Trump Idiots Can't Seem To Agree On What He Meant By 'Second Amendment People' Comment Either
It is Wednesday, so Donald Trump is once again saddened and appalled at the way the media has totally misinterpreted and twisted the thing he said on Tuesday. This Wednesday, that thing happens to be the thing he said at a rally that sure sounded like he maybe was suggesting that "Second Amendment People" would have to assassinate Hillary Clinton to protect her from using the Supreme Court to overturn the Second Amendment. Which by the way, is not actually a thing the Supreme Court can do!
Shall we refresh?
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. Although the Second Amendment people maybe there is, I dunno. But I tell you what, that will be a horrible day. If, if Hillary gets to put her judges — right now we’re tied.
Naturally, the Clinton campaign and all THE MEDIA purposely wrongly interpreted this as Trump telling his people that if Clinton is elected and gets to appoint Supreme Court nominees, that Second Amendment people will have to resort to assassinating her. You know, because that is exactly what it sounds like he is doing. Clearly, anyone could tell that he was just suggesting that they would hold peaceful protests and candlelight vigils and sing "We Shall Overcome," and that the gun lobby would put pressure on the Supreme Court and politicians to make sure that this doesn't happen. Clearly, the only people who would act as if they didn't know exactly what Trump meant by that statement are liberal shills who are trying to rig the election for Hillary Clinton. Or something! It's so obvious what he meant!
Except, apparently, to former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who said "I don't know what he meant!" on CNN this morning.
— New Day (@NewDay) August 10, 2016
Shouldn't he, of all people, know exactly what Trump meant?
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan seemed to think he was telling some kind of joke ! "It sounds like a joke gone bad," he said. "You should never joke about that. I hope he clears it up quickly."
On MSNBC's Morning Joe , New York Representative Peter King, who has endorsed Trump, said that Trump should take back the statement, but also suggested that Trump probably had no idea about the words coming out of his own mouth, noting "I don't think he even fully appreciated what he was saying." He says he will continue to endorse Trump, and very much thinks that a person who "accidentally" calls for the assassination of their political rival has the temperament to be President of the United States.
Trump-whisperer Roger Stone seemed to be "on message," appearing on Newsmax's Newsmax Prime...
"They don’t want to talk about the IRS investigation into Hillary or the fact that we just learned that she armed ISIS and lied about it. Instead, we’re going to nitpick Trump and unfairly interpret his words. So the media claims that he advocated gun violence against his opponent when he said gun owners can affect the election, meaning their voting power. It’s a smear. It’s a mainstream media smear."
Which is understandable because he, too, has suggested that if Clinton is elected (in what will obviously be a rigged election), people will need to peacefully lobby their legislators in hopes of resolving the situation.
“He needs to say for example, today would be a perfect example: ‘I am leading in Florida. The polls all show it. If I lose Florida, we will know that there’s voter fraud. If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.’”
“If you can’t have an honest election, nothing else counts,” he continued. “I think he’s gotta put them on notice that their inauguration will be a rhetorical, and when I mean civil disobedience, not violence, but it will be a bloodbath. The government will be shut down if they attempt to steal this and swear Hillary in. No, we will not stand for it. We will not stand for it.”
Rudy Giuliani, for his part, suggested that he couldn't have possibly have meant what the LIEBERAL media said he meant, because if he had said that, the crowd would have gone wild because they all love the idea of assassinating Hillary Clinton so much.
“You know how speeches go. He was talking about how they [gun rights advocates] have the power to keep her out of office. That’s what he was talking about,” he added. “With a crowd like that, if that’s what they thought he’d meant, they’d have gone wild.”
Although the thing is... uh, some Trump supporters certainly did interpret it that way, and see nothing wrong with it because they believe in all that "the purpose of the Second Amendment is so people can defend themselves against the government" thing. Which is, of course, why assassination is legal, George Washington was totes cool with the Whiskey Rebellion, and Abraham Lincoln let the South secede that one time.
We have been repeating this cycle for weeks now. Donald Trump, a straight shooter who tells it like it is, says a thing that sounds pretty terrible, and then THE MEDIA reports on it, and then he goes "I didn't mean it that way! The media is out to get me!" Either he is doing this on purpose and is completely aware of how his remarks come across, or he is incredibly, incredibly stupid. Because how dense would you have to be to say something that could be "interpreted" that way in the first place? Also, maybe he should send out some kind of memo or something telling his people what the party line on the weird thing he's gonna say is, so they can actually do a good job of pretending they all totally understand exactly what he meant and that the media is totally just misinterpreting everything? I mean, if that is the angle he's gonna play, there are certainly better ways to play it.