Trump quotes London mayor verbatim. Politifake: "False"

[Major Kong]

[USN_Hokie]

He does have a blase attitude. He thinks it's part and parcel to living in a big city.

If the troops were there for a parade or even an exercise, I would agree with you. They were there because of the threat and his response was to a question about the threat level in the city.

You know that not even Snopes agrees with you and politifake, right?

[miles]

He does have a blase attitude. He thinks it's part and parcel to living in a big city.

If the troops were there for a parade or even an exercise, I would agree with you. They were there because of the threat and his response was to a question about the threat level in the city.

You know that not even Snopes agrees with you and politifake, right?

HFDC? He don't give a shite. He's a baaadass!. NeverTrumper...NeverTrumper. What's the verb tense?

[USN_Hokie]

Trump is not pulling any punches.

[Cpt Jagdish]

Let me put it another way for you -- Trump uses the quote to infer that the police presence means another attack is imminent and that people should be afraid; Kahn uses it to say just because the police are there doesn't mean another attack is imminent and that people shouldn't necessarily be afraid.

Why do you think police were mobilized throughout the city?

I'm pretty sure they did it in case another attack was possible.

You think he mobilized police through the city for fun?

This is where their argument is just ridiculous. I can't believe there are people here defending it.

I was a student at Virginia Tech prior to and after 2007. Are you to say that Virginia Tech/Blacksburg PD were more present and mobilized immediately after, for days/weeks and for the next year, because they thought that another massacre was imminent?

Because I can tell you right now, I never thought that was the case. And I would think most sane people did not think that was the case either.

[awesome guy]

Let me put it another way for you -- Trump uses the quote to infer that the police presence means another attack is imminent and that people should be afraid; Kahn uses it to say just because the police are there doesn't mean another attack is imminent and that people shouldn't necessarily be afraid.

Why do you think police were mobilized throughout the city?

I'm pretty sure they did it in case another attack was possible.

You think he mobilized police through the city for fun?

This is where their argument is just ridiculous. I can't believe there are people here defending it.

I was a student at Virginia Tech prior to and after 2007. Are you to say that Virginia Tech/Blacksburg PD were more present and mobilized immediately after, for days/weeks and for the next year, because they thought that another massacre was imminent?

Because I can tell you right now, I never thought that was the case. And I would think most sane people did not think that was the case either.

Can you tell me how many Chos exist vs. Jihadists? That's a clue to understanding why police are worried of a second wave in terrorist attacks.

[awesome guy]

Coulter nails it too

[Maroon Effect]

I would think it would be silly to see public places littered with military level security and not be alarmed.

If a liberal president tweeted, people would talk about how "in touch" he is with the people.

[Cpt Jagdish]

Let me put it another way for you -- Trump uses the quote to infer that the police presence means another attack is imminent and that people should be afraid; Kahn uses it to say just because the police are there doesn't mean another attack is imminent and that people shouldn't necessarily be afraid.

Why do you think police were mobilized throughout the city?

I'm pretty sure they did it in case another attack was possible.

You think he mobilized police through the city for fun?

This is where their argument is just ridiculous. I can't believe there are people here defending it.

I was a student at Virginia Tech prior to and after 2007. Are you to say that Virginia Tech/Blacksburg PD were more present and mobilized immediately after, for days/weeks and for the next year, because they thought that another massacre was imminent?

Because I can tell you right now, I never thought that was the case. And I would think most sane people did not think that was the case either.

Can you tell me how many Chos exist vs. Jihadists? That's a clue to understanding why police are worried of a second wave in terrorist attacks.

Im not denying that there's a difference in that respect. I'm merely referring to the fact that if you read/listen to the London mayor's comments it's very obvious that Trump's tweet takes it out of context. I think other posters have pointed that out. My VT reference is analogous, not 1:1 obviously.

[awesome guy]

Let me put it another way for you -- Trump uses the quote to infer that the police presence means another attack is imminent and that people should be afraid; Kahn uses it to say just because the police are there doesn't mean another attack is imminent and that people shouldn't necessarily be afraid.

Why do you think police were mobilized throughout the city?

I'm pretty sure they did it in case another attack was possible.

You think he mobilized police through the city for fun?

This is where their argument is just ridiculous. I can't believe there are people here defending it.

I was a student at Virginia Tech prior to and after 2007. Are you to say that Virginia Tech/Blacksburg PD were more present and mobilized immediately after, for days/weeks and for the next year, because they thought that another massacre was imminent?

Because I can tell you right now, I never thought that was the case. And I would think most sane people did not think that was the case either.

Can you tell me how many Chos exist vs. Jihadists? That's a clue to understanding why police are worried of a second wave in terrorist attacks.

Im not denying that there's a difference in that respect. I'm merely referring to the fact that if you read/listen to the London mayor's comments it's very obvious that Trump's tweet takes it out of context. I think other posters have pointed that out. My VT reference is analogous, not 1:1 obviously.

USN has pointed out how that's not reasonable or correct. He is soft on terrorism and that was Trump's point.

[USN_Hokie]

Let me put it another way for you -- Trump uses the quote to infer that the police presence means another attack is imminent and that people should be afraid; Kahn uses it to say just because the police are there doesn't mean another attack is imminent and that people shouldn't necessarily be afraid.

Why do you think police were mobilized throughout the city?

I'm pretty sure they did it in case another attack was possible.

You think he mobilized police through the city for fun?

This is where their argument is just ridiculous. I can't believe there are people here defending it.

I was a student at Virginia Tech prior to and after 2007. Are you to say that Virginia Tech/Blacksburg PD were more present and mobilized immediately after, for days/weeks and for the next year, because they thought that another massacre was imminent?

Because I can tell you right now, I never thought that was the case. And I would think most sane people did not think that was the case either.

Edit: misread your post. Looks like you agree with me.

The threat was gone, no more police. Khan is telling people everything is OK when police are swarming in. Looks like you, me, and Trump agree.

Trump was right to call them out. Politicians are trying to pacify the public against the hordes they've imported as votes for the welfare state

[HokieHam]

Coulter nails it too

Russia, Russia, Russia!

[awesome guy]

Let me put it another way for you -- Trump uses the quote to infer that the police presence means another attack is imminent and that people should be afraid; Kahn uses it to say just because the police are there doesn't mean another attack is imminent and that people shouldn't necessarily be afraid.

Why do you think police were mobilized throughout the city?

I'm pretty sure they did it in case another attack was possible.

You think he mobilized police through the city for fun?

This is where their argument is just ridiculous. I can't believe there are people here defending it.

I was a student at Virginia Tech prior to and after 2007. Are you to say that Virginia Tech/Blacksburg PD were more present and mobilized immediately after, for days/weeks and for the next year, because they thought that another massacre was imminent?

Because I can tell you right now, I never thought that was the case. And I would think most sane people did not think that was the case either.

Edit: misread your post. Looks like you agree with me.

The threat was gone, no more police. Khan is telling people everything is OK when police are swarming in. Looks like you, me, and Trump agree.

Trump was right to call them out. Politicians are trying to pacify the public against the hordes they've imported as votes for the welfare state

I think they're reading Kahn's statement as 2 independent thoughts. That's the only way you get to "out if context".

[Major Kong]

Coulter nails it too

I think the whole of Eastern Europe gets it....especially Poland and Hungary.

[HokieFanDC]

He does have a blase attitude. He thinks it's part and parcel to living in a big city.

If the troops were there for a parade or even an exercise, I would agree with you. They were there because of the threat and his response was to a question about the threat level in the city.

You know that not even Snopes agrees with you and politifake, right?

This part, "he was not indicating that another attack was imminent or that citizens should “not be alarmed” by what had occurred."?

[USN_Hokie]

He does have a blase attitude. He thinks it's part and parcel to living in a big city.

If the troops were there for a parade or even an exercise, I would agree with you. They were there because of the threat and his response was to a question about the threat level in the city.

You know that not even Snopes agrees with you and politifake, right?

This part, "he was not indicating that another attack was imminent or that citizens should “not be alarmed” by what had occurred."?

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say. Can you rephrase or add some context?

[USN_Hokie]

Does deploying police all over the city not indicate an imminent attack is possible to you?

Is that where we are with this? He didn't state the obvious conclusion from deploying armed police all over the city, so you guys are going to pretend he was telling people to not be afraid that police would murder them or something?

[HokieFanDC]

He does have a blase attitude. He thinks it's part and parcel to living in a big city.

If the troops were there for a parade or even an exercise, I would agree with you. They were there because of the threat and his response was to a question about the threat level in the city.

You know that not even Snopes agrees with you and politifake, right?

This part, "he was not indicating that another attack was imminent or that citizens should “not be alarmed” by what had occurred."?

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say. Can you rephrase or add some context?

That's the Snopes take, that you referenced, agreeing with me.

[USN_Hokie]

He does have a blase attitude. He thinks it's part and parcel to living in a big city.

If the troops were there for a parade or even an exercise, I would agree with you. They were there because of the threat and his response was to a question about the threat level in the city.

You know that not even Snopes agrees with you and politifake, right?

This part, "he was not indicating that another attack was imminent or that citizens should “not be alarmed” by what had occurred."?

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say. Can you rephrase or add some context?

That's the Snopes take, that you referenced, agreeing with me.

Snopes did not call his assertion false like you and politfake did.

[HokieFanDC]

He does have a blase attitude. He thinks it's part and parcel to living in a big city.

If the troops were there for a parade or even an exercise, I would agree with you. They were there because of the threat and his response was to a question about the threat level in the city.

You know that not even Snopes agrees with you and politifake, right?

This part, "he was not indicating that another attack was imminent or that citizens should “not be alarmed” by what had occurred."?

I honestly don't know what you're trying to say. Can you rephrase or add some context?

That's the Snopes take, that you referenced, agreeing with me.

Snopes did not call his assertion false like you and politfake did.

I called his tweet deceptive, like Snopes did.

[USN_Hokie]

If you want to call your position as closer to one bullshirt source than another bullshirt source, that's fine.

The media looks particularly petty here with this attack. You...more so carrying all that water for them.

#MSMSDB

[HooFighter]

I'm just trying to figure out why he chooses to attack the mayor of the largest city of our closest ally after a terrorist attack. It's almost like there's something different or unusual about the mayor that he wants to point out.

[CFB Apologist]

I'm just trying to figure out why he chooses to attack the mayor of the largest city of our closest ally after a terrorist attack. It's almost like there's something different or unusual about the mayor that he wants to point out.

A muslim sympathizing with and protecting terrorists is not different or unusual. Unfortunately

[USN_Hokie]

I'm just trying to figure out why he chooses to attack the mayor of the largest city of our closest ally after a terrorist attack. It's almost like there's something different or unusual about the mayor that he wants to point out.

You could ask the same question of a mayor who wants to block entry to the leader of the UKs greatest ally to his city, but not terrorists. It's almost like the mayor wants more of the problem and less of the solution.

[HooFighter]

The mayor of Manchester self-identifies as a socialist. Does anyone have a link to the Trump tweet attacking him?