Trump praises assault on reporter

[oxmixmudd]

FIFY n/c

The simple fact is that Charles is right. It just doesn't matter that you like his posting style or his politics, and that does not give license to dismiss his point. This was not a trivial assault. The level of bodily injury did not meet the criteria for felony assault (thankfully for the reporter), but it was not a minor assault, and from the sound of it Gianforte could easily have done much more harm than he did. IOW, he got away with a misdemeanor through no restraint on his part.

To minimize the assault, and Trump's praise of it, is wrong. Just as wrong as looking the other way when Antifa incites violence at a rally.

Jim

[One Bad Pig]

What actions? You point to none...

There are generally two sides to debates here, Charles. You just so happen to be consistently on the side labeled "Democrat/liberal". However you protest otherwise, it's your general stance on issues that gets you lumped in with them. Further, your noted lack of nannying those on that side reinforces that impression.

Nope. Your line of reasoning seems to imply you think along those lines.

I nearly think you're deliberately trying to make me angry via absurdly false accusations, Charles. My lumping you with the Democrats in general has nothing whatsoever to do with this thread.

Why is it on topic? I never got an answer.

Since you're talking about an instance of politically-induced violence, and MM is bringing up similar instances....

You missed something very fundamental it seems. Trump's praise of the assult was not given in may 2017 but a few days ago. The actions back then were bad enough but the fact that Trump praises the assult and did so a few days ago obviously means that my OP is not from may 2017. I wonder how much attention you paid to any of this if you got that impression.

I did miss that. Thank you for finally making that clear. I don't hang on Trump's every word, and I hadn't seen any news stories on it.

[Charles]

There are generally two sides to debates here, Charles. You just so happen to be consistently on the side labeled "Democrat/liberal". However you protest otherwise, it's your general stance on issues that gets you lumped in with them. Further, your noted lack of nannying those on that side reinforces that impression.

Nope. I go for what I think is morally defensable. I don't care about your traditional boxes and I have never supported Hillary or Obama or whomever. You have a very simple view on this if you think it is all about political boxes.

I nearly think you're deliberately trying to make me angry via absurdly false accusations, Charles. My lumping you with the Democrats in general has nothing whatsoever to do with this thread.

The only false thing going on is that you try to put me in a box in which I don't belong and identify me with views I don't hold.

Since you're talking about an instance of politically-induced violence, and MM is bringing up similar instances....

I am opposed to politically-induced violence of all sorts and encouraged MM to start a post about what he found was more important instead of being of topic in this thread that he likes to claim is less important and yet spends a lot more time on (wonder why....). This thread is about the fact that Trump (who believe it or not is actually president) praises the assault on a reporter. When the president praises the assult he is certainly not making it easier to push for higher standards in general. [/QUOTE]

[Tassman]

As usual, the truth is likely in the middle: the reporter burst into a private office uninvited and aggressively shoved a recording device in Gianforte's face, and Gianforte overreacted by attempting to grab the recorder and in the process pushed the man to the floor.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/back...ry?id=48415766

At any rate, Trump making light of an isolated incident that happened a year ago versus continued aggression against Republicans and calls for violence from Democrats,

It's not an "isolated incident," this is the point. See above.

I can't help but think the latter is significantly worse.

Of course you do.

[Mountain Man]

Misdemeanor assault is what you get when you push somebody. If the media reports were true then he would have certainly been handed a felony. I'll let you figure out the rest for yourself.

Meanwhile, violence against Republicans continues to escalate with the approval and encouragement of Democrat party leaders

[oxmixmudd]

If that were accurate then Gianforte would have surely been convicted of felony assault. The fact that he wasn't, and that the reporter did not sustain serious injuries consistent with being choked and repeatly punched should make you question FOX News' description of events.

Why would a group of Fox News reporters have any motivation to lie about the actions of a Republican Senator from Montana? Does it not strike you as a step too far when you have to start maligning one of the few 'friends' in the media Trump has to justify the actions of Donald Trump?

And just to be clear what sort of assault is required to be Felony assault. Here is the definition from New York:

Source: the Blanch Law Firm

felony assault, the physical injury must be severe that creates a substantial risk of death, or actually causes death, long-term disfigurement, ill health, or loss or impairment of an organ.

© Copyright Original Source

So your assumption that the actions as described by the Fox news reporters would constitute felony assault is false. A few bruises or cuts from some punches apparently do NOT rise to that level.


Jim

[Mountain Man]

Why would a group of Fox News reporters have any motivation to lie about the actions of a Republican Senator from Montana?

I don't know, but it seems the story has at least been exaggerated. It reminds me of the Corey Lewindowski/Michelle Fields scuffle which was wildly overblown by the media. It's not usual to see reporters "support their own" even if they happen to be on opposite sides of the political divide.

Does it not strike you as a step too far when you have to start maligning one of the few 'friends' in the media Trump has to justify the actions of Donald Trump?

Not everybody who works for FOX is necessarily a friend of Trump.

And just to be clear what sort of assault is required to be Felony assault. Here is the definition from New York:

Source: the Blanch Law Firm

felony assault, the physical injury must be severe that creates a substantial risk of death, or actually causes death, long-term disfigurement, ill health, or loss or impairment of an organ.

© Copyright Original Source

It's not as cut and dry as that:

Source: Felony Assault in New York

Physical injury versus serious physical injuryhttps://www.criminaldefenselawyer.co...d-assault-laws

© Copyright Original Source

If the reports are true (choking, being body slammed, repeatedly punched, injuries serious enough to require a hospital visit) then it would have been a slam dunk for second degree felonious assault.

[Cow Poke]

Why is it that whenever you lead with something like this, we know we're about to get the Tassmerized version?

[oxmixmudd]

I don't know, but it seems the story has at least been exaggerated. It reminds me of the Corey Lewindowski/Michelle Fields scuffle which was wildly overblown by the media. It's not usual to see reporters "support their own" even if they happen to be on opposite sides of the political divide.


Not everybody who works for FOX is necessarily a friend of Trump.


It's not as cut and dry as that:

Source: Felony Assault in New York

Physical injury versus serious physical injuryhttps://www.criminaldefenselawyer.co...d-assault-laws

© Copyright Original Source

If the reports are true (choking, being body slammed, repeatedly punched, injuries serious enough to require a hospital visit) then it would have been a slam dunk for second degree felonious assault.

I'm sure there are many factors mm. The point was the assumption by the the assault would necessarily rise to the level of felony assault of the reporters description was accurate is false. And it was that assumption that drove your conclusion the reporters were not telling the truth. And it was the idea the reporters might be lying that justified belittling the attack. And if the attack was not all that severe, then you can claim the shock at Trump's comments is over the top.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-with-boulder/

But, no, let's all focus on Trump's literally harmless jest.

[Mountain Man]

I'm sure there are many factors mm. The point was the assumption by the the assault would necessarily rise to the level of felony assault of the reporters description was accurate is false. And it was that assumption that drove your conclusion the reporters were not telling the truth. And it was the idea the reporters might be lying that justified belittling the attack. And if the attack was not all that severe, then you can claim the shock at Trump's comments is over the top.

I never said the reporters were lying, I said that their report of the incident was likely exaggerated, since what they described -- the victim grabbed by neck, slammed to the floor, and then repeatedly punched -- would not have resulted in a slap on the wrist misdemeanor.

[oxmixmudd]

I never said the reporters were lying, I said that their report of the incident was likely exaggerated, since what they described -- the victim grabbed by neck, slammed to the floor, and then repeatedly punched -- would not have resulted in a slap on the wrist misdemeanor.

Well, we just saw exactly how it could indeed result in only a misdemeanor. So your willingness to minimize what happened is unjustified.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-with-boulder/

But, no, let's all focus on Trump's literally harmless jest.

That would be today. There is nothing good about it - I agree with you it is bad - but it is in the same spirit as what the President has done. In fact, it is the president's penchant for chaos and discord, amplified by his base, that is tending to fuel acts like this on both sides, and I don't quite follow why you don't see that fact. It is what happens when both sides 'hit back 10 times harder'. Escalation is inevitable.

But this thread concerns an action of the president two weeks ago in the same timeframe as it was becoming clear a Washington Post journalist was killed by political/financial 'friends' of POTUS and his family, the Saudi's. What the president did was not a harmless jest. It amplifies and brings to light a serious flaw in both judgement and empathy in the man leading this country and I believe it is worthy of discussion.



Jim

[Tassman]

But, no, let's all focus on Trump's literally harmless jest.

The problem is that it is not just a "literally harmless jest". Trump's "jest" in praising this action is consistent with his long history of comments demeaning the press as "the enemy of the people" and encouraging violence against it. It's a pattern. Freedom of the press is essential in a democracy; it enables public participation in making decisions based on the free flow of information and facts. Without it, people would be unable to make informed decisions.

[firstfloor]