zlacker

>>danso+(OP)
Objectively - how is this advocating for violence? I have not been following this deeply but it seems like there is already serious violence occurring where dozens of people have been charged with probable felonies and buildings have been set on fire? Isn't it the responsibility of the local government to protect private property? It certainly seems like the situation is out of hand when a police station is burned to the ground.

The National guard has been dispatched in similar situations e.g. Rodney King riots. Ostensibly the reason for the deployment is to "ensure peace"

I understand Trump walks a thin line, but in my opinion he is very skilled at never literally advocating for violence or overtly racist actions.

I absolutely do not condone excessive force against anyone, but I fail to understand how this specific tweet is glorifying violence. I'm just trying to understand

>>bgorma+mR1
The phrase Trump uses is a direct quote from a police chief who was explicitly giving the OK to his police officers to kill protesters.

Much as I hate the over-use of the term "dog whistle" this is the exact thing it means. It has plausible deniability, but to the intended audience it sends a clear message.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/05/29/when-the-l...