Trump on Clinton's Secret Service protection: 'Take their guns away, see what happens to her'

Miami (CNN)Donald Trump on Friday wondered aloud what would happen to Hillary Clinton should her Secret Service detail disarm.

"I think her bodyguards should drop all weapons. Disarm immediately," Trump said. "Take their guns away, let's see what happens to her."

"Take their guns away, OK? It'll be very dangerous," he added.

Trump's comment, which came as he criticized Clinton over gun rights, is not the first time he has called for Clinton's Secret Service detail to "disarm." But it is the first time he has wondered aloud what would happen to her should she suddenly be deprived of armed protection.

Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said Trump's remarks "should be out of bounds for a presidential candidate."

"Whether this is done to provoke protesters at a rally or casually or even as a joke, it is an unacceptable quality in anyone seeking the job of commander in chief," Mook said in a statement, adding, "He is unfit to be President and it is time Republican leaders stand up to denounce this disturbing behavior in their nominee."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/16/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-guns-secret-service/

Scraping the barrel with this one. I agree with Clinton on disarming, but he has got a point. If her bodyguards disarm....then what?
He's right. Can't see why he's being ridiculed for it tbh.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Miami (CNN)Donald Trump on Friday wondered aloud what would happen to Hillary Clinton should her Secret Service detail disarm.

"I think her bodyguards should drop all weapons. Disarm immediately," Trump said. "Take their guns away, let's see what happens to her."

"Take their guns away, OK? It'll be very dangerous," he added.

Trump's comment, which came as he criticized Clinton over gun rights, is not the first time he has called for Clinton's Secret Service detail to "disarm." But it is the first time he has wondered aloud what would happen to her should she suddenly be deprived of armed protection.

Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said Trump's remarks "should be out of bounds for a presidential candidate."

"Whether this is done to provoke protesters at a rally or casually or even as a joke, it is an unacceptable quality in anyone seeking the job of commander in chief," Mook said in a statement, adding, "He is unfit to be President and it is time Republican leaders stand up to denounce this disturbing behavior in their nominee."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/16/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-guns-secret-service/

Strawman shite!!!!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/17/donald-trump-just-made-his-most-direct-comment-yet-about-violence-against-hillary-clinton/?wpisrc=nl_most-draw7&wpmm=1

I think the point is that everyone is supposed to be equal and have the same rights etc...

Tommy Monk wrote:

I think the point is that everyone is supposed to be equal and have the same rights etc...

Clinton has never called for the public to be disarmed!

Mission creep...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Mission creep...

Horseshit.

What's a 'mission creep'?

eddie wrote:What's a 'mission creep'?

Kind of like 'changing the goalposts'.  It's a term developed in the military.  When you go to war you have an objective, then when you are there you creep away from the original mission, on to other things.

It's an idea that has developed when the military is employed in these frivolous conflicts like Iraq.  A classic example was during the year 2007, when General Petraeus urged the "surge".  The coalition had lost the purpose of Iraq War II, and Petraeus' plans were called mission creep.

Right okay. Thanks.

Eddie... it's where an unpopular and unwanted political agenda is achieved by bringing it in slowly, surreptitiously, by stealth, bit by bit, over a long period of time...


It's all very... 'progressive'...!!!






The American constitutional right to bear arms is based on the UK British bill of Rights...


And as you can see here...


https://thelibertarianalliance.com/2014/12/22/the-british-constitution-and-the-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms-for-defence/


Once politicians start legislating against peoples rights... they often carry on... bit by bit...


And in America they will keep chipping away until their constitutional right to bear arms is reduced to our current situation...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Eddie... it's where an unpopular and unwanted political agenda is achieved by bringing it in slowly, surreptitiously, by stealth, bit by bit, over a long period of time...

It's all very... 'progressive'...!!!



The American constitutional right to bear arms is based on the UK British bill of Rights...

And as you can see here...

https://thelibertarianalliance.com/2014/12/22/the-british-constitution-and-the-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms-for-defence/

Once politicians start legislating against peoples rights... they often carry on... bit by bit...

And in America they will keep chipping away until their constitutional right to bear arms is reduced to our current situation...

 That's an extreme paranoid's view.

It has nothing to do with an intentional agenda.  Mission creep happens in many ways.

Most military officers are schooled on Carl von Clausewitz' book, On War.  In it, he makes the point that war is an extension of policy, but somewhere in the heat of a war people start to focus on the people, and not upon the purpose.  (Like tommy: he gets confused with crime and starts in on Muslims, the people he thinks are behind it; pretty soon he is obsessed with Muslims and doesn't know why).  

In 2007, Bush was so fond of saying he would let the military generals guide the war, that he abdicated his responsibility to follow any goal.  General Petraeus came up with the 'surge'--a series of massive, quick strikes--but someone pointed out there was no purpose to it.

Identifying the enemy or his race with the policy is one form of 'mission creep', but there are others.  Atilla, it is said, started out avenging the punitive measures that were placed on his tribes by the Romans; but then he saw, Whoa...they're letting us build an army and get away with this shite.  Mission creep.

Another example might be Israel, which started out as a refuge from religious oppression in Europe, and indeed the holocaust of Hitler.  But, today we find that Israel fancies an expanded lebensraum in the west bank, and who knows where else.  Mission creep.

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

Eddie... it's where an unpopular and unwanted political agenda is achieved by bringing it in slowly, surreptitiously, by stealth, bit by bit, over a long period of time...

It's all very... 'progressive'...!!!



The American constitutional right to bear arms is based on the UK British bill of Rights...

And as you can see here...

https://thelibertarianalliance.com/2014/12/22/the-british-constitution-and-the-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms-for-defence/

Once politicians start legislating against peoples rights... they often carry on... bit by bit...

And in America they will keep chipping away until their constitutional right to bear arms is reduced to our current situation...

 That's an extreme paranoid's view.

It has nothing to do with an intentional agenda. Mission creep happens in many ways.

Most military officers are schooled on Carl von Clausewitz' book, On War.  In it, he makes the point that war is an extension of policy, but somewhere in the heat of a war people start to focus on the people, and not upon the purpose.  (Like tommy: he gets confused with crime and starts in on Muslims, the people he thinks are behind it; pretty soon he is obsessed with Muslims and doesn't know why).  

In 2007, Bush was so fond of saying he would let the military generals guide the war, that he abdicated his responsibility to follow any goal.  General Petraeus came up with the 'surge'--a series of massive, quick strikes--but someone pointed out there was no purpose to it.

Identifying the enemy or his race with the policy is one form of 'mission creep', but there are others.  Atilla, it is said, started out avenging the punitive measures that were placed on his tribes by the Romans; but then he saw, Whoa...they're letting us build an army and get away with this shite.  Mission creep.

Another example might be Israel, which started out as a refuge from religious oppression in Europe, and indeed the holocaust of Hitler.  But, today we find that Israel fancies an expanded lebensraum in the west bank, and who knows where else.  Mission creep.

Interesting how you are denying 'international agenda' in reply to my post...


When I wasn't even saying there was...

I was speaking of an intentional agenda, did you not catch that?

You said: " it's where an unpopular and unwanted political agenda is achieved by bringing it in slowly, surreptitiously, by stealth, bit by bit, over a long period of time..." That would be an intentional agenda.

So you were saying it was an international agenda... then you say it has nothing to do with an international agenda...


Interesting...


Is that more leftie quantum thinking in action...?


Or have you now just started arguing with yourself...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:So you were saying it was an international agenda... then you say it has nothing to do with an international agenda...


Interesting...


Is that more leftie quantum thinking in action...?


Or have you now just started arguing with yourself...!?

He said it was not an "I-N-T-E-N-T-I-O-N-A-L" ("by intent, on purpose") agenda and never said anything about "I-N-T-E-R-N-A-T-I-O-N-A-L" ("among several nations").

Tommy Monk wrote:So you were saying it was an international agenda... then you say it has nothing to do with an international agenda...

Interesting...

Is that more leftie quantum thinking in action...?

Or have you now just started arguing with yourself...!?

Mission creep has more to do with losing sight of your purposes, with the consequence that you end up in a cause or campaign you never intended. With mission creep you lose sight of your goals. It can apply to anything, but it is spoken of most frequently in terms of misuse of military power.

If it is a genuine mission creep, it does not happen intentionally. For, if it were to happen intentionally that would be a deliberate change of course. Mission creep is more of an unintentional event, at least from the perspective of original purposes, caused by a confusion of symbols and associations.

If you look at Iraq as a single course of events (Iraq War I and Iraq War II), you see that it started with Oil: the invasion of Kuwait; then progressed to instability of Iraq, breaking apart the Kurds, the Shi'ites and the Sunnis; with the Iraqi government cracking down; leading to charlatans like Bush, Jr. and Cheney fabricating lies because it got personal with Saddam; to the second Iraq invasion; to the rise of al Qaeda in Iraq; to the rise of ISIS; to what it is now...international terrorism. So you see, ironically our purposes rest on an an oil slick, and our mission slides about with a randomness. We are in a continual malaise of mission creep.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:So you were saying it was an international agenda... then you say it has nothing to do with an international agenda...

Interesting...

Is that more leftie quantum thinking in action...?

Or have you now just started arguing with yourself...!?

He said it was not an "I-N-T-E-N-T-I-O-N-A-L" ("by intent, on purpose") agenda and never said anything about "I-N-T-E-R-N-A-T-I-O-N-A-L" ("among several nations").

Haha...with tommy, I try once, and then just move on. But, ty Ben.

I thought he was intentionally winding you up Quill.

eddie wrote:I thought he was intentionally winding you up Quill.

To what end?

No, tommy moves at a slower pace than the rest of us. I will give him one shot, and then leave him alone. In his abyss of darkness, he finally gets it and comes around.

It was a joke, Quill, using the word "intentional".

I think I should avoid people today. My words are plopping like stones.

eddie wrote:It was a joke, Quill, using the word "intentional".

I think I should avoid people today. My words are plopping like stones.

No, but he was "internationally" winding me up.