RFK Jr assassination attempt

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by bambino

Kinda of shoots down Mr Ninja and WD’s take. Taking the Kennedy’s past history with assassinations, Joey Bribes should have extended the courtesy. After all, they’re both Democrats. Or are they?

It does indeed. Of course Ninja hasn't been correct under this handle or his other one on much of anything since he started posting here so not surprised he was wrong on this one as well

Originally Posted by bambino

Yeah, Mr Ninja said it was “widely” reported..

He also said it happened a month ago when it literally happened 2 days ago

So he was wrong THREE times in this thread alone

[DNinja69]

Originally Posted by berryberry

It does indeed. Of course Ninja hasn't been correct under this handle or his other one on much of anything since he started posting here so not surprised he was wrong on this one as well



He also said it happened a month ago when it literally happened 2 days ago

So he was wrong THREE times in this thread alone

I clarified the month ago in another comment. Still no word on any other candidate that fits any real comparison to RFK Jr who actually got SS protection when requested? Nope. Because it didn't happen. He does not qualify.

Berry this is the second time you have accused me of either having 2 accounts or something similar and much as I appreciate Liberty especially with regard to speech and expression you need to check that bullshit asap. You can break all the rules you wish here that don't include me directly.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by DNinja69

I clarified the month ago in another comment. Still no word on any other candidate that fits any real comparison to RFK Jr who actually got SS protection when requested? Nope. Because it didn't happen. He does not qualify.

Berry this is the second time you have accused me of either having 2 accounts or something similar and much as I appreciate Liberty especially with regard to speech and expression you need to check that bullshit asap. You can break all the rules you wish here that don't include me directly.

Is that a threat Mr Ninja? Calm down. Have a cookie and a Bud Light. You did blatantly lie about the assassination attempt happening a month ago and being “widely” reported. You were simply called out on it. I will say your posting style is suspiciously similar to Mr Ghristle. As is your choice of beer. Just sayin

[DNinja69]

Originally Posted by bambino

Is that a threat Mr Ninja? Calm down. Have a cookie and a Bud Light. You did blatantly lie about the assassination attempt happening a month ago and being “widely” reported. You were simply called out on it. I will say your posting style is suspiciously similar to Mr Ghristle. As is your choice of beer. Just sayin

Sorry you don't get any 'gotcha' moments I am human and mistakes happen. Unlike some orange ex-Presidents and current posters here I am happy to own it and clarify when needed. Spare me the faux outrage the story I was referencing from August was RFK Jr asking for SS protection because a Utah nutjob got shot after threatening Biden on social media. Neither issue was any kind of assassination attempt if truth is of value to you. He has asked many times and this 'but he had a gun' story again simply does not qualify anyone Kennedy or otherwise for million$ in taxpayer funded security. Daily Mail qualify as 'widely' or no? No idea how many readers they have but nearly 3 million TwiXXer followers tell me my comment was quite true. Still zero mention anywhere in here of a similar situation that resulted in SS protection being authorized. Anyone?

As for the other issue I was clear and to the point. If someone got their feelings hurt off my comment so be it. People who run for office invite slander and accusation it comes with the territory and unfortunately for RFK Jr he may be a target for more nefarious efforts so he should make sure and have a security support system in place. He knew the risks when he signed up. These are some of the reasons fundraising is so vital in a national campaign

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by DNinja69

I clarified the month ago in another comment. Still no word on any other candidate that fits any real comparison to RFK Jr who actually got SS protection when requested? Nope. Because it didn't happen. He does not qualify.

Berry this is the second time you have accused me of either having 2 accounts or something similar and much as I appreciate Liberty especially with regard to speech and expression you need to check that bullshit asap. You can break all the rules you wish here that don't include me directly.

You were wrong THREE times in this thread alone. Why are you afraid to admit it. Your words are there for all to see

I listed a number of candidates. Not my fault you dismissed some of them for no reason. Although funny that you ignored Obama getting SS protection nearly 2 years before the election when he was a junior Senator

As to the other point, I simply speak the truth and you know it. You are not fooling anyone. I can't help it that the truth hurts

[DNinja69]

Originally Posted by berryberry

You were wrong THREE times in this thread alone. Why are you afraid to admit it. Your words are there for all to see

I listed a number of candidates. Not my fault you dismissed some of them for no reason. Although funny that you ignored Obama getting SS protection nearly 2 years before the election when he was a junior Senator

As to the other point, I simply speak the truth and you know it. You are not fooling anyone. I can't help it that the truth hurts

I have been wrong before and it will happen again. As for truth that word coming from you is a joke. Happy to know my commentary is causing some form of thought process and to the OP here the question I asked was for apples><apples so let me give a short list as guide for anyone wanting to tackle the task.

1. Candidate seeking a seat currently spoken for by an incumbent President running for re-election.

2. Got protection 14 months from the election.

3. Has poll numbers near where RFK Jr's are which is around 10-12% vs nearly 80% for Biden


Obama got his approval earlier than anyone else in large part due to the crowds and attention he was getting. That does not apply to RFK Jr. Again what reason exists to break protocol here? Are you advocating that anyone who declares and requests should get taxpayer funded security? That sounds like a quite Liberal concept to me

[Big Daddy Joe]

Originally Posted by DNinja69

I have been wrong before and it will happen again. As for truth that word coming from you is a joke. Happy to know my commentary is causing some form of thought process and to the OP here the question I asked was for apples><apples so let me give a short list as guide for anyone wanting to tackle the task.

1. Candidate seeking a seat currently spoken for by an incumbent President running for re-election.

2. Got protection 14 months from the election.

3. Has poll numbers near where RFK Jr's are which is around 10-12% vs nearly 80% for Biden


Obama got his approval earlier than anyone else in large part due to the crowds and attention he was getting. That does not apply to RFK Jr. Again what reason exists to break protocol here? Are you advocating that anyone who declares and requests should get taxpayer funded security? That sounds like a quite Liberal concept to me

Well you already know they're all socialist would'nt surprise me if they turned out to be closet liberals too!

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by DNinja69

I have been wrong before and it will happen again. As for truth that word coming from you is a joke. Happy to know my commentary is causing some form of thought process and to the OP here the question I asked was for apples><apples so let me give a short list as guide for anyone wanting to tackle the task.

1. Candidate seeking a seat currently spoken for by an incumbent President running for re-election.

2. Got protection 14 months from the election.

3. Has poll numbers near where RFK Jr's are which is around 10-12% vs nearly 80% for Biden


Obama got his approval earlier than anyone else in large part due to the crowds and attention he was getting. That does not apply to RFK Jr. Again what reason exists to break protocol here? Are you advocating that anyone who declares and requests should get taxpayer funded security? That sounds like a quite Liberal concept to me

You continue to make excuses. How sad

1. Who (incumbent or no incumbent) a candidate is running against has ZERO impact on when SS protection is provided so your statement is meaningless

2. I already showed multiple candidates who got protection 12 to 24 months before the election

3. The criteria is an average of 5 percent in individual candidate preferences in the most recent national opinion polls . So once again you are wrong on the facts

Amazing how you can be wrong on everything.

It is almost like you want RFK Jr assassinated as he is a threat to Senile Biden. Why is that?

[DNinja69]

Originally Posted by berryberry

1. Who (incumbent or no incumbent) a candidate is running against has ZERO impact on when SS protection is provided so your statement is meaningless

2. I already showed multiple candidates who got protection 12 to 24 months before the election

3. The criteria is an average of 5 percent in individual candidate preferences in the most recent national opinion polls . So once again you are wrong on the facts

Amazing how you can be wrong on everything.

It is almost like you want RFK Jr assassinated as he is a threat to Senile Biden. Why is that?

1. It is quite relevant and really ends the discussion to be fair. Really any argument otherwise is either naive or purposefully ignorant. If for some reason Biden decided not to run and our current VP was abducted by aliens there are a dozen names or more ahead of RFK Jr on the list of replacements favorable to Democrats. Without a legit shot at winning the nomination there will be no chance of Secret Service protection.

2. Obama won the White House. Trump won the White House. Both of them got people out in force to show their support. Rock stars. They were approved for criteria Mr Kennedy does not meet. Watch any of his speeches? I have seen movies with more people in seats than that.

3. BS. There is no 5% threshold and the fact that millions of people know who RFK Jr is compared to candidates on the other side like Tim Scott or Asa Hutchinson doesn't qualify him either. Caitlyn Jenner has name recognition. So what...

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by DNinja69

1. It is quite relevant and really ends the discussion to be fair. Really any argument otherwise is either naive or purposefully ignorant. If for some reason Biden decided not to run and our current VP was abducted by aliens there are a dozen names or more ahead of RFK Jr on the list of replacements favorable to Democrats. Without a legit shot at winning the nomination there will be no chance of Secret Service protection.

2. Obama won the White House. Trump won the White House. Both of them got people out in force to show their support. Rock stars. They were approved for criteria Mr Kennedy does not meet. Watch any of his speeches? I have seen movies with more people in seats than that.

3. BS. There is no 5% threshold and the fact that millions of people know who RFK Jr is compared to candidates on the other side like Tim Scott or Asa Hutchinson doesn't qualify him either. Caitlyn Jenner has name recognition. So what...

There you go posting false information yet again.

#1 is irrelevant - nothing in the criteria that says if you run against an incumbent you don't count
#2 neither Obama nor Trump were favorites when they were afforded SS protection. Hell Obama was some two bit gay junior Senator
#3 there is indeed a 5% threshold - why do you lie?

Why do you post this utter BS? Either you are completely unaware of and devoid of the facts or you are purposely posting false information. Which is it?

[HDGristle]

Originally Posted by bambino

Is that a threat Mr Ninja? Calm down. Have a cookie and a Bud Light. You did blatantly lie about the assassination attempt happening a month ago and being “widely” reported. You were simply called out on it. I will say your posting style is suspiciously similar to Mr Ghristle. As is your choice of beer. Just sayin

I don't drink beer, Bam. And definitely not Ninja. Or Tanana. Or whoever else you or Berry think I am.

And RFK, Jr. is still a DINO with an almost zero percent chance of ever getting the Dem nom for president.

It's also been stated very clearly why he's not eligible for or entitled to SS protection.

[Big Daddy Joe]

Originally Posted by berryberry

You continue to make excuses. How sad

1. Who (incumbent or no incumbent) a candidate is running against has ZERO impact on when SS protection is provided so your statement is meaningless

2. I already showed multiple candidates who got protection 12 to 24 months before the election

3. The criteria is an average of 5 percent in individual candidate preferences in the most recent national opinion polls . So once again you are wrong on the facts

Amazing how you can be wrong on everything.

It is almost like you want RFK Jr assassinated as he is a threat to Senile Biden. Why is that?

Why does the right think that every every political nut that shows up is the second coming.
Who gives two shits if that wack job gets whacked!

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Joe

Why does the right think that every every political nut that shows up is the second coming.
Who gives two shits if that wack job gets whacked!

what a wonderful sentiment. just because you don't like RFK Jr politically you are ok with him being assassinated. that's the mark of a population in a 3rd world banana republic. the more people who think this way, the farther down that path we go.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

what a wonderful sentiment. just because you don't like RFK Jr politically you are ok with him being assassinated. that's the mark of a population in a 3rd world banana republic. the more people who think this way, the farther down that path we go.

Liberals are so tolerant, and intelligent.



BAHAHAHAHA

[himzert]

Wouldn't there actually have to be an attempt to call it an "assassination attempt"?