anti-gun people are blind in mind as they only see it their way
Actually, Democrats are smart enough to understand that Mrs. Clinton never said that. Rather, she wants to keep guns away from the mentally ill and others who should not have them. You, sadly, don’t understand that, and as a result, you lie about her position.
Amen
I never worked for an elected office. Clinton lies to us and YOU too. What you got to say about that? Did she land in Bosnia under sniper fire?
How does your own Democratic politics taste? lol
Klastri, as an elitist bigot it’s ok for you and your kind to have armed bodyguards but not ok for Americans to protect ourselves. Typical. What’s good for you is good for you and not for the deplorable. Hypocrites. Glad to see your true colors.
Nasty imbecile Klastri opens her gap once again. The current laws already keep guns away from anyone that is mentally ill! The FBI denied 6,000 gun purchases to mentally ill patients in 2013 alone from the 3 million records submitted to them that year. Here’s a snippet of the law for you, since you are the most incompetent self proclaimed lawyer, legal expert and federal judge on the face of the Earth…
Doctors can report some mentally ill patients to FBI in addition to the 1993 Brady law which prohibits gun ownership by individuals who have been involuntarily committed, found incompetent to stand trial or otherwise deemed by a court to be a danger to themselves or others.
“Trump, whose conspiracy theories about Obama’s birth helped make him deeply unpopular among blacks, made no reference to the matter at his Miami rally.”
“former McClatchy D.C. Bureau Chief James Asher tweeted that long-time Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal had encouraged him in 2008 to investigate the rumor that Obama was not born in America.”
uh, no, michael finnegan, you got that wrong:
“former McClatchy D.C. Bureau Chief James Asher tweeted that long-time Clinton confidante Sidney Blumenthal had encouraged him in 2008 to investigate the rumor that Obama was not born in America.”
“Clinton 2008 campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle admitted that there was an Iowa volunteer who forwarded an email promoting the conspiracy.”
the birther claims were birthed by backers of the female felon in 2008.
This has been debunked by everyone except Fox News.
No, the Clinton campaign used it alright. Easy to look up.
One staffer in Iowa writing an email is different from a five year long campaign by Mr. Trump himself. The fact that you don’t understand that makes sense, since his supporters tend to be poorly educated, and aren’t capable of analyzing anything.
Yes, Klastri, it may have been one staffer in Iowa, but you seemed to have missed one of Hillary’s closest confidante, Sidney Blumenthal, who encouraged McClatchy D.C. Bureau Chief James Asher in 2008 to investigate the rumor that Obama was not born in America. Yes, Klastri, I also know I can expect you to reply as you normally do that I am making things up or that James Asher is lying.
Ronin006 – This is sad, but expected from you.
You are suggesting that this is the same thing as a years long crusade by Trump as an individual, who lied constantly about things supposedly turned up in Hawai’i by his “private investigators” which of course now, he can’t remember. He’s a serial liar about this and you can’t figure that out. He kept this alive to gather support from people who believe in aluminum-foil-hat conspiracies, like you, who don’t know any better.
Klastri, you are missing the point. The issue is how the rumor started.
Bingo! Watch the debater side-step your point. hahahahahaha
The next president will most likely name between 1 and 3 new Supreme Court Justices.
With that said, it is obvious that we need to have picks whom choose to adhere to the Constitution of the United States.
And, yes, it is very important for all of us on who those picks are.
As for the usual rhetoric of putting down anyone that is conservative and lifting up anyone that is a Democrat – typical of this paper’s ongoing MOA. It appears soon that Hawaii will truly be a One Party State with zero Republicans in any high level office – wow! That’s not diversity – that is poison to the soul of this great state.
And, while I rant, since when does calling names change facts? President Obama never released his college transcripts, his high school transcripts, his applications for entry into any place of learning! His birth certificate [since it is brought up in this article] has both halos and kerning – making it beyond suspect – and should give any normal person pause in its authenticity. Yet, calling anyone even broaching the subject names seems to suffice as a rebuttal.
Anyways, the next president will be determined long before Hawaii votes, such is life in paradise.
You got to be kidding. Please show either Bush’s elementary school report cards, their college transcripts, maybe even their Alcohol Anonymous attendance reports. Have you seen Dwight Eisenhower’s report cards? What another fool you are….
Indeed. Fools are aplenty here. When uneducated intersects with a laziness of intellectual curiosity and is sprinkled with the lack of objectivity or the want to read a wide spectrum of sources, you get much of the crew here…..
lunalilohi – you’ve got to be kidding. Your counter argument is flimsy at best. Bush’s or Eisenhower’s report cards were never subject to suspicion; therefore never an issue. Obama’s college record/transcipts however have been called into question. Obama’s response? – Retain a team of lawyers and keep his college admission records/transcripts closed to public scrutiny. If Obama has nothing to hide, why keeps his records closed? Before calling others fools, examine the folly of your own argument.
A team of lawyers were never employed. By federal law, grades are protected, and as such, he had no need to hire a team of lawyers or you just making this up as you go along??
As,for grades, I can tell you with some veracity the baseline of his grades. For admission to Harvard Law, even if he was on the bottom quarter of those accepted students to HLS, his undergraduate GPA would be about 3.6.
Now as to his his grades at HLS, as he graduated Magna Cum Laude, his minimum GPA would be 3.67
Any other silly questions?
Therefore, if indeed his grades had to have been very good at the least, and I have little doubt they probably exceeded your minimums, have you ever speculated as to why they were never made available?
Why? Because federal law prohibits institutions from releasing students grades. As far as Obamas personal motivation, or lack thereof, that would be mere speculation, but I do know several folks who know him very well, (we are a year apart in age), and what I have been told is twofold: he doesn’t care what folks think or doesn’t think; and, coupled with the idiotic birther folks, he cares not to get involved with rather trite matters that only seek to de legitimize who he is or accomplished.
Wassup SA?
Ikofromeli – talk about foolish answers, at least do your homework before exposing your own ignorance. Gary Kreep of the U.S. Justice Foundation petitioned Occidental College to produce their records which would determine if Obama attended college there as a foreign national. Obama’s lawyers’argued in court that the election was over and that future concerns should be addressed to Congress. They filed a motion with the court to quash Kreep’s petition claiming that the petitioner’s demands “are of no relevance to this moot litigation.” The judge agreed with Obama’s lawyers and the subpoena was quashed.
Nope you are the wrong one. First, Obama’s college records are not “sealed” as under federal law (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) for Occidental, Columbia or Harvard Law School to give any former student’s records to reporters or members of the public without that person’s specific, written permission.
Further, the law firm of record, is not,,per se, Obamas, but rather the long standing counsel for Occidental, maybe for a lay person a subtle distinction, but a rather profound one.
You’re a big josher. I don’t know one person from Yale that didn’t have a huge curiosity of what the the rather flat minded George W,,archived by way of grades. And to be certain, he did not release the grades that were eventually published, he actually worked hard to not have them ever leak. Word behind closed doors, says an Eli alum leaked his grades and it validated what everyone thought–he barely got by.
Well, as you say, the reason is indeed open for speculation, so any comments would be little more than guesses. Personally, I consider what the predictable results of withholding them has been, and, coupling that with Barry’s obvious capability of being able to foresee those same repercussions, I’ve been led to draw my own conclusions.
Ikefromeli – I did not write that Obama’s records were “sealed” as that is a word you use. I simply stated as fact – that Obama’s records remain closed to public scrutiny as a result of the actions taken by Obama’s legal team. Do you disagree? A “profound distinction” you claim…not really. The lawyer representing the college was Stuart W. Rudnick of Musick, Peeler & Garrett who sought the court’s opinion regarding the subpoena. The lawyer representing Obama’s interests and who motioned to quash the subpoena was Fredric D. Woocher of Strumwasser & Woocher. Rudnick wrote: “Inasmuch as the subpoena appears to be valid on its face, the College will have no alternative but to comply with the subpoena absent a court order instructing otherwise.” Woosher’s law firm then filed a motion that the subpoena directed to Occidental College be quashed – to which the judge eventually agreed with. To infer or claim that Obama’s legal team had nothing to do with keeping Obama’s records closed from public scrutiny as you do, is disingenuous at best and an outright lie at worst.
I’m going to refrain to continue to go down this rather moot and fallow road of birther conspiracy, but please enjoy the ever fictional ride.
Not surprised at all by your declination Ikefomeli as I simply pointed out the speciousness of your argument which you could not counter.
Wow, birthers win again! You’ve all got more me convinced.
So you agree then that we should not have the Donald as the next president of the United States? I agree 100%. Here is a so called president who would go to war if someone gives a navel boat the finger. I guess he hasn’t read the constitution. Here is a potential president who stiffs young girls. Why would anyone vote for such a clown?
They voted for Bill Clinton and he “stiffed” young girls all the time.
Middle & older ones as well…anything that has …never mind.
At least he wasn’t a clown and his relationships were consensual.
Boots, what exactly did Qaddafi do such that SoS Clinton had him overthrown, and his country virtually destroyed..? This long after she should have learned her lesson from voting for the war in Iraq. Her only original thoughts and policies are those of an incompetent. It’s spelled NAVAL, by the way.
Hillary is not my choice but I will support her for president. I will work to keep her hawkishness controlled. But at least she hasn’t said she would bomb someone just for giving us the finger.
Excellent post cloudforest. Recall it was Nancy Pelosi, when she was Speaker, who said, “we don’t need two parties”. Many Democrats actually agree with her, as if half the country should be silent. For a Republican to win, they must defeat the candidate and the mainstream media; a tough task. Hillary’s solution is “tax the rich”, yet, those in Hollywood, for example, who make millions are given special tax breaks. We’ve seen many companies exit the U.S. because of high taxes and regulations. Hillary’s answer, we need to have an exit tax. Soon she’ll want a wall built on the border, to keep everyone in the country!
Well we have only one party that has a real chance of winning and actually stands for something. Been this way for at least 1 5 years now. Republicans have shown that they no longer believe in republican values and deficits don’t matter.
As for the mainstream media, it is a joke. The only reason the Donald is the republican candidate is because the main stream media has given him lots of free advertising. What suckers they were. If they actually did their job, the republicans may have nominated someone better.
As for the wall on the border, ever thought that might be the real reason the Donald is pushing it? He wants to keep Mexicans in so they cannot return to Mexico? Just a thought.
So why did the Chump suddenly say that the President was born in the US.
Who knows why that senile old dude does half the things he does. Many people say that the reason he won’t release his medical history is he was diagnosed with early Alzheimers.
More of Trump’s deplorable, unacceptable, dangerous rhetoric.
AP doesn’t report the news…it parrots the Clinton spin. Trump’s point is that it’s hypocritical to go around with armed guards and be against citizens rights to protect themselves. Unless you have already given up and accept that “all animals are equal, except some animals are more equal than others.”
No. Trump’s point is that he is threatening violence against Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Trump is a violent psychotic.
Klastri, aren’t you being a little dramatic? Are you a physician? I haven’t seen any diagnosis close to what you’re suggesting.
cajaybird – He said that he would go to war with Iran if their sailors gave the finger to our Navy. No sane adult speaks like that. Not ever.
I’m not being dramatic. He’s a violent psychotic.
Which should be obvious to any thinking person.
Klastri, You’ll be surprised to learn that I do agree somewhat with your point. I believe Trump uses such language to show the contrast with the current administration. In other words, to counter the fact that our enemies know we won’t take action, even when we draw “a red line in the sand”. Unfortunately, our current leading from behind has resulted in ten of thousands of Christians, Muslims, and others being executed or driven out of their homes. I have no clue what our foreign policy is, but I am concerned when amateurs like Ben Rhodes are representing the U.S. (not his fault, he was given the position).
Mr. Trump is beating his chest by threatening to use other people’s children to fight wars. He, of course, is a flat out coward, who fabricated a medical deferment that he can’t even remember now to escape military service. And his two worthless sons only shoot at defenseless trophy animals.
Trump is a violent psychotic who has already threatened war over an insult. He’s profoundly mentally ill.
Just as it was hypocritical for the republican party to hold a convention in a place that didn’t allow people to bring in guns. So whats your point? What is the matter with the republican party when they won’t even stand up for the right of people to bring guns into their convention? How pathetic. Republicans say the support guns but do they really? I don’t think so.
Many people say that the reason Trump doesn’t want to limit the insane from having guns is that he was diagnosed with Alzheimers.
But the thing about the Donald is that he is all talk and little else. When confronted, he generally backs down real fast like he did at that Black church. Not criticizing, just stating what is. I mean it sure was better for him to back down rather than punch out that female minister.
And then he lied about that encounter with the pastor. He’s obviously mentally ill. He lies about things that are on video, and says that things that happened didn’t happen. He’s ill, and his supporters are unable to admit that.
All talk? Do you know how often Hillary says “We need high paying jobs”? she told that to Upstate New Yorkers when she was campaigning for the Senate. She never went back after being elected. Upstate NY was losing jobs. She did not have a clue. She wasn’t from NY, new nothing about the NY economy. The Democratic Party (run by her husband at the time) selected her to run in NY because everyone knew any Dem candidate would win because because the state is heavily Democratic. The same is true of CA. The same is true of Hawaii. The Democrat wins, so the real issue is who the Party selects for the position.
Tell me this and please answer specifically: why is it that most productive cities and states are D? That the hubs finance and capitalization (are you familiar with this term?) are all D? That the top 25 colleges in our nation are either in democratic cities or states ?
Conversely the least educated and least productive and the poorest states are all R??
Now, I will await to be dazzled by your lucid and cogent response…….still waiting–crickets-chirp-chirp.
Insane having people believe in the Democrats who’s supposedly are for the minorities in words. But ask yourself, What has Obama done for them except to create more Racial divided and I hate to say it but with Obama sticking his nose into the Travon case with Racial lines he’s created more COP killings. I blame the Obama for the Cop killings! If it wasn’t for his rhetoric those cops who got shot killed would be alive today!
Ikefromeli: Tough name to remember. You’re right, it’s tough to respond to your comments. So based on your statistics, Democrats are responsible for the productivity of cities, etc.? I have heard your argument before. Notice that elected politicians rarely make such claims; they rely on the pundits. Do you believe the U.S. would be better off if every State were strongly Democratic, in other words, all elected officials be Democrats like in Hawaii?
No, I firmly believe in a multi-party system. That said. Rs have very few examples, that are based on generational data that says and/or proves their public policy positions are correct.
Now, that said no party has absolute binary answers. I will say, I suggest you read “The geography of jobs, by Enrico Morretti. He is a labor economist at CAL. In short, from an evidence based perspective he outlines why conservative environments are less productive than progressive ones. Please note, this was not his posit or objective, rather his goal was to collect data on why some cites are more productive than other ones. As it turns out, for a wide variety of factors, D leaning regions and cites, by and large are the most productive.
You can ask Poch but the same can be asked of you republicans. Are you proud that it has been over 50 years since a republican president has submitted a balanced budget to congress? Do you even know what that was? So what has republicans done besides incurring big deficits? Let me remind you Reagan criticize Carter for his budget deficit which was below 50 billion at the time but when he became president quickly ran up a 250 billion deficit. Your hero GW promised to maintain a balanced budget but when he left the presidency, the deficit was over a trillion. Way to go Republicans. All I can say is with republicans you better hang onto your wallet!
As for racial divide, republicans are the main source of this. Perhaps 50 years ago democrats were somewhat responsible but today, you republicans live off of Racial divide. Without it, you would have nothing.
I guess Donald doesn’t understand about gun control. He acts like she wants all guns to be gone. Gun control is just about guns being registered and people take classes in proper care, background checks, etc. Why is this not reasonable? The people who support him believe him be cause they are not too bright or gulible. I don’t like her either, but he is just crazy!
For those who don’t quite understand Trump, he has a sarcastic sense of humor. His point is that HilLIARy is a hypocrite who wants to take away guns from law abiding citizens, but not from her security team.
Well then, just for laughs at his next event, maybe Mr. Witty will hand out firearms to his audience at the entrance.
The republicans are a bit hypocritical on this subject ever since they complied with their convention and did not allow guns into the convention. Come on Donald. Where is your support for the second amendment?
No decent human being would even think of making such a statement. But that explains things, doesn’t it.
What a moron! This is the big lie that republicans and the nra would have you believe…that wanting better control over who has guns means wanting no one to have guns.
He sells himself, obviously, to low and very low information voters. Just read the comments here from his supporters.
You are being too kind. I think a better description would be brain dead zombies.
I was trying, uncharacteristically, to be kind.
You’re right, of course. It’s sad and pathetic.
I know hundreds and hundreds of physicians. Few support Hillary, and most support Trump. Are they low information voters? The border agents, Policemen, business owners, are they all low information voters? On the other hand, you believe the democrats bus in high information voters? Every day I see people who support Hillary who can conjugate the verb “to be”, and others who don’t know who the VP is of the United States. Are they in the “high information” voters. It is nonsense to label voters. It’s all part of the Democrats MO.
It’s not nonsense. It’s science.
The fact that you would write something so ridiculous and obviously untrue as “I know hundreds and hundreds of physicians. Few support Hillary, and most support Trump.” shows how low your information quotient is. How could you possibly know who hundreds of physicians are voting for? The answer, of course, is that you don’t, and you just made that up.
Ok,,by that standard of logic, and make no mistake about it, you set a very low bar–my wife, and her medical group, or 18 physicians who have a critical care practice, only one of them has said he will vote for Trump. Now, that’s 17 out of 18 partners in a medical practice, so are we to dervive from this that serves as the definitive view on how doctors feel about Trump?
Come now, you border on the logic of a simpleton…..
It’s always humorous to observe people caught up in self-aggrandizement.
Klastri,
I work with hundreds of physicians that I’ve known for decades. They are all in private practice. It is true that those in hospitals and especially recent grads all support socialized medicine. In fact, when I discuss it with them they are absolutely 100 % convinced it’s the only way to go.
In general, I read the constant derogatory comments about Trump on this site, which are way over the top. I believe such comments are only motivating those who are more independent to vote for Trump. We’re rapidly heading toward a globalist agenda. I wonder if you’re comfortable heading in that direction.
The sad thing about the derogatory comments is that they are not over the top enough. Nothing touches how self absorbed, mean spirited, and dangerous Mr. Trump is. It is true deplorable – and astonishing – that he has managed to make it this far. Very sad reflection that many Americans do not realize how blessed they are, and look to a strongman to control them.
cajaybird – If people are motivated to vote for someone after learning about the candidate’s psychoses, I might argue that they shouldn’t vote. But that’s our system.
There aren’t enough failed white men, white supremacists, racists and bigots to elect Trump. Mrs. Clinton is going to win.
The media is the only fool who thinks that Trump is inciting violence! WThe Black Lives Matter group incites violence. In another article Michell’s Obama is campaignng for Clinton, MO hates Hillary but all that matters is that their agenda keeps them in power.i
Mr. Trump has incited violence since the beginning of his campaign. Virtually at every rally.
Trump is a violent psychotic.
All of you have a car, it is registered. Some of you might have a marriage or two, it is registered. Some of you even own a house, it is registered. Your pets are registered. Please show from a reputable source exactly where it states guns will be taken away.
The republican campaign handbook. Just repeat lie often enough and a lot of suckers will believe it.
The Clinton Foundation in 2014 contributed 5.7% of the Foundation’s spending from $91.3 Million. Expenses show $34.8 Million for salaries and benefits, $5.2 million to charitable groups.
And how does this related to the article?
It doesn’t. He’s throwing things at the wall in the hope that something will stick.
Yep, Ike and Klastri got stuck on the wall. The Clinton Foundation supports gun control with funding and personnel.
The sad thing is that you don’t understand the distinction between trying to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, and others who shouldn’t have them, and the lie that Mr. Trump and others repeat that Mrs. Clinton wants to take guns away from law abiding people. She of course does not. Mr. Trump is lying about that, as he does about so many things.
…and according to Klastri if you want a gun you ARE mentally ill, therefore….
Mr. Trump, obviously, is a violent psychotic. This isn’t the first time he’s winked at violence directed at Mrs. Clinton.
He knows that he’s going to lose the election. He’s profoundly mentally ill, and is liable to say or do anything when faced with a humiliating defeat.
I am no fan of Donald Trump, but I do believe it is hypocritical of someone to try to keep law abiding citizens from possessing guns while surrounded by a phalanx of armed guards.
Why is it hypocritical? First of all, Hillary only wants to keep crazies from having guns. You know people with mental problems, or people with violent histories. When and where has she ever advocated doing away with guns? You phony conservatives always follow the mantra, if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.
What lie? Seriously.
Hillary Clinton is in favor of restricting firearms for those on the “secret” no fly. As a law abiding American who spent a fair amount of time on that list with no recourse to get off it, and no explanation of how one gets on it, nor process to get off it, I resent being on it, and resent even more having my constitutionally protected rights suspended without due process.
I figured you be in favor of due process and the constitution. It seems your values stop where you party affiliation begins. You are part of the problem.
You are expecting people here to believe that you were on a terrorist watch list, and you were unable to fly for a “fair amount of time?”
That is what you are saying? That you were on a terrorist watch list, and that you were unable, in any case, to fly during that period?
Nope. My name was flagged and I was on a list that didn’t allow me to check in online or using the airport kiosk.
I had to be checked in by an agent and then was “randomly” selected by TSA for extra screening before I could get on an airplane. I shared the name the name of a known terrorist and it caused me a fair amount of frustration. I still don’t know who it was or how I got on the list and I eventually dropped off it.
Any other questions?
Kalaheo1 – Yes. Why do you think that what happened to you was related in any way to what Mrs. Clinton was suggesting?
If you were on the actual terrorist watch list, you would have been banned from flying. Period. That’s the list this refers to. Good grief.
You are going to have to educate me, what list was I on? what list are you talking about? How do you get on and off those respective lists and home many other lists are there?
Let’s let our laws and constitution work the way it was meant to.
“Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said Trump’s comments tonight, in view of past remarks, fit “a pattern of inciting people to violence.” ”
strange that democrats equate “stop” with violence.
especially with their latest attack ad stating “stop him” written over a picture of trump, paid for by the female felon’s campaign.
Often, Politicians want protection for themselves with armed guards, secret service, etc. They fear a lunatic will try to take their lives or do harm as a result of what notable people such as Gabrielle”Gabby” Giffords, president Kennedy, president Reagan, James Brady, Lincoln, had to experience.
A few were able to live and tell the tale and survive, living disabled for the rest of their lives. Other’s were not so lucky, but left a legacy.
When you’re out there in the public at a mall, university campus, or restaurant we citizens’ are not fortunate enough to have that same protection to protect us or our family members if a lunatic decides to kill everyone in their path. We can’t depend on our police force to be everywhere and react to emergencies in a split second.
So if Hillary/states like California, wants to disarm law abiding citizens from protecting themselves if confronted by a terrorist/lunatic, how can they ensure our safety?
Politicians off mandates, however NO solutions.
Another leading republican thinker and an expert in security public policy rejects and repudiates the Donald.
WASHINGTON ― Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has served both Republican and Democratic presidents, sharply criticized Republican nominee Donald Trump’s ability to lead the United States, writing that the business mogul was “beyond repair” when it came to national security.
“At least on national security, I believe Mr. Trump is beyond repair. He is stubbornly uninformed about the world and how to lead our country and government, and temperamentally unsuited to lead our men and women in uniform. He is unqualified and unfit to be commander-in-chief,” Gates wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published Friday evening.
Gates wrote that Trump was clueless when it came to the American military and foreign policy. Trump has praised Russian President Vladimir Putin repeatedly, threatened to not defend NATO countries, said he would “bomb the shit” out of ISIS and seemed unfamiliar with Russia’s annexation of Crimea.
“Mr. Trump is also willfully ignorant about the rest of the world, about our military and its capabilities, and about government itself. He disdains expertise and experience while touting his own—such as his claim that he knows more about ISIS than America’s generals,” Gates wrote. “He has no clue about the difference between negotiating a business deal and negotiating with sovereign nations.”
Mark my words, by the end of next week, Trump will give up gains he previously achieved in the last two weeks…..
Criticisms work both ways! Just take a look in a mirror!
What part of “shall not be infringed” don’t you understand???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Liberals think it’s the government’s roll to “infringe.” In fact a nice police state would suit them just fine…that’s the only way they can win a argument.
Vote for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein!