SUV plows down Wisconsin Christmas parade as children watch in horror

Do you believe that Biden would have benefited from that kind of discretion instead of linking him to a militia and then talking about white supremacy?

 

Did Biden call him a white supremacist? When did that happen?

 

On two occasions Joe linked Kyle to Illinois militia, which he followed with berating white supremacy, so... playing fast and loose with his defamation.


Did Joe Biden Call Kyle Rittenhouse a 'White Supremacist'? | Snopes.com

 

From your article:

What's False

Biden did not explicitly describe Rittenhouse as a white supremacist.

 

Yeah he just associated him with militia and then immediately berated white supremacy. And you're okay with that? Even the left-leaning Snopes admitted Joe was associating Kyle with white supremacy.

 

Yes, I'm just as okay with this as I am with the references to this guy's past racist statements. I don't know how to make this any more digestible. Let met try.

Pointing out history okay.

History not necessarily criminal motivation.

I'm pretty sure even my youngest niece could understand those basic concepts. Where are you getting lost?

 

Ah but you see, he didn't use the exact magical word...

 

See previous post. Let me know where you get lost.

 

Guilty by association? Does Biden actually believe militias are white supremacists?

The term “guilt by association” refers to the idea that an individual is guilty of a crime simply because of his association with the person who actually committed it. The guilt by association meaning exists, not because of proof, but more because of an individual’s assumption.

 

I'm getting lost where you're "just as okay" with the President of the US falsely defaming a 17 year old. The Prez should issue a public apology.

 

Until you can quote Biden actually claiming that Rittenhouse's actions were a racially-motivated crime, you don't have a comparison to this discussion.

 

Until you can quote Biden actually claiming that Rittenhouse's actions were a racially-motivated crime, you don't have a comparison to this discussion.

Rittenhouse WAS associating with white nationalists. It is okay to recognize facts. POTUS does not owe anyone an apology for recognizing facts.

 

That magic word theory again...

 

We are having a conversation about accusations. Yes, when it comes to accusations, words matter. That's what accusations are made of. Welcome to Language Arts 101.

 

I dont have to explicitly call you a white supremacist if I bash white supremacy and violence while showing a picture of you holding a gun.

its implied.

This type of intellectual dishonesty from the left is exactly what I am talking about when I say you ultimately support brandon and dems in general in their labeling of KR, and repubs in general as white supremacists without evidence.

Dems say they dont, but the writing is on the wall. They most certainly do.

 

Yeah he just nationally defamed him by making him out to be a white supremacist. And you won't even acknowledge just how despicable that truly is.

 

Like I said above.

He would rather deny it than accept the reality. This is what dems do, they will latch on to the tiniest technicality to avoid having to acknowledge the faults of their own party.

 

The only thing I saw was them saying he had been associating with white nationalists . . . which he had. I have no problem with stating facts. It is no different than pointing out that the criminal in the topic had made racist statements in the past. Same thing.

Something tells me you didn't give 2 shits about all of the ways in which Trump publicly defamed people.

 

He directly associated him with white supremacy.

He doesn't have any associates who are white nationalists.

Its a lie, and you know it.

 

You mean pedantry not art.

 

Words mean things. That's what they are for. How have you made it this far in life without learning that.

 

By understanding that language is fluid and not set in stone like you do. Unless you're a bot, nobody thinks or express themselves in such strict manner.

 

Words mean things. That's what they are are for. This was a discussion about he application of words, which you are desperate to avoid because you have no rational argument. But, let me guess, I should have expressed my argument in interpretive dance instead of words, right?

 

Words have synonyms. Humans are also known to express ideas indirectly or in allegorical ways. Only a machine would think like you do.

 

Only a machine would use words to express thoughts and ideas? Weird assumption. If you'd like to actually engage in the topic, I can help you out. My statement was that I don't like to assume that crimes are racially motivated without witness testimony that testifies that this is the case. What problem do you have with that?