Trump calls out Clinton over armed protection by Secret Service

[HAPPY2BME]

http://amestrib.com/news/trump-calls-out-clinton-over-armed-protection-secret-service

Posted May 21, 2016 - 11:39pm
By Lindsey Bever
Washington Post

WASHINGTON — A day after Donald Trump told people at the National Rifle Association that Hillary Clinton would strip away their right to bear arms, the Republican seemed to suggest on social media that his opponent, who he thinks totes a hard line on gun control, should disarm her Secret Service team.

“Crooked Hillary wants to get rid of all guns and yet she is surrounded by bodyguards who are fully armed,” Trump tweeted Saturday morning. “No more guns to protect Hillary!

”Asked what Trump meant by his statement on social media, campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks said, “the tweets speak for themselves.

”While accepting an NRA endorsement Friday at the group’s annual convention, Trump turned his attention to Clinton’s stance on guns, claiming that the Democratic front-runner wants to “abolish the Second Amendment.

”Trump’s assertion that Clinton should not permit her Secret Service agents to carry guns was also brought up at Friday’s NRA convention.“Heartless hypocrites like the Clintons,” Trump said, “want to get rid of guns, and yet they have bodyguards that have guns.

”He added that their bodyguards should “immediately disarm” and “let’s see how good they do. Let’s see how they feel walking around without their guns and their bodyguards. In the meantime, nobody else can have the guns.

”A representative for Clinton could not immediately be reached for comment.

[montanajoe]

Going to be walking this back....

[BuckeyeTexan]

Taunting Hillary to disarm her bodyguards is ignorant. By law, the Secret Service is authorized and instructed to protect her for life because she's the spouse of a former POTUS. They are likewise authorized and instructed to protect her because she is "a major presidential candidate."

Sure, she can decline Secret Service protection, but is that really what Trump intends to suggest? Or does he intend to suggest that Secret Service agents shouldn't carry weapons?

Ignorant all the way around.

[Paladin]

Taunting Hillary to disarm her bodyguards is ignorant. By law, the Secret Service is authorized and instructed to protect her for life because she's the spouse of a former POTUS. They are likewise authorized and instructed to protect her because she is "a major presidential candidate."

Sure, she can decline Secret Service protection, but is that really what Trump intends to suggest? Or does he intend to suggest that Secret Service agents shouldn't carry weapons?

Ignorant all the way around.

If you think that is what he meant, you have absolutely no idea what Trump was actually saying.

[BuckeyeTexan]

If you think that is what he meant, you have absolutely no idea what Trump was actually saying.

That's the point. I don't know what he's saying. Her bodyguards are Secret Service agents.  They're not hired guns. What is the point of taunting her about SS protection?

[Norm Lenhart]

That's the point. I don't know what he's saying. Her bodyguards are Secret Service agents.  They're not hired guns. What is the point of taunting her about SS protection?

Well we know by his own words that he thinks assault rifles are bad so perhaps his detail will not be armed with them. I mean he's certainly a man of his word. So I am told. If he really believes that, then it's incumbent on him to follow through concerning himself. Because if he does not, then he believes in two classes of people. And clearly that's not constitutional.

Of course things like that are a problem for his supporters with Trump vs. Hillary, both having anti gun records until lately. I wonder what changed in his life recently. Oh thats right. He's running for office.

[RedHead]

Ignorant all the way around.

But very Trump?  So when he says he wants to do away with gun-free zones will he do it for the White House and the Capitol?

[RedHead]

If you think that is what he meant, you have absolutely no idea what Trump was actually saying.

I don't know if Trump knows what he is actually saying.

[Mechanicos]

Taunting Hillary to disarm her bodyguards is ignorant. By law, the Secret Service is authorized and instructed to protect her for life because she's the spouse of a former POTUS. They are likewise authorized and instructed to protect her because she is "a major presidential candidate."

Sure, she can decline Secret Service protection, but is that really what Trump intends to suggest? Or does he intend to suggest that Secret Service agents shouldn't carry weapons?

Ignorant all the way around.

Its called pointing out the Hypocrisy. Like all Gun grabbers they are not about banning all guns, just the ones in the hands of the little people. She has guns to defend her but wants to take away ours for defending ourselves. Its a glaring hypocrisy. "Guns for me but not thee...."

[RedHead]

Its called pointing out the Hypocrisy. Like all Gun grabbers they are not about banning all guns, just the ones in the hands of the little people. She has guns to defend her but wants to take away ours for defending ourselves. Its a glaring hypocrisy. "Guns for me but not thee...."

And when Trump says that day one the first thing to go is gun-free zones in schools then shouldn't he set an example by removing the gun-free zone in the White House and the Capitol?   Not to mention the gun-free zones at many of his hotels and resorts?  Or is "Guns for thee but not for me..." not quite as glaring a hypocrisy?

[Mechanicos]

And when Trump says that day one the first thing to go is gun-free zones in schools then shouldn't he set an example by removing the gun-free zone in the White House and the Capitol?   Not to mention the gun-free zones at many of his hotels and resorts?  Or is "Guns for thee but not for me..." not quite as glaring a hypocrisy?

Pointing out in public that you cannot tell the difference between a gun free zone where only Homicidal Hillary supporters can have guns and not letting minors have guns in school looks bad for you.
Oh and do you know what the Security measures are there at his hotels. Are there armed guards who protect the clients?

[RedHead]

Pointing out in public that you cannot tell the difference between a gun free zone where only Homicidal Hillary supporters can have guns and not letting minors have guns in school looks bad for you.

Yes letting 10 year olds pack heat in class doesn't look bad for Trump at all, does it?

Oh and do you know what the Security measures are there at his hotels. Are there armed guards who protect the clients?

You mean Trump doesn't trust his clientele to be law-abiding individuals who can be trusted to carry safely and responsibly?  That he needs to hire armed guards to protect the place if he removes the gun-free zone rules?  What kind of people does he cater to?

[Mechanicos]

Yes letting 10 year olds pack heat in class doesn't look bad for Trump at all, does it?


You mean Trump doesn't trust his clientele to be law-abiding individuals who can be trusted to carry safely and responsibly?  That he needs to hire armed guards to protect the place if he removes the gun-free zone rules?  What kind of people does he cater to?

You really have the bug bad because 1. Private business have the legal right to do so and 2. Only you made up its because he does not trust people. There are government buildings and political rallies you go to that are the same way Hypocrite. Nothing here - just want to attack Trump and argue.

[RedHead]

You really have the bug bad because 1. Private business have the legal right to do so...

They do, as do school districts.  But Trump wants to take the right away from schools and yet keep that right for his own properties.  Why is it good for one but not for the other?  Why is that not hypocrisy in it's rankest form?

...and 2. Only you made up its because he does not trust people.

What other reason can he have for keeping his businesses gun-free if not that he doesn't trust people who go there?

There are government buildings and political rallies you go to that are the same way Hypocrite. Nothing here - just want to attack Trump and argue.

And why shouldn't President Trump order a complete and total ban on gun-free zones nationwide?

[verga]

But very Trump?  So when he says he wants to do away with gun-free zones will he do it for the White House and the Capitol?

There was just an article saying that several of his resorts are gun free zones.

[verga]

Pointing out in public that you cannot tell the difference between a gun free zone where only Homicidal Hillary supporters can have guns and not letting minors have guns in school looks bad for you.
Oh and do you know what the Security measures are there at his hotels. Are there armed guards who protect the clients?

Because when seconds count the security guards are only minutes away.

[sinkspur]

More Trump BS.  Just like yesterday, Trump says nobody should be allowed into schools with guns, but maybe teachers should have guns because "what's happening in schools is unbelievable."

Then he said it, AGAIN, that there shouldn't be guns in schools except that teachers should have them.

Nothing he says makes any sense. 

[Mechanicos]

They do, as do school districts.  But Trump wants to take the right away from schools and yet keep that right for his own properties. Why is it good for one but not for the other?  Why is that no hypocrisy in it's rankest form?
This is a lie,.

What other reason can he have for keeping his businesses gun-free if not that he doesn't trust people who go there?
Many, Liability, security for high value clients, Odds are he has armed security personal that provide security considering who some of his clientele are. Last thing one would want is to have a high ranking official assassinated on a golf course under his control.

And why shouldn't President Trump order a complete and total ban on gun-free zones nationwide.
Same reason Obama cannot order a complete and total ban on guns nationwide. The US Constitution limits the powers of the President.

[RedHead]

This is a lie,.

How so?  It's exactly what he said to the NRA.

Many, Liability, security for high value clients...

And that doesn't apply to school zones?

Odds are he has armed security personal that provide security considering who some of his clientele are. Last thing one would want is to have a high ranking official assassinated on a golf course under his control.

Now who is making it up as they go along?

[Mechanicos]

How so?  It's exactly what he said to the NRA.<p>

And that doesn't apply to school zones?


Now who is making it up as they go along?
Because Schools are government not private, are charged with In loco parentis and require forced attendance. They do not have the right.

[Paladin]

Truly astonishing how the anti-Trumpsters were able to bend, distort, pervert, and mangle a story of Trump pointing out the hypocrisy of Hillary when it comes to guns into yet another attack on Trump himself. These guys definitely show an unsophisticated type of cleverness but, sadly, instead reveal themselves as remarkably misguided zealots.

Also note once again with these people. Hillary is not the enemy, Trump is. This would certainly seem strange unless, of course, it is anything but strange.

[HAPPY2BME]

Truly astonishing how the anti-Trumpsters were able to bend, distort, pervert, and mangle a story of Trump pointing out the hypocrisy of Hillary when it comes to guns into yet another attack on Trump himself. These guys definitely show an unsophisticated type of cleverness but, sadly, instead reveal themselves as remarkably misguided zealots.

Also note once again with these people. Hillary is not the enemy, Trump is. This would certainly seem strange unless, of course, it is anything but strange.

===================

Nothing strange about it.

These clucks are political operatives working for the Democrat Party.

op·er·a·tive

  :  a person who does work for a government or political organization

[Mechanicos]

===================

Nothing strange about it.

These clucks are political operatives working for the Democrat Party.

op·er·a·tive

  :  a person who does work for a government or political organization

 :thumbsup3:

[Paladin]

===================

Nothing strange about it.

These clucks are political operatives working for the Democrat Party.

My point exactly and long suspected.

[R4 TrumPence]

My point exactly and long suspected.

Whether they are or aren't, it doesn't matter.
What matters are the visitors reading the forum think it!!