There Are Good People On Both Sides

[variant]

At least you admit that he wasn't referring to neo-nazis and KKK members, as his other remarks make obvious. That at least establishes that the people who said that he did support such groups were lying, he made no such remarks.

If you want to say something like "The President said that there are good people who attend rallies that are also attended by neo-nazis and KKK members, but who are not of those groups themselves" you could at least defend that interpretation. But it lacks the rhetorical kick of the

lie that people have been using, so I doubt it will catch on.

I doubt any of these people are good.

It's pretty obvious when you've found yourself attending a hate rally and what that "side" was about.

It would also be very counter productive. Anyone who was there for the historical significance of Robert E. Lee in a non racist way was paving the way for associating those statues with the kind of bigotry that the hate rally saw them as supporting.

 

[Jenny_8675309]

At least you admit that he wasn't referring to neo-nazis and KKK members, as his other remarks make obvious. That at least establishes that the people who said that he did support such groups were lying, he made no such remarks.

If you want to say something like "The President said that there are good people who attend rallies that are also attended by neo-nazis and KKK members, but who are not of those groups themselves" you could at least defend that interpretation. But it lacks the rhetorical kick of the lie that people have been using, so I doubt it will catch on.

He said there were good people on both sides. What other side was there?

 

[MoonlessNight]

Assuming Trump was telling the truth. Which is a pretty big assumption.

Why even bother bringing up specific statements at all, if you're going to dismiss everything else he said to provide context as lies?

If you're assuming that he always lies, but that you can tell what he "really" meant, you don't even need a specific statement to work with. Just say that you assume that he supports nazis, since you know what he means and any statements to the contrary are lies, without bringing up any specific quote.

But if you are going to claim that a quote says something that it does not, you should at least have the decency to able to defend your assertion.

 

[Jenny_8675309]

Why even bother bringing up specific statements at all, if you're going to dismiss everything else he said to provide context as lies?

If you're assuming that he always lies, but that you can tell what he "really" meant, you don't even need a specific statement to work with. Just say that you assume that he supports nazis, since you know what he means and any statements to the contrary are lies, without bringing up any specific quote.

But if you are going to claim that a quote says something that it does not, you should at least have the decency to able to defend your assertion.

It's a direct quote "good people on both sides". There's only two sides involved, one of which was Nazis and white supremicists.

You explain how he can be refering to anyone BUT them?

It's not a matter of interpretation, it's a direct quote. And getting angry at people who point this out won't magically change it.

 

[mark kennedy]

Trump showed his colors, he isn't a neutral third party. That's his base and I am appalled. I don't like the counter protestors either, but weighed in the scales, the White Nationalist extremists have a history.

 

[MoonlessNight]

It's a direct quote "good people on both sides". There's only two sides involved, one of which was Nazis and white supremicists.

You explain how he can be refering to anyone BUT them?

It's not a matter of interpretation, it's a direct quote. And getting angry at people who point this out won't magically change it.

I've already demonstrated that the context makes clear that your interpretation that one side consisted entirely of nazis is not what the president meant. You dismissed the context without argument beyond claiming that it had to be lies.

And as I've noted repeatedly, if we remove context, there is nothing in the quote that mentions nazis or any similar groups.

Thus without context: the quote does not imply that the President supports nazis.

With context: the quote explicitly does not support nazis, since the President made clear that the two sides he was discussing were not nazis versus everyone else.

<Staff Edit>

 

[Always in His Presence]

The President suggested there were good people knowingly marching along side them..

No he didn't. He said there were good people there.

 

[MoonlessNight]

staff edit

How do you change the contents of your posts without having an "last edited" notification?

 

[Rion]

And you are wrong. Richard Spencer was there and he is the one who coined the new name 'New Right' for the alt-right.

He is in this photo taken Saturday.

Amongst Saturday’s headline speakers was Richard Spencer, who claims to have invented the term "alt-right," and has disseminated its white nationalist ideology via his National Policy Institute think-tank, as well as a network of websites and publishing ventures.
Charlottesville's alt-right leaders have a passion for Vladimir Putin

I was saying that the non- identitarian alt-right were not there.

 

[Rion]

1) The Tea Party is going nowhere. They have their ant-establishment candidate.
2) From what we can see, evangelicals will continue to say that they are not voting for the pastor in chief, and give their support to Trump.

It seems unlikely that neither group will desert Trump until at least after the mid-terms. After that the Tea Party might be looking for a new candidate, probably not.

The tea party hasn't been relevant in years. What are you talking about?

 

[variant]

No he didn't. He said there were good people there.

If they were there and on that side that's what they were doing.

 

[MoonlessNight]

1) The Tea Party is going nowhere. They have their ant-establishment candidate.
2) From what we can see, evangelicals will continue to say that they are not voting for the pastor in chief, and give their support to Trump.

It seems unlikely that neither group will desert Trump until at least after the mid-terms. After that the Tea Party might be looking for a new candidate, probably not.

The tea party has been dead for some time, and only really exists as a bogeyman used by people who are the mistaken belief that anyone cares about it any more.

Do you think that President Trump was the gamergate candidate too?

 

[Always in His Presence]

And the only people there were literal Nazi's the KKK, white nationalists, and people comfortable marching along side them

Along with dozens of reporters, photographers and armed counter protesters.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Please remember it was 1977

National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie

It was then that the neo Nazis were granted the right to do exactly what they did last weekend

It is also worth noting that the alt right were self identified as socialist.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

How do you change the contents of your posts without having an "last edited" notification?

You do it when the post is five minutes old or less

 

[GondwanaLand]

Please remember it was 1977

National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie

It was then that the neo Nazis were granted the right to do exactly what they did last weekend

It is also worth noting that the alt right were self identified as socialist.

Yes, and North Korea self identifies as Democratic.

 

[GondwanaLand]

Here's what the Jews of Charlottesville experienced as these "good people" Trump speaks of, went about their day of protest:
In Charlottesville, the Local Jewish Community Presses On

On Saturday morning, I stood outside our synagogue with the armed security guard we hired after the police department refused to provide us with an officer during morning services. (Even the police department’s limited promise of an observer near our building was not kept — and note, we did not ask for protection of our property, only our people as they worshipped).

Forty congregants were inside. Here’s what I witnessed during that time.

For half an hour, three men dressed in fatigues and armed with semi-automatic rifles stood across the street from the temple. Had they tried to enter, I don’t know what I could have done to stop them, but I couldn’t take my eyes off them, either. Perhaps the presence of our armed guard deterred them. Perhaps their presence was just a coincidence, and I’m paranoid. I don’t know.

Several times, parades of Nazis passed our building, shouting, “There's the synagogue!” followed by chants of “Seig Heil” and other anti-Semitic language. Some carried flags with swastikas and other Nazi symbols.

When services ended, my heart broke as I advised congregants that it would be safer to leave the temple through the back entrance rather than through the front, and to please go in groups.

This is 2017 in the United States of America.

Later that day, I arrived on the scene shortly after the car plowed into peaceful protesters. It was a horrific and bloody scene.

Soon, we learned that Nazi websites had posted a call to burn our synagogue. I sat with one of our rabbis and wondered whether we should go back to the temple to protect the building. What could I do if I were there? Fortunately, it was just talk – but we had already deemed such an attack within the realm of possibilities, taking the precautionary step of removing our Torahs, including a Holocaust scroll, from the premises.

Again: This is in America in 2017.

 

[variant]

Along with dozens of reporters, photographers and armed counter protesters.

Your meandering bewilderment is amazing as he was very specific about which "fine people" he was talking about and what the "sides" were.

Well the "sides" are composed of the protesters and counter protesters clearly from his remarks, so reporters, police, photographers wouldn't be on either, and the counter protesters would be the other side.

The "fine people" were those he specifically mentions were there too:

TRUMP: Those people — all of those people — excuse me. I’ve condemned neo-Nazis. I’ve condemned many different groups. But not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists, by any stretch. Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of a statue, Robert E. Lee.

He thinks, and is willing to say out loud that, these "fine people" were marching completely innocently and openly in a hate rally organized and packed with KKK, white supremacists and Natzi's.

 

[MoonlessNight]

You do it when the post is five minutes old or less

In this case, the post in question was several hours old. You can see exactly where it happened because I put in an edit on my post to note what had happened after his post was edited.

But that's all I'll say about that since it's both off topic and could lead to other unpleasantness for those of us without connections with the higher-ups.

 

[variant]

So, like passer-bys on the street? People who were shopping? Homeless people? People actually standing up to Nazis?

Perhaps he was referring to differn't sides of a street!