WHAT

  • Former U.S. President Donald J. Trump was shot at a rally in PA.

TRUMPS STATEMENT

“I want to thank The United States Secret Service, and all of Law Enforcement, for their rapid response on the shooting that just took place in Butler, Pennsylvania. Most importantly, I want to extend my condolences to the family of the person at the Rally who was killed, and also to the family of another person that was badly injured. It is incredible that such an act can take place in our Country. Nothing is known at this time about the shooter, who is now dead. I was shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear. I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin. Much bleeding took place, so I realized then what was happening. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

WHAT WE THINK WE KNOW SO FAR

  • gunman is dead
  • Trump “is fine”
  • one attendee is dead
  • another attendee is in critical condition

News Sources

  • jeffw@lemmy.world
    shield
    M
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    334
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Do not advocate or celebrate violence, please. Comments advocating violence will be deleted and bans will be issued.

    Also, please avoid promoting conspiracies. Discussing current events is fine but suggesting things like “it’s a false flag” without evidence is spreading a conspiracy.

      • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s not a justification for more violence, two wrongs don’t make a right. He was wrong for doing what he did and this is wrong as well. This is because political violence in it’s entirety is wrong. Jesus, do people not have principles anymore? Seeing all the supposedly moral people turn into Q anon level conspiracy theorists who condone violence is depressing.

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          62
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          two wrongs don’t make a right.

          You’re right. But let me tell you all about the sympathy I have for him:

          .

          That’s about it.

          • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            4 months ago

            We didn’t join WWII because the Nazis were bad, we joined because Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and then Hitler declared war on the US.

              • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                4 months ago

                Really? You don’t realize that the US didn’t join a war that started in 1939 until 1941 when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor … so was only part of the war for less than 4 years?

                Wow!

                • retrospectology@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  You inferred something about Nazis, and now what you’re saying makes no sense as a response to what I’ve been asking you.

                  I’ll put it more clearly so you can actually give an answer: When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, you’re saying we should’ve turned the other cheek?

                  • Pandantic [they/them]@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    I think this poster is saying: “since you believe two wrongs don’t make a right, then when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, the correct thing to do in your view would to turn the other cheek.”

              • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                No, I’m just pointing out that your comparison is flawed. We didn’t know about the Holocaust until the war was almost over. The Soviets were the first to discover and liberate the camps back in 1944 (too bad they ended up having their own brutal camps) and the Americans liberated the first camp they discovered (Ohrdruf) in April 1945… the war in Europe was over in a month. That’s when the then general Eisenhower ordered the American soldiers to find the other camps, free the captives, and take pictures of everything they came across so Nazi crimes can be thoroughly documented and the American public can be made aware of them.

                My point is that we didn’t intervene in the war because of what the Nazis were doing like you seem to imply, we intervened because we got attacked and declared war on.

                • snooggums@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  We didn’t know about the Holocaust until the war was almost over.

                  It wasn’t confirmed until the war was nearly over. But even before then we knew the Axis powers were slaughtering people while they conquered Europe.

                  • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Fair, but the situation is similar to what’s happening to Uyghurs in China right now. We know something is going on there, but it’s not exactly sufficient grounds to invade China and intervene.

        • Nora@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          4 months ago

          A wrong makes a right if it prevents many many horrible wrongs in the future.

          • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The ends don’t justify the means politics, that’s how you end up with terrorism, tyrannical governments, and atrocities. I’m all for bringing Trump to justice, but it has be done through civil and democratic means via the established criminal justice system. If Trump goes through trial and is found guilty, which has already happened for one of his crimes, then our criminal justice system will punish him accordingly. If the punishments aren’t deemed harsh enough then we reform our punitive laws. We can’t have self righteous assholes going on terrorism crusades assassinating political candidates they don’t like. That’s a sign of a failed state.

              • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                True, which is why now is the most important time to condemn political violence, get people politically active, and vote to keep the fascist wannabes out of power.

        • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          4 months ago

          So you’re telling me conservatives will realize this has gone to far and tell everyone to remain calm and peaceful?

          • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The reasonable conservatives have already jumped off ship a long time ago and are now mostly either apolitical, independent, disenfranchised Democrat, or still a minority Republican opposing Trump. The only ones left that support Trump are his cult, and they will never see reason. However, we can’t get rid them with violence. It’s like what America tried to do with the Taliban or Israel is trying to do now with Hamas or what Saudi Arabia has tried to do with the Houthis, you can’t use violence to get rid of ideologies. The way to get rid of ideologies is to make them irrelevant. This can happen either by defeating them in democratic elections or using their track records to delegitimatize them or ignoring them or providing better alternatives or whatever. Political violence will only fuel them, and that is something I don’t want to see.

        • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          Mhmm. Where exactly do you draw the line regarding use of force as a preventative measure?

          • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            When it’s used as a means to achieve power in a democracy. Normalizing violence is not okay in general, but especially during democratic elections, and this applies to everybody regardless of who does it.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          one wrong plus another wrong, generally seems to overthrow most rights throughout the history of man kind.

          I’m not sure what to do with this information, but it’s present.

      • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        This shit was never here before because it’s likely CYA mode for Lemmy because feds could come sniffing here if copycat incidents occur.

        • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          bro the feds are already sniffing lemmy you think they arent?

          They’re sniffing lemmy just like their sniffing literally every other social media platform right now.

          • AnIndefiniteArticle@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            4 months ago

            There is a difference between background-level bulk sniffing and someone-here-maybe-incited-violence targeted sniffing. The former is data collection, which is passive in the form practiced by “the feds”. The latter is data connection, putting effort into connecting a subset of the data that has been collected to form a story. Data connections need a framing, a nucleation seed, an impetus for why the feds might think such a connection is interesting or relevant or worth adding to their story about a larger incident. Collecting data is cheap and done in bulk, partly because it can be done passively and partly because the US govt paid a lot of money on storage and collection mechanisms. Connecting data is something that requires a lot more time, effort, patience, and vetting to make sure you are doing it right.

            Or you can give the job to generative AI and hope it doesn’t hallucinate that someone innocent is guilty; with a large enough data pool (ie the internet, reality, what-have-you) it’s possible to select a misleading subset to support whatever hallucination you want.

            It’s easy to do wrong, which is exactly why you don’t want the feds sniffing around. Especially now that they have the tools to automate doing it wrong, and might not know how to use them yet.

            • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              yeah obviously, but it’s all the same at the end of the day. And they definitely have people actively sniffing around social media posts surrounding this at the moment.

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Communism, not Fascism, or to protect workers’ rights if you go back far enough. We only got involved in fighting fascism because we were drawn into the war, otherwise it’s never been that big of an issue to Americans and many schools aren’t even allowed to teach about it anymore because “kids shouldn’t have to feel bad about something like that” or whatever excuses the far right is currently using to prevent their schools from teaching about Anne Frank, concentration camps, slavery, anything else they want to implement themselves.

      • Draedron@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        49
        ·
        4 months ago

        Advocating for violence to prevent a fascist from abolishing the democracy is the only acceptable violence. Sometimes a democracy has to be protected violently if it is too weak to protect itself. Trump allies always say its why they have the second amendment. Now that it is used against them they cry about it.

        • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Violence is rarely good for anything as we have seen it just now. It would be better even if this guy shot at Biden that’s how counterproductive it is.

          Modern problems aren’t solved with blood but with marketing. You cannot kill an idea but you can ridicule it

          You cannot just eradicate everyone who opposes you. China tried, Soviets too. Now they have something vastly better - troll farms.

          • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            4 months ago

            Modern problems aren’t solved with blood but with marketing.

            Tell that to the Ukrainians and the Palestinians. I know you want this to be the case, but you couldn’t be more wrong if you tried.

              • Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                4 months ago

                Not sure what you mean, but Ukraine and Zelensky have been marketing themselves all over the place. They need all the help they can get, and they are doing whatever they can to boost support. So far pootin hasn’t achieved his goals so it’s working.

              • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                4 months ago

                You’re right, better to allow a violent oppressor to slowly eradicate your people than attempt to free or defend yourself by whatever means necessary…

                • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Eh I think you guys see what you want to see in my comment. I was talking about Russia. putin attacked Ukraine, it was insane in any case and what did he got out of it really?

                  The violence on Ukraine was just plain stupid.

                  I am kinda surprised and amused you take me for some pacifist goodie two shoes, other cheek blah blah. funny from my pov. Idk how you extracted that from my comment, I bet you will now continue to argue with something that doesn’t exist. My congratulations

              • shiroininja@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                4 months ago

                Appeasement of an aggressor never works. History has taught this over and over and over again. We still haven’t learned I see. I’m mainly talking about Ukraine. Palestine is a lot more complex.

          • Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Your last point is actually not a bad analysis - but it is missing that the ones operating their propaganda and troll farms already also control the violence monopoly. And both entities also use violence where they deem it practical.

          • NoSpiritAnimal@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            4 months ago

            The paradox of tolerance is only a paradox if you don’t believe in the social contract.

            Beliefs that violate the social contract deserve no protection under it.

      • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        Was it wrong when Trump triggered Jan 6 with his calls for violence?

        If yes, why do you get to call for violence?

        If no, you should read more about the ramifications of Jan 6

      • meowoem@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        This sub has some crazy censorship. I’m pretty sure it’s all right-wing mods.

          • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The user in question was banned and comments were removed for ban evasion. The mod log is public.

              • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Please do not repost removed comments. If you want to share a screenshot or quote, please do so in a DM to a mod.

                • whoreticulture@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  So there is no available form of public accountability for comments? I have had mixed experiences in the past with DM-ing mods and I do not trust private communications.

                  • Blackbeard@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Let it be known that you’ve had removed-then-reposted comments re-removed multiple times in the past 2 days by three different moderators. If you do so again, a ban will follow.

                  • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    There is absolutely accountability. Unlike any other platform, the entire history of moderator actions is public, and may be reviewed from the mod log. I have already mentioned to you several ways to make public comments about a moderation decision that are within the rules. Please take the time to review the responses I have already taken the time to research and send.

                    I am working on answering your questions, but I am only one person, and I can only review one at a time. All Lemmy mods and administrators are volunteers, myself included.

                    Also, please note that DMs on Lemmy are not private. They are only shared with the person you are messaging, but are unencrypted and may be visible to others. Please keep this in mind for your security.

      • barkingspiders@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        4 months ago

        This community can be whatever it wants to be. If you want to advocate for violence you are free to do that elsewhere in the fediverse. Just not here.

    • Christer Enfors@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      spreading a conspiracy

      I know this is off-topic, but can we please go back to saying “conspiracy theory”? Conspiracy and conspiracy theories are not the same. There are actual conspiracies (a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful) , and there are theories of conspiracies. They should not be confused.

      • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Surprised you’re not already banned just for the c-word. I mean, if someone crashes their car through a storefront, I could speculate without evidence that the driver was excessively old, young, drunk, or just plain stupid and it’s left up to the reader to take my comment with a grain of salt, but if I so much as entertain the possibility of this shooting being anything besides what is being reported by official channels, I must be silenced.

      • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        If the only way you can discuss an assassination is by advocating for additional violence and pushing lies, then I guess not?

          • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            4 months ago

            Not really what I said at all. “Hey guys, don’t make stuff up, please rely on credible sources, and don’t advocate for violence”.

            Or, in other words: follow the rules we’ve always had in place

            • whoreticulture@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              4 months ago

              Advocating for, or not advocating for, violence is a political stance. Many people defend Israel’s ongoing genocide and are not blocked from doing so. That doesn’t feel like the rules being consistently enforced. The people speculating on whether or not this is staged have access to the same information as everyone else, and in the spirit of true discourse, if it was seen to be false you could figure that out by discussion rather than censorship.

                  • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    If someone has made a claim that runs counter to commonly acknowledged information, please report it. If you need a few examples…

                    You would need a source to say:

                    • “the new COVID vaccine is dangerous because it has killed people”
                    • “Donald Trump faked an attack on his life”
                    • “this new medical treatment is extremely effective”

                    You would NOT need a source to say:

                    • “Donald Trump was subject of an assassination attempt” (commonly known and widely speculated to be an assassination attempt)
                    • A personal preference like “Chocolate cake is the best kind of cake”
                • whoreticulture@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I don’t personally think it was staged, but be honest … it’s not like you delete every single comment that doesn’t have sources …

        • whoreticulture@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          You are limiting discussion to centrist viewpoints, centrism caters towards permissive attitudes towards fascism. You know this.

          • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            True: confirmed information. False: unconfirmed information of a speculative nature. Do you see a specific issue you disagree with or are you just trying to argue?

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              You are just moving the problem around via definitions not actually saying what method you used to know exactly what happened yesterday.

              All I asked is how you arrived at the truth. Did you see evidence that the general public didn’t? Because what I am seeing is you all are so absolutely certain you have literally compared it to Covid misinformation. Amazing, a 30 hour news event is so well understood you can compare our knowledge of it to the single most studied virus in human history months after a new variant had appeared.

              It is not unreasonable how you were able to obtain information the rest of us apparently do not have and how you were able to eliminate all other alternatives so quickly.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        4 months ago

        My friend, you know exactly what they mean. Don’t push a “well maybe somebody set it up because …” theory unless you have facts to back it up.

        • SLfgb@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I take issue with inaccurate language. This is how trains crash. A conspiracy is where 2 or more people plan something in secret. A conspiracy theory is where an outsider speculates about the nature of such plans. Also, without wanting to speculate myself, logically it was either a lone actor or a group conspiring, since it clearly wasn’t publicised in advance. I personally doubt it was some grand conspiracy.

        • Wilzax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Obviously someone set this up, bullets don’t just appear out of nowhere. It may have just been the gunman who acted entirely alone. We have no evidence that anyone worked with the gunman but what’s that saying about the absence of evidence?

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yeah but there’s also no evidence that this was anything other than a single person acting on their own. Most loan shooters are actually loners.

          • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            The issue is the volume of comments about this being faked entirely or a false flag.

          • orcrist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            You can’t use the English language in an openly misleading fashion and expect that people are going to go along with it, not in a situation like this. The expression “someone set this up” clearly implies the existence of a second person.

            What made you think that another person is involved? Nothing. If we were to look at historical evidence, we would find that a lot of these situations are done by so-called lone wolf attackers. So if we’re going to blindly speculate, we should at least be consistent with historical evidence, and we should certainly speak unambiguously.