Summary
During a rally in Lititz, Pennsylvania, Donald Trump criticized the bulletproof glass surrounding him, joking that an assassin would need to “shoot through the fake news” to reach him, a remark aimed at the press positioned behind the glass.
He called the media “bloodsuckers” and mocked the glass’s size, referencing prior assassination attempts, including a July incident in Butler, Pennsylvania, where a bullet grazed him and an audience member was killed.
Trump added that his supporters serve as his “glass” for protection: “Glass here. There’s nothing over there. They’re my glass. See? Those people are my glass,” Trump said, pointing to the crowd.
I wish we lived in a world where his words mattered to more than ~51% of the population.
Although, it does give us a more clear picture of where the values of nearly half of Americans lie – those who call themselves Patriots aren’t dissimilar to those who called themselves Confederates.
Also… there’s a very compelling video suggesting that it wasn’t the bullet that caused his ear to bleed but a collision with the gun holster of a secret service agent when he crouched down for cover.
Edit: Found the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TOtnYboqxQ
patriotism means different things to everyone. the use of that word in political ads is just ludicrous for that reason. calling someone unpatriotic just means their alliegences are not yours. doesnt make them any less valid for the perspective held.
You’re right. There’s a cohort of people who’ve taken it upon themselves to redefine words and reality to make it seem like they’re the good guys when in fact they’re traitors.
Most of the people who will vote for Donald Trump don’t know the things he says. They don’t attend his rallies, they don’t watch or read news that will report on what he says. They read the Wall Street Journal opinion pages that talk about how terrible and stupid Kamala Harris is, rather than how stupid and terrible Donald Trump is.
When I talk to my family about things he has said they are shocked, and don’t really believe me. Or they shrug and say things like, “He’s just speaking tongue-in-cheek” or something like that. They don’t have any sense of the candidate because they don’t listen to him. They don’t like him, but they don’t fear him. They think he’s a bullshitter who will enable their side to do what they think is good, not realizing all the horrible racist and xenophobic baggage that comes along.
My mom said yesterday, “Vance will keep him in line.” I laughed and said the only reason Vance—a man who once called Trump “America’s Hitler”—has the job is that he (and the other finalists for the VP pick) agreed they would have done what Pence did not, and prevented the vote from being certified in 2020. She’s a smart (if uninformed) woman, and was very thoughtful after I said that. Seemed to agree.
They just don’t know. Our bubbles are constructed to make us never have to hear what we don’t want to hear. And that goes for all of us, we all need to be careful about avoiding confirmation bias.
he “jokes all the time” is how my sister puts it.
I’ve had a similar experience recently with my family (though I failed to convince them to think for themselves) and I fully agree with you.
One of my uncles said he’s voting to Trump to lower gas prices - I told him no American president has ever set gas prices. My aunt, who was on the fence (no pun intended), was concerned about migrants coming through the border - I told her about the bipartisan immigration bill that Trump managed to kill so Biden wouldn’t get a win. She was also concerned about female rights. Someone else argued that there were no wars during Trump’s term and that Harris would be soft on international politics - I informed them there were “no wars” (not true) because Trump let everyone do what they wanted and empowered our enemies.
It’s just really hard to understand how people can go about their lives not have a passing interest in politics or elections. Especially given that it’s basically everything in the world right now.
At the same time, these fucking election ads are just the worst. Every single one of them, including many of Harris’, are full of blatant lies and distortions of the facts. I watch some of them and say to myself - this is what’s going to decide the election, an ad full of lies.
I’m as skeptical that an actual bullet grazed his ear as the next guy (my money’s on shrapnel of some kind), but he clearly reacts and reaches up to his ear before the SS does their thing so it can’t be from the huddle
Found it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TOtnYboqxQ
This is typical conspiracy theory crap. The entire thing is based entirely on the idea that Doug Mills faked not one but three separate photographs: 1) the bullet mid-flight, 2) the photo with blood on his hand before he goes down, and 3) the one with blood on his face while he’s down.
I highly doubt Mills faked three photographs to conspire with a shooter so accurate he was able to precisely miss in order to facilitate this bizarre theory. The dude even puts the Mills’ photos in his video and basically does a “fake? I’m just asking questions. Do your own research.”
How this kind of crap gets and holds people’s attention is beyond me. But believe what you want, it doesn’t really matter one way or the other.
I’m just looking at the video of Trump crouching down and plausibly colliding with the holster. I don’t know how any of what you’re saying is relevant.
I’m coming for the previous belief that he was shot. However, the lack of clear injury and medical report do raise questions. It seems far more likely to me that he just smash his ear on the holster than a bullet hitting him. That’s just logical to me.
It’s relevant because the video literally shows the Doug Mills photograph capturing Trump’s blood-smeared hand immediately after he grabbed his ear, just before being tackled. So, your “logic” entails time travel, a vast conspiracy involving a NYT photographer, a hyper-accurate sniper, and fake-blood capsules—or all of the above—to explain it as the result of a holster alone.
Unless you’re inclined to believe the conspiracy theory promoted by the video—which appears to be the case, given that you’re attributing the injury to an unseen holster rather than the bullet (also photographed) or bullet-related shrapnel—it would be “just logical” to trust the direct photographic evidence over a random YouTube conspiracy theory.
This is precisely how disinformation spreads. And, like many who propagate it, you don’t even realize you’re doing it.
I really don’t know what you’re talking about. I’m talking about the video of the actual live event which clearly shows a holster on the belt of the agent and Trump crouching down next to it. That is all. It’s clear, in the actual video, that Trump does not have blood on his hand when he checks it before he crouches down.
I’m talking about the video you linked? And I’m talking about the NYT photographer that captured an image of Trump’s bloody palm after grabbing his ear seconds before the person with the holster gets there? Which is also shown in the video? That you linked? Look at you, denying reality to cling to your theory, even when it’s literally in the link you yourself provided.
There’s clear evidence that a bullet did go past his ear. He was likely reacting to the noise of it. I wish I could find the video I saw but basically, you have to find the clip of the wide angle view. It’s not 100% evident that this is what caused the blood but it’s extremely compelling and just makes all the sense in the world. I’ll keep looking.