Summary

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes announced her office is examining whether Donald Trump’s recent remarks about former GOP Rep. Liz Cheney, made during an event with Tucker Carlson, could qualify as a death threat under Arizona law. Trump suggested that Cheney might reconsider her “war hawk” stance if guns were “trained on her face," prompting Mayes to instruct her criminal division to investigate.

Vice President Kamala Harris condemned Trump’s rhetoric, calling it “disqualifying” and warning of his “increasingly unstable and unhinged” behavior.

73 points

"It’s easy for her to talk, sitting far from where the death scenes take place, but put a gun in her hand, and let her go fight, and she’ll say, ‘No thanks!’” This from a guy who discusses deploying troops in America against Americans, yet dodged the Vietnam draft with fake medical issues.

permalink
report
reply
16 points

I’m too exhausted with this asshole to make a joke about bone spurs.

Can Netflix or whoever cancel America already? It’s getting too fucking repetitive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

I’m pretty sure that, if he were to do such a thing, Kamala Harris would be just one of many people fighting back. And, yeah, with a gun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points
*

The actual transcript:

But [Dick Cheney’s] daughter is a very dumb individual, very dumb. She’s a radical war hawk. Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her. OK, let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face, you know, they’re all war hawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, oh, gee. Well, let’s send, let’s send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy, but she’s a stupid person. And I used to have, I have meetings with a lot of people, and she always wanted to go to war with people.

I’m no fan of Trump but this is unambiguously not a threat. The clear meaning is that she would would change her mind if she was one of the soldiers who would be fighting a war that she supports, not that Trump would threaten her with a gun until she changed her mind.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Just look at that word salad. I bet getting dressed is a real struggle for him

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Yeah, how can you even tell whether or not he made a threat? Does he even know?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Its sure as hell is a stupid threatening way to put it.

He could have said something far more professional like, I don’t know:

“She constantly wants to go to war but she doesn’t understand what that is really like. Put her in the boots of a soldier and see how she holds up and maybe she would have some empathy.”

Fuck Trump, he can’t even speak like an adult or form a proper statement. There are so many ways this could have been executed in a professional manner. It is a threat regardless of you and the 25+ upvotes. The projection here is this is how a from of punishment for this kind of thing is seen in his world view.

By the way, he also knows jack shit about being in a war or being a soldier. Why don’t we also put him in a military uniform and put him on the frontlines. This is fucking Trump just being fucking Trump.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

He could have said something far more professional

He’s Donald Trump. No he couldn’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Thank fucking Christ he’s old and will be dead soon. That’s all I’m holding onto right now.

permalink
report
reply
34 points

Yes, but this election will determine whether he dies while on the White house toilet or a prison toilet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Did you imagine what could be the country with JD Vance as president if Trump die of old (or fat) age?

I find this even more disturbing than Trump being president.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

That is precisely the plan. Vance is a comparatively stable predictable tool. No way he can win re-election on his own, but that won’t be necessary after he has a year or two in the white house.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Liz Cheney had an insanely high percentage of voting with Trump on legislation. Like 95%+. Way way higher than Elise Stefanik, who took her place in house leadership, because Stefanik was loyal on election denial.

It is insane that anyone is fighting over Cheney vs Trump. None of them are good for America.

permalink
report
reply
3 points
*

But there are conservative-leaning never trumpers who have an ounce of moral standards that doesn’t let them vote for Trump who is unquestionably worse than Liz Cheney in every way (namely, she didn’t try to overthrow democracy on January 6th and continue to peddle the Big Lie).

It is these voters Liz Cheney seeks for Harris and it’s clearly scaring the fuck out of Trump lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Merrick Garland: “Wait, they can do that?”

permalink
report
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 521K

    Comments