The Left At It Again

[*bfine32*]

(03-14-2016, 07:55 AM)GMDino Wrote: To look, fairly, if Pat is at odds with anyone let's look and see if he said what you think he said.




It seems he said, clearly, that Drumpf's security should have handled this better by keeping the protesters out before anything started.

But you added the word "forceful" in this next quote.  Perhaps it was to defend Drumpf saying he wishes it was the good old days and you could punch a protester int he face?


Then it goes back to you saying Pat said what you said he said.  Not what he said.



That was what was "obtuse".  Pat said they should have done a better job.  Others said Drumpf has acted like his security being rough is a good thing and wishes they would/could be rougher.  You said that means Pat wants his security to be rougher which is in opposition of those who said Drumpf's people have been too rough.



Then the "poor me card" came out.

On what actually happened at the event: 

Drumpf WANTS controversy.  It's his best friend because the low educated people he loves will look at it as "the man" taking away his "rights".

And it will be all over the news.

Quite frankly I would not be even slightly surprised to find Drumpf hired the protesters and allowed them in just to make him look like a victim.  It seems to be the right has perfected the art of martyrdom.  (Cite: War on Christmas)

Glad you explained it. So no one is at odds over what Trump should have done in the way of security?