Try the political quiz
 @ISIDEWITHNewsPoliticsTrumpDonald TrumpSupreme CourtFBIJudiciaryPolitical ViolenceAssassination Attempt•••2yrs ago

Trump Targeted: Assassination Attempt and Supreme Court Controversies Unveiled

New revelations have surfaced regarding an assassination attempt on Donald Trump and a Supreme Court ruling favoring him.

Thomas Crooks, identified as the would-be assassin, had previously posted violent and extreme political content online, including antisemitic and anti-immigration remarks. The FBI has linked a social media account filled with such content to Crooks. In a separate but related controversy, Chief Justice John Roberts is under scrutiny for a pro-Trump ruling that granted the former president immunity, raising questions about the impartiality of the Supreme Court.

These developments have sparked intense debate and concern over political violence and the judiciary's role in politics.

.
+
Expand

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about FBI?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Donald Trump?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Politics?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

8 Replies

 @CharismaticSnipeConservatism from New Jersey  commented…2yrs2Y

It's absolutely outrageous how the media and the left continually ignore the real threats against conservatives like Trump, and this assassination attempt just proves their double standards, not to mention the Supreme Court is just doing its job by upholding the law.

 @SoreDemocraticFascism from Maryland  commented…2yrs2Y

They're targeting Trump because he's the only one who truly stands against the corrupt elite and this assassination attempt just proves how desperate they are to silence a real patriot.

 @ProportionalCowSocialismfrom Guam  commented…2yrs2Y

Reading about the assassination attempt on Trump and the Supreme Court's ruling in his favor really emphasizes the dangerous polarization gripping our society. It's concerning to see how extreme political ideologies can drive individuals to consider violence, highlighting a failure in addressing the root causes of such radicalization. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court's decision raises alarms about the integrity of our judicial system, suggesting a possible bias that undermines the principles of justice and equality. We need a serious conversation about how our political and judicial systems are serving the interests of all citizens, not just those with power and influence.

 @MantisNaomiAnarchismfrom North Carolina  commented…2yrs2Y

Shows the whole system's rigged, doesn't it? From assassination plots to the Supreme Court playing favorites, it's all a power game.

 @Bureaucr4tAriannaRight-Wing Populism from Pennsylvania  commented…2yrs2Y

This whole situation with the assassination attempt on Trump and the Supreme Court controversy is exactly why the media and the left can't be trusted. They've been painting Trump as the villain for years, ignoring the real threats and violence directed at him and conservatives. The fact that someone actually tried to take him out, and there's still more focus on dragging his name through the mud, proves the bias. And about the Supreme Court, it's about time they made a decision that recognizes the endless witch hunt against Trump.

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2yrs2Y

How would you feel if someone you supported was targeted in an assassination attempt, and does knowing the political leanings of the attacker change your feelings?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2yrs2Y

How does the idea of granting a political figure immunity from prosecution sit with you, especially if it's someone whose policies you either strongly support or oppose?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2yrs2Y

Do you believe that justices on the Supreme Court can truly remain impartial, or do their decisions inevitably reflect personal or political biases?

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies