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

    • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
      40·
      6 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
        62·
        6 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
          13·
          6 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
              6·
              6 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
                8·
                6 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.socialEnglish
                  2·
                  5 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
              2·
              5 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.socialEnglish
                2·
                5 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
                  1·
                  5 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
        12·
        6 months ago

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

        • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
          1·
          5 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
              1·
              5 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
        9·
        6 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
          1·
          5 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
        6·
        6 months ago

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

        • SleezyDizasta@lemmy.world
          1·
          5 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.comEnglish
        1·
        6 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
      19·
      6 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.comEnglish
        23·
        6 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
          8·
          6 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.comEnglish
            2·
            5 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.