The fact that you have someone who openly jokes about having their political opponent killed as one of the major party candidates should be an embarrassment to your country.

This is a massive misrepresentation of what was actually said, media spin cycle be damned.

The fact that you have someone who openly jokes about having their political opponent killed as one of the major party candidates should be an embarrassment to your country.

This is a massive misrepresentation of what was actually said, media spin cycle be damned.

The Fact he made it easy for the media to spin his words though is on him, no matter what he REALLY meant with that.

Either he has real problems, or he always talks ambiguous on purpose. I am not so sure myself, but lets go with the latter. His fault trying to fuel the fire so much with ambiguous comments that even hardcore republicans no longer find it funny. He could have worded it LESS AMBIGIOUS by telling the gunfreaks directly to, you know, get politically involved, instead of leaving it open to interpretation if he meant for the mob on the street to lynch Hillary, or if he just wanted to remind them that their votes count.

Either way, he obviously speaks without thinking... you really want THAT as a president? Not a fan of hillary myself, but at least she is not making a fool of herself everytime she opens her mouth.

The fact that you have someone who openly jokes about having their political opponent killed as one of the major party candidates should be an embarrassment to your country.

This is a massive misrepresentation of what was actually said, media spin cycle be damned.

Bullshit, that's exactly what he meant.

The direct quote is:

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.
But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

No media spin is required.

The only misrepresentation is his assertion that Hillary wants to "abolish" the 2nd amendment.

I think he nailed it when he said: Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.

Are we really back to poor Trump being misrepresent in the media? Maybe if he weren't so stupid and used his brain (assuming he has one) he would think before he spoke. You can't misrepresent something if it's obvious what he's saying.

There is a hidden coded message in that seemingly Trump rambling, you know, only us the Illuminati would know :ph34r:

Or some really special mathematics super-genius could also decode it

The fact that you have someone who openly jokes about having their political opponent killed as one of the major party candidates should be an embarrassment to your country.

This is a massive misrepresentation of what was actually said, media spin cycle be damned.

That doesn't actually matter. If your behaviour comes across as having offended, threatened, or hurt somebody, your intent doesn't really matter. It's too late. It already happened. At most, you can clarify your intent, but that doesn't change the past, and all you can do then is hope that the person you hurt believes you and forgives you.

When Donald Trump says "I was just joking" or "that's not what I meant," do you really believe him?

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

CNN who is constantly running anti-Trump segments admitted today that the whole quote was open to interpretation. I think it was the editor of The Daily Beast that said it could be viewed as calling for gun fanatics to kill her or for gun lobbyists and gun owning Americans to use their vote to make sure Clinton loses in November by voting for Trump. Which do you think will bring more clicks?

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

CNN who is constantly running anti-Trump segments admitted today that the whole quote was open to interpretation. I think it was the editor of The Daily Beast that said it could be viewed as calling for gun fanatics to kill her or for gun lobbyists and gun owning Americans to use their vote to make sure Clinton loses in November by voting for Trump. Which do you think will bring more clicks?

I don't recall Mitt Romney or John McCain having these sort of issues in the last two elections.

The fact that you have someone who openly jokes about having their political opponent killed as one of the major party candidates should be an embarrassment to your country.

This is a massive misrepresentation of what was actually said, media spin cycle be damned.

Bullshit, that's exactly what he meant.

The direct quote is:

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.
But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

No media spin is required.

The only misrepresentation is his assertion that Hillary wants to "abolish" the 2nd amendment.

Exactly. This is a very common "trick" that fascists keep using when they have to operate under a pretense of "democratic" principles. They constantly throw this kind of "jokes" around, winking at their target audience that are "in the know", while protesting in the mainstream media that they were "misinterpreted" and "didn't really mean that". They're not fooling anyone of course besides those that want to be fooled.

Example from my own country: This is the logo of the Golden Dawn "party", which sadly has quite the following(and parliament seats) these days:

If it happens to remind you of a...certain something...naaaah, it's a Greek Meander guys! Where did your dirty minds go?!

Everytime I witness such things, somehow I get this image in my head:

"I told them it's actually an ancient Roman salute!"

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

CNN who is constantly running anti-Trump segments admitted today that the whole quote was open to interpretation. I think it was the editor of The Daily Beast that said it could be viewed as calling for gun fanatics to kill her or for gun lobbyists and gun owning Americans to use their vote to make sure Clinton loses in November by voting for Trump. Which do you think will bring more clicks?

Bull-shit. The quote is literally this :

“If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks,” Mr. Trump said, as the crowd began to boo. He quickly added: “Although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know.”

If this is just about voting against Clinton, this makes no sense : No reason to mention the "second ammendment people" specifically, while for the rest there's "nothing they can do". I'm pretty sure the "second ammendment people" don't get double votes, so what is this "extra thing" only *they* can "maybe" do, out of all his supporters?

As I said, this is such a common tactic with fascists that it's only those that are not very familiar with them that are going to give him the "benefit of the doubt". They do it non-stop.