Political Violence

[Proto]

 

And their return address is to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, yet you don't believe she mailed them as a secret ISIS plot?

 

Just some dude trying to false flag

 

What idiot terrorist would mark all their calling cards on the first three bombs when there'll probably be more.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

And their return address is to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, yet you don't believe she mailed them as a secret ISIS plot?

 

Just some dude trying to false flag

 

What idiot terrorist would mark all their calling cards on the first three bombs when there'll probably be more.

You do realize they could have put her Return Address in the hopes that it would hit her if not the target?

 

I don't know, I'm skeptical for a number of reasons too...namely that attention whores like ISIS haven't claimed credit yet.

 

They might not want to blow their mole however

[Phantom Roxas]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38404033

 

I'm just reminded of this. Occam's Razor does suggest this is a right leaning loon, and most likely it will be. But as with the Chuch Burner and the guy vandalizing the Jewish Centers, we really wont know till the FBI nabs him.

 

At which point social media will pretty much clarify where the chips will fall

 

---

 

So the package sent to Eric Holder, Obama, Clinton had Debbie Wasserman Schultz' return address. The package had the WRONG address and was sent back to DWS' office. Might be possible that someone who dislikes the fine lady from Fl  is behind this

 

Yeah, I think that is the case. I am feeling more comfortable saying that it's someone from the right, but I'll wait and see it. The main factor that has come up is that the targets have each been declared "enemies" by Trump. I doubt Trump endorsed these attacks; at most, it's probably someone who thinks they're doing what Trump would want, but that would be more about the criminal's own assumptions.

 

Bombs have ISIS flag on them

This seems a little too convenient

 

...Yeah, I doubt that ISIS would do that. I'll elaborate on this on my next point, but I think that's someone just putting the ISIS flag on the bombs to make people think it was ISIS.

 

You do realize they could have put her Return Address in the hopes that it would hit her if not the target?

 

I don't know, I'm skeptical for a number of reasons too

 

Sounds to me like someone is trying to make this appear as either DWS or ISIS are behind this, if not having the bomb hit her as you said. DWS would likely be a target moreso for her role as DNC chair, and association with Clinton.

 

EDIT:

 

Okay, it's not even the ISIS logo.

 

It's a Larry the Cable Guy sticker. https://twitter.com/AltUSPressSec/status/1055229035259813889

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/investigations/Mail-Bombs-Biden-De-Niro-Clinton-FBI-Obama-Florida-New-York-City-Delaware-Washington-Investigation-498562021.html

 

So many of the bombs were found lack parts needed to actually explode.

[Proto]

So they're testing the waters and attempting to politically intimidate these people with violence. Including Robert DeNiro who's only real connection with the other 3 is that they're old people (I guess white too if you count Obama) who have actively been anti-Trump

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

So they're testing the waters and attempting to politically intimidate these people with violence. Including Robert DeNiro who's only real connection with the other 3 is that they're old people (I guess white too if you count Obama) who have actively been anti-Trump

Not educated enough on the motive of terrorists to speculate....sorry

 

---

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/23/books/review/trumps-next-chapter.html

 

Meanwhile, NYT printing that sweet sweet sweet assassination porn 

[vla1ne]

So they're testing the waters and attempting to politically intimidate these people with violence. Including Robert DeNiro who's only real connection with the other 3 is that they're old people (I guess white too if you count Obama) who have actively been anti-Trump

What exactly would they get out of this though? Not trying to make an argument here, just asking questions about motives and such. Republicans already have the most fired up base, by this point even the most democratically skewed poles show that republicans in practically every state that's not dyed blue is playing with full buffs. Why would anybody who supports trump or republicans actually send these out when a massive republican victory is practically right around the corner? And if they're going to do it as a threat, why send them to impotent targets, instead of actual figures who might affect change? Seriously, this entire thing just feels really dumb. like it was implemented at the last minute and done with the most half assed planning possible.

[Phantom Roxas]

What exactly would they get out of this though? Not trying to make an argument here, just asking questions about motives and such. Republicans already have the most fired up base, by this point even the most democratically skewed poles show that republicans in practically every state that's not dyed blue is playing with full buffs. Why would anybody who supports trump or republicans actually send these out when a massive republican victory is practically right around the corner? And if they're going to do it as a threat, why send them to impotent targets, instead of actual figures who might affect change? Seriously, this entire thing just feels really dumb. like it was implemented at the last minute and done with the most half assed planning possible.

 

Probably because Trump has actively encouraged violence against a few of these individuals, declared them "enemies of the state", and gets people to chant "LOCK HER UP" in droves, so with how much he actively incites his supporters to commit acts of terrorism because he'll just defend them by calling them "very fine people", if they want to get anything out of this, then delivering on the violence that Trump has called for should be enough.

[vla1ne]

Probably because Trump has actively encouraged violence against a few of these individuals, declared them "enemies of the state", and gets people to chant "LOCK HER UP" in droves, so with how much he actively incites his supporters to commit acts of terrorism because he'll just defend them by calling them "very fine people", if they want to get anything out of this, then delivering on the violence that Trump has called for should be enough.

That claim is a two way street, If i recall, trump himself, well before this has stated bluntly that he does not support violence against the opposing party. Declaring lock her up was in regards to her actions in select government roles (I don't agree with the statement, but it does have proper context). He has already, in no uncertain terms denounced the person/people sending the bombs. Using him as an excuse makes no sense.

 

Republicans/trump are winning or easily competing in practically every political aspect. There's a majority in both houses, and it looks like it's going to stay that way. Voter enthusiasm is way up. Trumps nominee made it into the supreme court, The economy is one a steady uptick. Trump just slammed stormy and her lawyer in the first of their cases to settle. Public approval of trump has been rising, Businesses and foreign nations are on board with trump, The wall's progressing slowly, but constantly. The list goes on and on. It's been practically nothing but straight winning. Why anybody potentially on trumps side would try to do this, especially at this exact time, is what confuses me. Why pick the worst, most petty option possible, and risk making the entire party sink, when everything's sailing so smoothly for republicans.

[Proto]

Republicans/trump are winning or easily competing in practically every political aspect. There's a majority in both houses, and it looks like it's going to stay that way. Voter enthusiasm is way up. Trumps nominee made it into the supreme court, The economy is one a steady uptick. Trump just slammed stormy and her lawyer in the first of their cases to settle. Public approval of trump has been rising, Businesses and foreign nations are on board with trump, The wall's progressing slowly, but constantly. The list goes on and on. It's been practically nothing but straight winning. Why anybody potentially on trumps side would try to do this, especially at this exact time, is what confuses me. Why pick the worst, most petty option possible, and risk making the entire party sink, when everything's sailing so smoothly for republicans.

It's very possible that individuals within his voter base feel like whatever promises he made that he didn't fulfill, of which there are many, are being overlooked and believe that its necessary to take it into their own hands to try to remind Democrats of fear with the advent of the midterms. I'm not predicting a blue wave or whatever but you have to admit that this kinda works. They could be people who believe that there are some weaknesses in congress that could potentially be exploited. That the blowback from this short period might be so large with the amount of media uproar about Trump and people pushing new voters that all his policies might be revoked in the same way he revoked most of Obama's.

 

With every peak, there's a trough. A recession after every massive upswing. And this could be a (poor) attempt at increasing the width of that trough by reminding these "untouchable" public figures that they are at full risk of being targets if they try to cut this peak off too soon.

[Phantom Roxas]

That claim is a two way street, If i recall, trump himself, well before this has stated bluntly that he does not support violence against the opposing party. Declaring lock her up was in regards to her actions in select government roles (I don't agree with the statement, but it does have proper context). He has already, in no uncertain terms denounced the person/people sending the bombs. Using him as an excuse makes no sense.

 

Republicans/trump are winning or easily competing in practically every political aspect. There's a majority in both houses, and it looks like it's going to stay that way. Voter enthusiasm is way up. Trumps nominee made it into the supreme court, The economy is one a steady uptick. Trump just slammed stormy and her lawyer in the first of their cases to settle. Public approval of trump has been rising, Businesses and foreign nations are on board with trump, The wall's progressing slowly, but constantly. The list goes on and on. It's been practically nothing but straight winning. Why anybody potentially on trumps side would try to do this, especially at this exact time, is what confuses me. Why pick the worst, most petty option possible, and risk making the entire party sink, when everything's sailing so smoothly for republicans.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/10/25/trump-inciting-violence-nearly-retired-journalists-condemn-presidents-un-american-attacks-press/

 

Trump does far more to condone violence. It fits much more of his personality, and Trump stating that he does not support violence means nothing when he has consistently been proven to lie. As this article nicely points out, Trump's condemnations against the bomb threats are adequately scripted at best, only for him to immediately undercut any promise of unity by showing his more natural temper. Citing Trump as an influence here makes perfect sense.

 

Republicans won back in 2016; everything since then has been about trying to oppose them, even though they've stacked the deck because they control both Houses. I doubt it's going to stay that way, because the intentions behind those hoping for a Blue Wave is that the midterms will weaken the GOP's majority. All your specific examples are irrelevant to the thread, so I'll cut to the chase: The issue is that you and I come from completely different perspectives. You believe that the GOP is secure in their position, so that these actions are unnecessary. I believe that the GOP is not secure in their position, and while I do not wish to exaggerate how effective the Blue Wave could be, I do think it will hurt a fair number of seats.

 

For example, Devin Nunes is one of Trump's biggest defenders, but his victory is not entirely guaranteed, so if Nunes loses, there goes one of the Trump's most reliable sources for obstructing Mueller's investigation. As such, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that some people are acting from a place of fear. Seeking the most petty options possible is everything Trump and his supporters strive for, and while it does risk sinking the rest of the party, that may be because the midterms represent a possible challenge to whether or not things really are running so smoothly for Republicans.

[Proto]

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/exclusive-x-ray-photo-and-inside-details-of-todays-bombs/

 

X-ray came out, nothing here suggests that they can't explode, they have the shrapnel, a clock and pyrotechnic powder. Reason they didn't is because bomb squad got ahold of 'em before the clock time.

 

Fake news. Hell not even your source really gives a "reason" of them not being capable of exploding, every official quoted mentions that there's the possibility of it blowing up. All the actually quoted people suggest that the bomb isn't a hoax.

 

Conservatives have already latched onto "oh it's entirely fake" though. So, nice to see that ya'll can hold every office in power and still be hilariously paranoid that everything's a conspiracy.

[vla1ne]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/10/25/trump-inciting-violence-nearly-retired-journalists-condemn-presidents-un-american-attacks-press/

 

Trump does far more to condone violence. It fits much more of his personality, and Trump stating that he does not support violence means nothing when he has consistently been proven to lie. As this article nicely points out, Trump's condemnations against the bomb threats are adequately scripted at best, only for him to immediately undercut any promise of unity by showing his more natural temper. Citing Trump as an influence here makes perfect sense.

 

Republicans won back in 2016; everything since then has been about trying to oppose them, even though they've stacked the deck because they control both Houses. I doubt it's going to stay that way, because the intentions behind those hoping for a Blue Wave is that the midterms will weaken the GOP's majority. All your specific examples are irrelevant to the thread, so I'll cut to the chase: The issue is that you and I completely different perspectives. You believe that the GOP is secure in their position, so that these actions are unnecessary. I believe that the GOP is not secure in their position, and while I do not wish to exaggerate how effective the Blue Wave could be, I do think it will hurt a fair number of seats.

 

For example, Devin Nunes is one of Trump's biggest defenders, but his victory is not entirely guaranteed, so if Nunes loses, there goes one of the Trump's most reliable sources for obstructing Mueller's investigation. As such, I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that some people are acting from a place of fear. Seeking the most petty options possible is everything Trump and his supporters strive for, and while it does risk sinking the rest of the party, that may be because the midterms represent a possible challenge to whether or not things really are running so smoothly for Republicans.

Both articles are trying to equivocate criticism and harsh banter with "Mail that guy bombs". It doesn't work that way. Even i cheered somewhat when gianforte body slammed the reporter. you gonna say i condone mailing bombs now? There's a massive difference in the magnitude of the two, and the actual quote used by cnn does absolutely nothing to bridge the gap. "A very big part of the Anger we see today in our society is caused by the purposely false and inaccurate reporting of the Mainstream Media that I refer to as Fake News. It has gotten so bad and hateful that it is beyond description. Mainstream Media must clean up its act, FAST!" This does not equal "mail those guys bombs", nor does it even remotely encourage it. it barely counts as divisive considering he's talking about their literal actions. It says the exact thing that articles of cnn and similar sites have done since he took office as president, simply directed towards them instead of him. They've branded him every label under the sun, asked him some of the most leading and divisive questions possible, criticized every misstep he's ever made, ridiculed even his greatest successes (the UN speech comes to mind, where they went after 5 early seconds of an actually good 30 minute speech, for days on end) helped damage the careers of innocent people simply because they were connected to trump. Drove all manner of false narratives in attempts to destroy his career. ect. claiming him telling them to stop being either liars or divisive reporters, might be harsh, but it does not negate a call for unity. If i say we need to work together, and then tell you (not you, just saying) to stop being a dick, that's not me endorsing violence. that's me telling you to stop being a dick. same principal here. they're simply twisting it up, and by doing so, proving the exact point that he was making. Yeah he called them fake news in his tweet. Who cares, The point of the statement doesn't change, and the fact of the statement doesn't change.

 

the numbers have been on a steady rise. democrats need vital seats to change if they want to change the house. i don't see that happening. this is a wait and see thing though, and not the point of my statement so you're right, it's best dropped.

 

Nunes is an example of what i'm saying. Mailing bombs is just a terrible way to endorse him. why would anybody on the trump side mail bombs when it's guaranteed to have the opposite effect? it would make sense if it were after the elections, and republicans had lost, but that's not the case, it's before the election, and republicans are looking good enough. Why would any trump fan ruin that?

[Phantom Roxas]

What possible reason is there to send a bomb to CNN other than it's been the subject of scorn from Trump's attacks on the free press? Again, I'm going to refrain from refuting much of your points trying to vilify CNN, other than to say that Trump has singled out CNN more than any other network because of their criticism. "He called them fake news in his tweet" is seriously understating his utter disdain for the network. Trump has attacked CNN on numerous occasions, and CNN just happens to be one of many targets in this bomb scare? That cannot be a coincidence. I'm not going to accuse you of condoning mailing bombs; I'm just asking you to understand that it stands to reason that CNN was targeted because of Trump's grudge against them.

 

There's a simple explanation for why a Trump fan would ruin the GOP's chances: Perhaps they may just be an idiot.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

GOP is actually winning the EARLY VOTE in most swing states, something that just does NOT happen. For a republican to start bombing democrats now is just dumb and doesn't really make sense.

 

Anyway they caught a suspect so we'll soon know

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Latest info: man in his 50s, criminal history, works in auto parts, lives in FLA, has ties to New York.

[Proto]

GOP is actually winning the EARLY VOTE in most swing states, something that just does NOT happen. For a republican to start bombing democrats now is just dumb and doesn't really make sense.

 

Anyway they caught a suspect so we'll soon know

I mean it depends on the state (obviously not California because I can just mail it in) but I know that in states with early voting where you need to show up at the physical booth heavily biases retired folk because well, most people have to be actually doin' their jobs and such during those times. And of course the old folks favor the republican party, if the dems have a chance then it'll be from younger voters well, actually voting since a majority of them happen to be more left-leaning. Their turnouts are just awful. So what's happening this election is that the dems are betting to improve them.

[Proto]

stickers on the van he was arrested in

 

all yours bby

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Yup, totally, a guy is running around with stickers like that on his car and not getting pulled over. Totally

I mean it depends on the state (obviously not California because I can just mail it in) but I know that in states with early voting where you need to show up at the physical booth heavily biases retired folk because well, most people have to be actually doin' their jobs and such during those times. And of course the old folks favor the republican party, if the dems have a chance then it'll be from younger voters well, actually voting since a majority of them happen to be more left-leaning. Their turnouts are just awful. So what's happening this election is that the dems are betting to improve them.

Except the dems always win the early vote in these states. 

[Proto]

Yup, totally, a guy is running around with stickers like that on his car and not getting pulled over. Totally

Except the dems always win the early vote in these states. 

Are you implying that police pull over people for stickers?

 

Either way it very much is his van and he has multiple threats against people on the left on it. 

 

Also, for the vote stuff, cite your sources.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Sayoc was arrested for grand theft in 2013 in Florida.

 

Also trumps fault. And bomb threats in 2010 also trumps fault

Yea police pull you over if your driver side and rear are fully obscured since it's a driving hazard

[Proto]

Sayoc was arrested for grand theft in 2013 in Florida.

 

Also trumps fault. And bomb threats in 2010 also trumps fault

Yea police pull you over if your driver side and rear are fully obscured since it's a driving hazard

Uh, sure? That doesn't change his political ideology. I'm not in the blaming Trump for this happening camp, I'm in the "conservatives aren't some monolithic non-violent peacebois while the left are rioting babies" camp.

 

Everyone said it was a 100% a conservative didn't do this, now he did do it and people are backtracking so funking hard it's hilarious.

 

You're so. funking. Partisan. It's amazing.

 

Also, he's a ReTrumpican. He registered in 3/4/2016 as Republican when he was in his 50s. Seems like he only did it to vote for Trump. So, if it wasn't for Trump he'd probably be unaffiliated. Food for thought.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

No he is a republican so that's an L for my side. But he was arrested mutiple times for bomb threats in 2002 and 2010 far predating trump

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

GOP is actually winning the EARLY VOTE in most swing states, something that just does NOT happen. For a republican to start bombing democrats now is just dumb and doesn't really make sense.

 

Anyway they caught a suspect so we'll soon know

Maybe they were dumb then?

Anyway gonna ask both you and proto to not double post anymore

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

https://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2018/10/26/more-than-2-million-votes-cast-gop-keeps-its-advantage/

Maybe they were dumb then?
Anyway gonna ask both you and proto to not double post anymore

Former stripper, multiple bomb threat pre-dating Trump. 

 

Oh well, it's a blessing for you guys electorally