El Paso Shootings: Is Trump Welcome?

The current official total of people killed in the El Paso shootings is 22. The names and nationalities of the deceased are here.

Donald Trump is going to visit El Paso on Wednesday. Not everyone is pleased:

“I call our governor, I call on our senators to send a message to our president and ask him not to set foot in El Paso,” David Stout, a Democratic commissioner in the border city, told VICE News. “It would just put salt on this wound.” He represents Precinct 2, where Trump spoke in February — and where the massacre took place.

The last time Trump was in El Paso was for a campaign rally and VICE News says he stuck the city for a $470k bill.

Donald Trump first blamed video games and "mentally ill monsters" for the El Paso and Dayton shootings. Via The Intercept, here's a breakdown of similarities between the El Paso shooter's manifesto and Trumpspeak and Fox News comments.

Trump is the most divisive and undeserving person ever to occupy a seat in the White House. Enough is enough. Trump needs to go.

< Tuesday Night TV and Open Thread | Trump and Blago, Sitting in a Tree? >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Agree Trump needs to go. (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 05, 2019 at 09:39:35 PM EST
    But strongly support federally mandated background check prior to purchase of any firearm, federal prohibition of possession of assault weapons and large capacity ammo magazines.

    It was legal (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 09:10:55 AM EST
    After every non-response to a mass shooting, we always find out that the purchase of Mitch McConnell was in full compliance with existing laws.

    According to Dr. Paul Krugman, (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by KeysDan on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 09:36:13 AM EST
    (NYTimes, Why do Republicans Enable Right-wing extremism, August 6, 2018), El Paso would be welcoming Trump, "a man who has arguably done more to promote racial violence than any American since Nathan Bedford Forrest, who helped found the Ku Klux Klan, a terrorist organization if there ever was one--and who was recently honored by the Republican governor of Tennessee."

    The mentally ill thing (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 10:13:24 AM EST
    Is really starting to chafe me.  It's insulting to the mentally ill.  

    The Texas guy was not mentally ill.  Unless you consider being a Trumpster mentally ill.  Which I might consider

    The video game thing is just as stupid but different.  Gamers are not harmless or defenseless and the vote in increasing numbers.  I worked in that industry.  Trump has supporters there.  And every time he sings the video game tune he loses a million more.

    At keast half of women (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Towanda on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:28:51 PM EST
    or more (as more likely to seek medical help, per studies) are mentally ill.

    Yet almost all mass murderers are men.

    Why this is not pointed out in discussion by the punditry of the claims that mental illness is causal for mass murder, I dunno. Do the math, media.

    If there is a predictor, the most common one appears to be violence toward women. Perhaps uf our cukture and country finally took that seriously, more potential mass murders would be prevented . . . as well as more violence toward women.


    Somebody, (none / 0) (#11)
    by Zorba on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 10:23:47 AM EST
    I forget who, was also saying it was because there's no prayer in schools any more.

    That's strange.  I'm 71, we didn't have prayers in the schools I attended, and yet neither I nor any of my classmates became mass shooters.


    It was (none / 0) (#12)
    by Zorba on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 10:40:05 AM EST
    NRA Board member and former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell who blamed lack of prayer in school.

    Yes, no school prayer. (none / 0) (#13)
    by KeysDan on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 10:57:04 AM EST
    And, too, No Fear of the Lord, is another.  But, I am not clear if this applies to the murderers or the victims.

    They probably pray (none / 0) (#20)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 12:49:18 PM EST
    to an AR-15 at NRA board meetings the way they prayed to the bomb in Beneath The Planet of The Apes.

    Btw, just how often does Blackwell pray at home? I want a full report.


    Mental illness (none / 0) (#44)
    by smott on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 08:23:14 AM EST
    Is the new Economic Anxiety

    Just one thing (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 11:15:08 AM EST
    I am becoming very uncomfortable with the calls from some on the left for expanded definitions and prosecutorial options for "domestic terrorists"

    Perhaps it's having been personally seen as a domestic terrorist, or at the very least "sympathizer", back in the day I see a very slippery slope.

    Let me be as clear as I can

    Not saying these things are not needed or even justified.  But you want to hear a real nightmare scenario?

    The congress gets all busy and passes all these new laws allowing the speech and private lives of US citizens to be infiltrated and used against them....

    ....and Trump wins in 20.

    Unlike the GOP right, ... (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 03:13:01 PM EST
    ... the far-left wing of the Democratic Party does not presently constitute the majority of that party's base but rather, occupies its fringes.

    Thus, unlike their Republican counterparts, Democratic candidates who are in the mainstream of their party are generally not dependent upon such uncompromising and self-absorbed political elements to survive a Democratic primary.

    Democratic incumbents become vulnerable to a primary challenge not necessarily because of any failure on their part to adhere to political orthodoxy but rather, due to their tendency to forget where they came from.



    I (none / 0) (#30)
    by FlJoe on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 03:49:36 PM EST
    agree, just today the FBI got involved with the Dayton shooting, citing violent ideology from some vague "far left" entity.  I think they might use this to go after anti-fa or some such types as a diversion, if nothing else.

    I think laws that infringe on first amendment rights are particularly dangerous.



    Dubious legal measures advocated by progressives (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Peter G on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 07:56:38 PM EST
    to restrain their/our opponents' advocacy or other speech during any window when they/we have power to enact such provisions, will surely be used later against them/us, history teaches. Just as overbroad obscenity laws enacted to "protect women" were used to suppress birth control information, gay rights literature, breast health education, etc.

    Just like clockwork (1.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 09:13:19 AM EST
    The Dem house passes a mostly party line bill that would not have prevented either of these mass shootings.

    What clock are you using Abdul? (5.00 / 6) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 10:04:32 AM EST
    The Mayan clock maybe.

    If you are referring to the background check bill passed by the house, that was last February.  

    "Just like clock work". Yeah, in a way.  Democrats take control and gun legislation passes.  Just like that.

    Also, the congress is in recess.   Hard to do it just like that.


    Yeah (none / 0) (#16)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 12:22:09 PM EST
    The one they are currently demanding the senate return to vote on. That bill would not have stopped either shooting and placed a serious burden on lawful firearms owners.

    Again a mass shooting is being used as an excuse to try to pass irrelevant legislation.  


    We will not know (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 12:25:01 PM EST
    How irrelevant until it's passed.

    Do it.  If it's irrelevant who cares.


    Ohhh (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 12:29:21 PM EST
    I'm sorry

    The "lawful firearms owners"

    Yeah.  That.

    You know what Abdul?  I'm ready to sacrifice the comfort and revenue of "lawful gun owners" to save a few lives.


    To be clear (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 12:33:00 PM EST
    My reservations with the surveillance of US citizens has zero to do with the fact the absolute interpretation of the second amendment is a KKK fantasy.

    To be clear


    What EXACTLY (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Chuck0 on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 01:43:39 PM EST
    is the "serious burden"?

    And to be clear, I agree with you slightly. It has been said repeatedly that the El Paso shooter purchased his gun legally. So did the Las Vegas shooter. I think the Sandy Hook kid took is mother's firearm. So, in these cases a background check MAY not have prevented these murders. That said, the attitude that NOTHING can or should be done, is well, plain stupid.

    An assault weapons ban would be a good start. And I'm not going to get into a semantics fight over what is an "assault" weapon. It doesn't take a wealth of intelligence to identify a AK47, an SKS, an HK MP5, an Uzi or an AR15 (which is essentially an M16 without full auto) as "assault" weapons. They are manufactured for soldiers to carry into war.

    The number one thing that has to be changed is the USA's gun culture. Unfortunately that could take a generation or two to change. But hopefully with organizations like those started by the kids from Parkland, it's a step in the right direction.


    Burden. (none / 0) (#31)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 04:54:03 PM EST
    Under the bill the house Dems passed if my daughter in law wanted to borrow a firearm from me we would both have to travel together to a FFL holder who would take possession of the firearm and for a fee of $50 or so would do the background check and release the fire arm to her. A week later when she wished to return the firearm we both need to make another trip to an FFL holder, and pay another $50 or so.

    That's a lot of money and the time of my daughter in law, myself, the FFL holder, and the human on the other end of the phone at federal office the FFL holder calls when doing the check.

    If she wants to borrow again a month later it's the same drill over again. Two more background checks two more fees and more time wasted even though we both know that neither of us has been arrested or been treated for mental illness in the preceding month.

    I would not have a problem with universal background checks if it was an on line process at no charge.

    There is no reason I should not be able to run an background check myself on line on any prospective purchaser or borrower.  

    If universal background checks are that important then they should be free of charge. There is no good reason to involve FFL holders.


    Imaginary "burdens" are the worst (5.00 / 8) (#34)
    by Yman on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 05:49:54 PM EST
    You know what the giveaway is with these silly hypotheticals?  When someone strains to come up with an example that sounds bad, but really isn't.  There's already an exception in HR 8 for loans or gifts between family members,which is why you specified daughter-in-law.  But even if that exception included your daughter-in-law, your next hypothetical would be about an ex-spouse or a dear cousin, until the "exception" was the rule and the requirement was meaningless.

    Sorry - your daughter-in-laws right to get a gun without paying a transfer fee doesn't supercede my childrens' right to live in a safer country.


    Just lend the gun (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by MKS on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 08:44:57 PM EST
    to the son.  

    What rubbish.


    Or just loan (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by MKS on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 09:01:44 PM EST
    money to the daughter-in-law to buy a gun.

    Somebody thought long and hard to come up with  this far-fetched hypothetical.  Wonder where it came from?  I doubt the poster read the legislation on his own to come up with this.


    Today's carve out (none / 0) (#41)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 02:12:05 AM EST
    Is tomorrow's loophole that needs to be closed.

    If you don't like my daughter-in-law as an example, then my shooting buddy who is a serving police officer.


    Too bad, so sad (5.00 / 4) (#43)
    by Yman on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 05:34:41 AM EST
    Nope.  Your "shooting buddy" should pay for his own background checks, too.  I thought conservatives were all about personal responsibility and paying their own way.  Turns out, they just want "free", (shall we say, "socialized"?) gun transfers.

    The only reason to pay (none / 0) (#46)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 10:18:01 AM EST
    Is to compensate the FFL holders time.

    Background checks could be done without involving FFL holders. Instead of making background checks simple on line operations free of charge the Dems decides to make it time consuming and costly.

    I'd support universal background checks if they were on line and free. It seems they are not seeking broad support but just another way to screw with the Deplorables.


    Just like the GOP with access to voting (5.00 / 5) (#48)
    by vicndabx on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 11:36:08 AM EST
    time consuming and costly.

    Make it easy for people to shoot, but hard to vote.


    Deplorables (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by MKS on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 11:43:40 AM EST
    are the racists who support Trump.  They should be screwed with.

    If you want to identify with the Deplorables,...


    I'm playing the world's ... (5.00 / 4) (#50)
    by Yman on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 11:47:17 AM EST
    ... tiniest violin for you.  

    It costs time and money to maintain a database and run background checks for ANY reason, including gun transfers.  Try having one to get a job or registering a car.  The fact that you want socialized gun transfers where we all have to pay for your hobby is pretty funny, though.


    You say (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 10:48:42 AM EST
    Simple (none / 0) (#42)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 02:13:28 AM EST
    Target shooting.

    So, to you, having your sister in laws simple target shooting inconvenienced is worth the lives that might be saved.  Got it.

    But I admit I am not that familiar with the enforcement of theses things.

    Do you seriously think you would be "threatened" by law enforcement for letting your f'ing sister in law borrow your f'ing gun for some simple target shooting?

    Cause I think that's pure horse shi+

    That probably would only be a problem if your sister in law shot up a public space.  Right?

    You want inconvenience?

    Assault weapons shouldn't be sold for one more day in this country.  It should be as easy to buy an assault weapon as it is to buy a rocket launcher.

    If you want to keep the one you have there will be draconian tracking.  It should be known where and in whose possession that weapon is every minute of every day.  WHATEVER that takes.

    There should be a generous federal assault weapon buy back program.

    Assault weapons are going away.  Get your mind around it.


    Do you (none / 0) (#52)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 01:12:14 PM EST
    realize that many criminal offenses are not online? Many court houses do not do online reporting. If you were familiar with background checks you would know this. Your ignorance on this subject and so many others are on full display here daily. Nobody ever said white supremacists were the sharpest tools in the toolbox though.

    If your daughter-in-law wanted to ... (5.00 / 4) (#36)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 07:57:50 PM EST
    ... borrow a firearm from you - for what, exactly?

    We're still trapped in a Fellini film.


    Home protection (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 08:05:54 PM EST
    To kill feral hogs link

    Aren't they official state (none / 0) (#38)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 08:27:25 PM EST
    mascot or something?

    Being gored by a feral pig isn't on my list of good ways to go.


    Simple (none / 0) (#42)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 02:13:28 AM EST
    Target shooting.

    Wow, that must be really (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by MKS on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 11:59:59 AM EST
    really important target shooting--it is worth many human lives to avoid the least little burden on this activity.

    Life's full of little inconveniences, dude. (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 01:32:15 PM EST
    And as little inconveniences go, your sister-in-law's inability to borrow a gun from you to go target-shooting is incredibly petty.

    But that said, I'm not without a heart. And in the hope that we can alleviate your tension and paranoia about the Deep State infringing upon your right to protect your community with force of arms from the insidious white slavery ring that's being funded by George Soros and Tom Steyer and operating out of the secret basement at your local Pizza Hut, I'll lend you my bong and will even thrown in the first bowl.



    Why (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 02:05:06 PM EST
    are you so afraid of trying something? All we hear from you guys over and over is we can't do anything about mass murders and we all need to just pray that it ends. Talked about learned helplessness. The rest of the country is sick and tired of hearing this garbage from conservatives. Mass shootings started large scale after the assault weapon ban expired and they have been going on unabated mostly since 20 kindergartners were gunned down in CT. Do you realize that Moms Demand Action is a bigger organization than the NRA these days and they aren't tainted by Putin either? You can lead, follow or get out of the way and I would suggest get out of the way for you since you only seem capable of following the people who assisted in creating these disasters.

    Try it; it might work (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by MKS on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 02:09:03 PM EST
    Only marginal burden on gun owners.

    Do you ever have any original thoughts? (5.00 / 4) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 01:51:16 PM EST
    All you ever seem to do around here is parrot Fox News. And as is par for the course with that network, your present claim about House Democrats acting "like clockwork" is not even accurate, given that the bill you cite was actually passed six months ago.

    Are you next going to assume the role of Little Sir Echo for Brian Kilmeade, who insisted this morning on "Fox and Friends" that calling immigration an "invasion" isn't anti-Hispanic?

    For sure, you'll likely get a rise from us with this sort of mindless trope, but what's the point, really? Do you believe that you somehow "own the libs" when you troll like this? Because far from owning us, you're often the butt of jokes.

    Try instead to be a principled conservative who relies on facts rather than innuendo to make his point, and who doesn't merely wait for cues from others before trafficking in someone else's opinions. Learn to think for yourself.



    No, he does not (none / 0) (#24)
    by MKS on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 02:04:12 PM EST
    Unfortunately, that's long been obvious. (none / 0) (#28)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 02:58:23 PM EST
    But I continue to hope that people like Abdul might one day finally grow weary of living in the perpetual shadows of their own self-induced political paranoias, and can somehow be coaxed to gravitate toward the light of day. Sometimes, it takes a tragic event like El Paso before such a revelation can be actualized.

    Then again, some people may well be beyond such hope.


    If the Right was actually (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by jondee on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 05:21:00 PM EST
    militant and energized about providing better mental health services for people who need it, I'd have a smidgen more respect for them, but they're not even serious about that. Because doing anything for the common good is another step on the slippery slope toward Marxist-Leninism or something

    It's really too bad that the Right ... (5.00 / 3) (#54)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 01:48:23 PM EST
    ... isn't "militant and energized about providing better mental health services" because given the present quality of political debate on Fox News and AM squawk radio, they're in dire need of immediate mental health triage.

    And from our "Sucker Born Every Minute" file, the Austin-based survivalist retailer ReadyToGoSurvival.com reported a large spike in orders over the weekend for bulletproof backpacks for schoolchildren.

    Truly, we are a nation of hucksters and chumps.


    Ready to go.. (none / 0) (#56)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 03:37:50 PM EST
    in their imaginations a lot of these folks seem to think they're living in a dystopian post-apocalyptic landscape where it's every man for himself.

    And the anti-government paranoia is at level red. Of course, usually "government" is code for liberal government.

    Through their sheer loopyness, one can envision these people helping create the very repressive situation they fear within a generation or so.


    As I observed earlier, ... (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:33:28 PM EST
    ... We're trapped in a Fellini film. And within that film, our antagonists are living in a Mad Max movie during which suddenly, the acid finally kicks in.



    Just like clockwork (5.00 / 5) (#32)
    by Yman on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 05:16:21 PM EST
    The NRA ammosexuals start making the rounds with non-sequitors.

    1.  The bill was passed long before these shootings, making your "clockwork" claim all the more ridiculous, and

    2.  It's about more than just these two shootings.

    Try again.

    Tr*mp and Biden can meet up in Houston (none / 0) (#1)
    by Peter G on Mon Aug 05, 2019 at 09:24:54 PM EST
    and offer their comforting remarks in tandem.

    Why not (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Zorba on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 10:10:37 AM EST

    Did he ever his bill for the last rally? (none / 0) (#3)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Aug 05, 2019 at 11:13:46 PM EST
    I read a little while ago (2 days) that trumpenfuhrer (or one his organization) still owed the city of El Paso $470,000 for transportation and security services. So far he has refused to pay his bill. True to his form. If I was mayor, I'd be at the bottom of the stairs hand outstretched, asking for the check. No check, get the eff off my tarmac and take your plane with you.

    No (none / 0) (#45)
    by smott on Wed Aug 07, 2019 at 08:27:49 AM EST
    He did not

    The Right Counterattacks (none / 0) (#10)
    by RickyJim on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 10:17:21 AM EST
    Since there are plenty of rightists in Europe where there is not as pervasive a problem with mass shootings, I think the emphasis should be on combating the ease in obtaining firearms rather than the (harder to do) stomping out of "right-wing extremism."

    Right wing extremism (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Repack Rider on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 11:20:48 AM EST
    ...is protected by the First Amendment.

    Murder is not.


    If you don't want right-wing extremism ... (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 02:25:17 PM EST
    ... to be "stomped out," as you so indelicately put it, then you really ought to urge the practitioners of that dark art to stop engaging in murder and mayhem and threatening others with the same. In the meantime, we'll do whatever it takes to defend ourselves.

    As was noted by Repack Rider, the First Amendment of our U.S. Constitution protects the right of right-wing extremists to speak their minds freely without fear of government retribution, including arrest and / or censor.

    However, the First Amendment does NOT guarantee right-wing extremists a public microphone to spew their toxic garbage, nor does it necessarily shield them from potential non-violent consequences of their vitriolic speech, which can include shunning by relatives and acquaintances, loss of employment, expulsion from college, and a corresponding erosion of their social standing within their respective communities.

    It is really in our best long term interests that these societal parasites and viruses be marginalized to the greatest extent possible, so that they do not fatally infect the body of the whole.



    RJ makes a valid point (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 02:33:12 PM EST
    Europe has as many extremists as we do.  Japan has more violent video games.  They do not have a mass murder a week.

    The problem is guns.


    The Atlantic (none / 0) (#59)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 03:26:57 PM EST
    Everyone seemed to be fleeing the brutality of the Chicago sun. There was no haven that compared to the cooling waters of Lake Michigan. Thousands of blacks and whites flocked to its beaches. That is where 17-year-old Eugene Williams and his friends fled. They knew all about the racial battles at the 29th Street Beach--or, they did not.

    The boys splashed into the black side of the lake. Williams climbed on a raft and floated, his friends not far away. His raft accidentally drifted past the invisible color line at 29th Street onto the "whites only" side. Yes, Jim Crow had become national.

    Twenty-four-year-old George Stauber saw Williams and started pummeling the boys with stones. Hit, Williams plunged into Lake Michigan and drowned. Daniel Callaghan, a Chicago police officer, arrived on the scene first and refused to arrest Stauber, as William Middleton, a black detective sergeant, insisted he should. Callaghan's backup arrived and stood as stone-faced as the stone that murdered Williams. A standoff. One black beachgoer drew a gun and fired at the police line.

    Then the city's white rage, to use Carol Anderson's term, exploded amid the false rumors of a black "invasion" to "clean out" white neighborhoods. When the lynch mobs finally disassembled nearly a week later, 38 people--23 black, 15 white--had perished, more than 350 people had reported injuries, and about 1,000 black homes lay in ashes. The worst incident of white-supremacist terror during the Red Summer of 1919 ended on August 3.

    Exactly a century later, on Saturday, 21-year-old Patrick Crusius, wielding an assault rifle, allegedly entered a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, and murdered 22 people. Hours later, 24-year-old Connor Betts, holding an AR-15-style firearm, allegedly entered Dayton's Oregon District and murdered nine people. A manifesto linked to Crusius said he targeted Latino people. Six of Betts's nine victims were African American in majority-white Dayton, although police have been unable to determine whether his victims were deliberately targeted.

    The American crisis of white-supremacist terrorism--its deadliest form, mass murder--is as old as it is new. The death knell still sounds. The deliverer of mass death has changed.

    In 1919, the white lynch mob was the deadliest domestic form of white-supremacist terror. Back then a sizable number of armed and coordinated white supremacists were needed  to slaughter a sizable number of people of color. Now it takes only one.

    The lynch mob endures in a different form. The assault rifle is the lynch mob of one.



    And this (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 03:36:32 PM EST
    Considering Betts' fairly detailed history (none / 0) (#61)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 04:35:31 PM EST
    of strongly left-leaning political views and activities like this:
    The Dayton Daily News reported he attended the May 25 Ku Klux Klan rally in Dayton as an armed counter-protester.
    I would not quickly accept the premise that he was trying to lynch black people.

    He drove his sister and another guy to the bar. He shot and killed his sister and wounded that other guy.

    Hard to believe that was random. At least at this point.


    From your link (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:00:33 PM EST
    The May 25 rally attracted about 500 to 600 counter-protesters who opposed the nine Klansman who came from Indiana and protested in Courthouse Square. The counter-protest group was fenced 0ff away from the Klansman and several people in the crowd were seen carrying firearms.Hasan Karim, who knew Betts and grew up in Bellbrook in the same high school class, was in the crowd accompanying freelance journalists and was taking pictures of the event. Karim bumped into someone in the crowd and the man told him `You don't know me.' The two said hello to each other and Karim recognized Betts by his voice, body and mannerisms in their brief interaction.Betts wore a bandanna covering part of his face and sunglasses. He carried a gun which appeared to be similar in style to the one used in Sunday's shooting. He did not appear to be part of any group that was in the protest crowd.

    So, someone "recognized him by his mannerisms"?  But his face was covered?

    Also he did not appear to be a part of any group in the protest crowd?

    Sounds to me like quite a stretch to say he was actually there or if he was that he was not there to shoot up the protest group and changed his mind.

    That is a great example imo of a screaming click bait headline that means exactly nothing.


    Your quote is actually from a different (none / 0) (#67)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:18:57 PM EST
    source than mine.

    Regardless, I still would not quickly accept the premise that he was trying to lynch black people.

    From what I believe is your article:

    The Dayton Daily News reported Monday that a friend of Betts told police the would-be Dayton shooter discussed mass shootings. But the friend, Will El-Fakir, told the newspaper Betts was "definitely not a right-leaning person. His political views definitely leaned to the left."  

    Voting records reviewed by the Dayton Daily News say Betts had been a registered Democrat."

    Not sure what the point is (none / 0) (#68)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:26:31 PM EST
    Beyond he was a Bernie bro.

    What does that have to do with his racial views?  Hate to tell you the Bernie bros push some pretty rancid views on race.  And gender.  And women.

    I guess it depends on what you mean by "leftist".

    I have a suggestion for those enforcing red flag laws.  If some one post this on social media-

    "#2016ElectionIn3Words This is bad," he wrote on Nov. 8, 2016 (he did follow Trump's page). "You can't kill 50+ people and injure 600(!) In 10 minutes with cigarettes my dude," he wrote in 2017. In response to a Buzzfeed story that read, "Virginia has declared a state of emergency in anticipation of the `Unite the Right' rally anniversary in Charlottesville this weekend," he wrote: "Kill every fascist."

    Take their f'ing guns.  Even if they like Elizabeth Warren.


    This (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:35:45 PM EST
    The Neckbeard Deathcamp band wrote on Twitter, "I did not know Conner Betts personally, but the midwest grind scene isn't large and we spend a lot of time pushing pornogrind out of Chicago DIY. For what it's worth men who cape hard line """""left""""" politics who still treat women like sh*t are not exactly a new invention."

    Go Warren!


    There are reports (none / 0) (#75)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:01:51 PM EST
    that his sister wasn't his sister and was actually a trans brother.

    This guy sounds like a nasty Bernie Bro. I hate to tell you but I've dealt with this type on social media and they can be every bit as racist, misogynist as Trumpers. It's horseshoe politics you see play out. Remember too it's the Bernie Bros that were screaming Russia interfering was a "hoax" and were parroting Barr's lies about the investigation.


    I admit I have absolutely no idea (none / 0) (#78)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:24:24 PM EST
    what a "Bernie Bro" is.

    Really (none / 0) (#79)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:27:22 PM EST

    You have been here through all these years.  Through the 2016 primary and you don't know that.

    That is remarkable.

    GOOGLE is our friend


    A complete lack of interest in TL's (none / 0) (#83)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:39:16 PM EST
    conversations about Bernie.

    And most other Dems.


    But I also have essentially no interest in TL's convos about Trump or any other Repub.

    Now, if something happens that has actual facts, that interests me.

    Anyway, I'll look at your link.



    When you do (none / 0) (#86)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:58:15 PM EST
    You will notice it was/is not a "TL" term.  It is actually quite universal.  

    In some circles (none / 0) (#87)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 09:00:24 PM EST
    You wouldn't be trying (none / 0) (#82)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:38:03 PM EST
    to stir up a hornet's nest, would you, su?

    Nasty is one thing (none / 0) (#80)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:28:18 PM EST
    committing nihilistic, unhinged acts of mayhem like that loon did is a category-unto-itself removed from things some anonymous political trolls say online, which goes on constantly.

    Why does this even matter? (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 06:35:30 PM EST
    suo: "Considering Betts' fairly detailed history of strongly left-leaning political views and activities like [counter-protesting a KKK rally,] I would not quickly accept the premise that he was trying to lynch black people."

    Nobody on the left who's sane and reasonable is defending Conner Betts or offering any excuses for what he did. We've long contended that being a crackpot, or even a violent crackpot, isn't contingent upon one's political orientation.

    So what if Betts sympathized with leftist causes in social media posts? His overall public record is reflective of an emotionally unbalanced and socially atrophied young man.

    More to the point, Bett's reasons for opening fire in Dayton may well have been entirely personal, given that his younger sister was one of his victims, and likely had nothing at all to do with politics. We simply don't know, because he didn't post an online rant just before heading into Dayton's party district -- unlike Patrick Crusius, whose racist screed clearly underscored his rationale and motivation for driving nine hours to El Paso to rampage.

    Your post strongly suggests that you are far more interested in embarrassing Democrats, rather than dealing realistically with the problem at hand, which is an overt act of deflection and denial on your part.

    Anyway, here's a suggestion. If Republicans and conservatives really want to avoid being suspected and / or accused of being closet white nationalists, maybe they ought to consider joining us in public to protest Nazis and the KKK whenever they show up in our mutual communities.

    Because honestly, white racist / nationalist violence targeting people of color is an American problem, and one which really shouldn't be the exclusive concern of liberals and progressives.

    So, if conservatives want to be active partners in a mutual quest for solutions, rather than perceived as an integral and particularly obstinate part of a very toxic problem, then it's high time for them to step up and actually walk the walk on combating racial hatred and ethnic bigotry, and stop dog-whistling racists while simultaneously trying to claim plausible deniability.



    Heard a term yesterday I liked (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 06:41:14 PM EST
    implausible deniability

    tad too sensitive on this discussion.

    The claim was made that Betts wanted to lynch black people. I said (twice) that I would not quickly accept the premise that he was trying to lynch black people.

    I gave a number of different reasons why I felt that way, one of them being that he was reported to be strongly left leaning to the point where he counter-demonstrated at a KKK rally.

    Seems a pretty strong indication of who he would not likely want to kill, assuming the report is true.

    Another reason I mentioned was that he shot his own sister and her/their companion. I'm reading now that some reports say he shot them first.

    He drove his sister and the companion there, he knew they were there, he knew exactly what they were wearing, etc., etc. Imo, it is pretty far-fetched to believe he shot them both accidentally while he was busy lynching black people.

    If new reports come out with new information, and they indicate that Betts did have a strong racial animosity, that will change my opinion.

    Do you disagree? Do you think he was trying to lynch black people?


    Not exactly (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:21:32 PM EST
    The claim was made that Betts wanted to lynch black people

    The Dayton shooting was mentioned along with the fact 6 of his 9 victims were black along with the fact the reasons for his shooting spree was not known in a larger and longer piece about white nationalist violence.

    Obsessing over whether his motives were racist sort of misses the point.  To the point of trying to miss the point.

    I assume you do not disagree the TX shooter was about white nationalism.


    Might as well have been.

    Is Betts going to be (none / 0) (#84)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 08:40:21 PM EST
    the new Jussie Smollet?

    What does that even mean? (none / 0) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 09:00:34 PM EST
    How exactly is faking an attack in any way similar to mass murder.

    I mean I always thought Smollett should get legally hammered for what he did.  I just find that a very curious remark.


    I mean in the limited (none / 0) (#89)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 09:09:10 PM EST
    sense of an event to beat "the left" over the head with that will be dredged up ad nauseum.

    That seemed to be happening for awhile here with Smollett.


    Oh (none / 0) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 09:18:18 PM EST
    Yeah, probably.  FTR "a leftie guy did it too" is a pretty lame straw to grasp.  But I'm sure it will be.

    past 3 hours while we packed the car for a camping trip, I now blame "the hippity hop."

    That shite causes me major agro.

    I'm out until sometime next week.

    Ya'll play nice now.


    The fact he was an (none / 0) (#62)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 04:54:43 PM EST
    "Armed counter protester" anywhere anytime is not exactly good.  IMO

    The fact that 6 of his 9 victims were black also doesn't seem random.


    Agreed on the armed protest. (none / 0) (#64)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:04:55 PM EST
    Also writing "Klu Klux Klan rally" in this day and age gives me the heebee jeebees.

    I'm going to guess the people outside the bar were the smokers. Maybe there was a group of black people near his sister and the friend?


    If we are doing maybes (none / 0) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:07:49 PM EST
    Maybe his sister was with the black people.  And he didn't like that.

    I have no idea but that's what happens with maybes


    And BTW (none / 0) (#66)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:13:45 PM EST
    In spite of the fact TOWNHALL and every other right wing mouthpiece is screaming about him being a "leftist"....


    Connor Betts, the Dayton, Ohio mass shooter, was a self-described "leftist," who wrote that he would happily vote for Democrat Elizabeth Warren, praised Satan, was upset about the 2016 presidential election results, and added, "I want socialism, and i'll not wait for the idiots to finally come round to understanding."

    Betts' Twitter profile read, "he/him / anime fan / metalhead / leftist / i'm going to hell and i'm not coming back." One tweet on his page read, "Off to Midnight Mass. At least the songs are good. #athiestsonchristmas." The page handle? I am the spookster. On one selfie, he included the hashtags, "#selfie4satan #HailSatan @SatanTweeting."

    Old tweets indicated the site was once @bettsconnor

    ...is not a "leftist".  That is a creepy freak who probably voted for Bernie and then Jill Stein.  


    Sure, all we have been doing is maybes. (none / 0) (#70)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:34:21 PM EST
    "maybe" he was lynching black people.

    Maybe he was mad at his sister.

    Maybe he was mad because she was hanging out with black people, though his reported background pretty clearly shows a liberal bent.

    Maybe he was mad at cigarette smokers.


    And maybe (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 05:39:34 PM EST
    Will El-Fakir could recognize him by his mannerisms.  And get his name in the paper.

    No, Trump should (none / 0) (#23)
    by MKS on Tue Aug 06, 2019 at 02:02:06 PM EST
    not show his face in  El Paso.....

    He has goaded his rally goers to shoot Latinos....He is on tape thinking that was funny.

    In 2017, Crusius tried to recruit the other teen into the small white supremacy group -- prompting the parents to alert the police.

    "I blew a gasket. `You know this isn't right. We've taught you better than this,' " the mother said she told her son.

    A report was filed with the Allen Police Department over white supremacy activity but did not mention Crusius, police said. The parents also claimed they notified the FBI.

    Why would you not mention the guy trying to recruit your son?

    The sound of gunfire echoes. (none / 0) (#57)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Aug 08, 2019 at 02:06:12 PM EST
    trumpenfuhrer: "Hey, Hey, look at me!"