So why is this a betrayal of Trump?

Seems Kyle could use some advisors...Or maybe he's got 'bad ones' too!



https://x.com/ThisIsKyleR/status/1819240397958160566

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

Not sure who is this "we all", because I sure am not part of it. I find his in-your-face bare knuckle no-holds-barred telling the truth like it is in the politics world quite refreshing. For far too long, the Uniparty swamp creatures have given us smoke and mirror with their sophisticated lies, cheats, steals and even murders. I'll take "unsophisticated" any days.

You're not wrong, and if Trump weren't the bare knuckle street fighter he is, then he wouldn't have been effective in his first term.

A good example of what I was talking about was his comments about bleach. As is typical, one must listen to the entirety of what he said, and in an even larger context. What he was shown saying by the traitorous media was an isolated clumsy sentence or two which implied using bleach sprayed inside the lungs.

The entire conversation was something very different. He was summarizing what the top science advisor had briefed, which was that preliminary investigation showed vulnerabilities that might guide treatment strategies. He also specifically said it was up to the doctors and scientists to continue investigating.

The context was 1) he was reassuring the citizens not to panic because scientists were hard at work and making progress, and 2) he was being sandbagged by his advisors and CDC/Fauci but didn't know it yet.

I don't fault Trump. He doesn't operate in politically cautious sound bites. But it is something the media exploits.

The stupid kid is completely ignorant of the fact that his write in vote favors the anti-gun side rather than fighting it. Moron. I loathe voters like this; when a true Us vs. Them situation arises, he chooses to essentially sit it out. It is a crystal clear choice between two, and the idiot has no clue to what exactly is at stake.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
The stupid kid is completely ignorant of the fact that his write in vote favors the anti-gun side rather than fighting it. Moron. I loathe voters like this; when a true Us vs. Them situation arises, he chooses to essentially sit it out. It is a crystal clear choice between two, and the idiot has no clue to what exactly is the at stake.

Agree. Like voting for a third party candidate. Thought he was smarter than that.

quote:

Originally posted by cruiser68:
Thought he was smarter than that.

Rittenhouse has never been a rocket surgeon. He's a naive immature kid. One would think that after his ordeal he'd have gained some wisdom, yet he remains a naive immature kid. To be honest, he's always struck me as being a bit on the slow side.

Someone needs to straighten that kid out. I happen to like Ron Paul, but he's never going to be President. Why not just write yourself in, its just as worthless. Not voting for Trump is essentially voting for the opposition. This kind of thinking drives me nuts.

I think if I was Rittenhouse, I would be keeping a lower profile. Ron Paul? Aint gonna happen.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
Seems Kyle could use some advisors...Or maybe he's got 'bad ones' too!

Whoever advised him to not just simply keep his mouth shut definitely gave him bad advice.

After all that kid has been through you'd think he'd keep a low-profile. I guess his Millennial traits are coming out

When we’re discussing what happens in the world, a friend sometimes reminds me of advice he received long ago shortly after going on active Army duty:
“Don’t do stupid things, in stupid places, around stupid people.”

Rittenhouse did all those things and was fortunate to have been tried in a location where the principles of self-defense were still understood. In any of countless other places the results would not have been favorable to him. And no, it’s not blaming the victim to point out that doing stupid things in stupid places around stupid people often leads to undesirable results.

And just because he was fortunate while using a gun doesn’t mean that he should have been adopted as the poster child (literally) for the rights of gun owners, and it especially does not mean that gun owners—or anyone else—owe him any more attention, much less respect, than we would give to a random stranger on the street who was espousing his own peculiar opinions.

Regardless of what their issue is, “single issue” voters are simply ignorant.

The way our system is set up, it is going to be one of the two major party candidates who is elected President. While unfortunate, it is a “lessor of two evils” situation. Other than your primary issue/concern/focus, which of the two are in line with where you would like the country to go?

You can stand on your “ideals” all day long and in most instances that is a sign of integrity and moral fortitude. In other matters, such as elections, you can maintain your ideals and integrity while voting for a candidate who may not share ALL of your beliefs.

The “third party”, “write in”, or just not vote at all response is the equivalent of “I’m taking my ball and going home” juvenile tantrum. I say this as someone who voted for Ross Perot.


Kid still has some growing up to do…

Rittenhouse seems to have apparently put his own thought into his choice and came to his own determination. I'm not going to hate on him for it. Hell most guys I know put ten times the research into which running back or wide receiver they are going to pick for their third round fantasy NFL draft then they do on who they are going to vote for. If they vote at all.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
The stupid kid is completely ignorant of the fact that his write in vote favors the anti-gun side rather than fighting it.

If you're not with us, your against us.
He's helping Kackling Kamala's Kunty Kringe Krisis

quote:

Originally posted by lastmanstanding:
Rittenhouse seems to have apparently put his own thought into his choice and came to his own determination. I'm not going to hate on him for it. Hell most guys I know put ten times the research into which running back or wide receiver they are going to pick for their third round fantasy NFL draft then they do on who they are going to vote for. If they vote at all.

Well, I came to the exact opposite conclusion. It seems to me that he is being influenced by some very anti-Trump characters.

Having said that, he obviously can vote for whoever he wants. But he ought to keep his idiotic reasons for doing so to himself.

It would appear that Ron Paul isn't even running for President either!

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
It seems to me that he is being influenced by some very anti-Trump characters.

Trump supported Rittenhouse during his trial, and also had him over to Mar A Lago after Rittenhouse asked to see him.




I agree that he probably met some gun dudes who are extremely 2A to the point of it being a single issue, no other issues matter. So the bumpstock ban was reason enough to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I have seen CA 2A advocates endorse Jerry Brown for governor because they felt he was pro 2A compared to his opponent Meg Whitman, never mind illegal aliens, taxes, crime, etc. . And look what the hell it got them. Idiots.

Haha.

Well, I say good.

https://x.com/TheCalvinCooli1/.../1819463194110525846



https://x.com/ThisIsKyleR/status/1819459882510069816



Over the past 12 hours, I've had a series of productive conversations with members of the Trump's team and I am confident he will be the strong ally gun owners need to defend our Second Amendment rights.

My comments made last night were ill-informed and unproductive. I'm 100% behind Donald Trump and encourage every gun owner to join me in helping send him back to the White House.

quote:

Originally posted by lastmanstanding:
...hate on...

Say what?

In this forum, we avoid grammatical train wrecks such as that expression.

Anyhoo...

So much for "standing by your principles" eh, son? Who's gonna break it to Ron Paul, the non-candidate for whom you were going to waste your vote?

https://x.com/ThisIsKyleR/status/1819459882510069816

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...734408&lctg=26773771

There are some inserts that I assume wouldn't copy/paste correctly within this article.

A Whistleblower Has Come Forward and Now We Have Even More Questions for Acting USSS Director Rowe

It looks like Acting Director for the United States Secret Service Ronald Rowe will be facing more questions about his alleged role in denying additional resources to protect former President Donald Trump. RealClearPolitics’ Susan Crabtree has been documenting the assassination attempt on the former president on July 13 in Butler, Pennsylvania. It’s led to intense scrutiny of the agency, including two tense testimonies before Congress, one of which led to the resignation of Kimberly Cheatle, the former director.

Rowe was asked about the assassination attempt this week before a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees. He was also questioned about whether he was involved in denying more resources to Trump’s detail, which he vociferously denied. Now, we have a whistleblower alleging that Rowe was directly involved in cutting off those resources:

"Just days after Secret Service Acting Director Ronald Rowe denied playing a direct role in rejecting repeated requests for added security measures and assets for former President Trump, whistleblowers have come forward refuting those claims and blaming Rowe for some of the agency’s security failures that led to the July 13 assassination attempt that nearly killed Trump and left rallygoer Corey Comperatore dead and two others wounded.

Other whistleblowers are coming forward citing more systemic problems with the Secret Service, the vaunted agency whose primary job is to protect presidents, vice presidents and former presidents and their families.

Those deep-seated long-term problems include nepotism and other non-merit-based favoritism, lowering standards and cutting corners in hiring – including failure to pass polygraph tests and accepting past hard drug use, retaliation for voicing security and other concerns, as well as uneven disciplinary action.

Hawley said he had received detailed information that Rowe personally directed “significant cuts” to the Countersurveillance Division, a department that performs threat assessment evaluations of event sites before the events occur and did not perform its typical evaluation of the Butler site and was not present that day.

“This is significant because CSD’s duties include evaluating potential security threats outside the security perimeter,” Hawley wrote, adding that a CSD’s threat assessment likely would have provided more measures to protect the rooftop of the American Glass Research building where shooter Thomas Crooks perched and opened fire on Trump and the crowd.

“The whistleblower claims that if personnel from the CSD had been present at the rally, the gunman would have been handcuffed in the parking lot after being spotted with a rangefinder,” Hawley continued. “You acknowledged in your Senate testimony that the American Glass Research complex should have been included in the security perimeter for the Butler event.”

The unnamed whistleblower further alleged that Rowe personally directed significant cuts to the CSD, including reducing the division’s manpower by 20%, Hawley asserted. “You did not mention this in your Senate testimony when asked directly to explain manpower reductions.”

The Secret Service had denied that no requests were rejected, though they were later forced to admit that more resources were denied to Mr. Trump. It comes as lawmakers wonder how the rooftop where Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, the shooter, perched could be left unprotected. A new video shows Crooks running on said rooftop moments before he opened fire on Mr. Trump.

We know that Crooks was ahead of the Secret Service during this attack. He had caught the eye of counter-sniper teams and local SWAT units, but there was a total failure in communications. Trump missed a fatal headshot by millimeters.