this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
313 points (96.7% liked)

politics

18789 readers
2817 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Wray said it's not clear yet whether it might have been shrapnel

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

They followed up that it was likely a bullet or bullet fragment

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Everything about it was pure fantasy. 100% conspiracy bullshit. Cheeto Chimp will literally pull strings from every conceivable angle.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

pull strings from every conceivable angel.

A thread from their heavenly robes.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Ha, thanks for the alert.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 month ago (1 children)

For anyone who was wondering why Trump refused to release the medical report after the shooting, this is why.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You're telling me Dementia Don the racist rapist with 34 felonies wouldn't release a medical report of him getting "shot"? If he had proof he was shot, It'd be on tshirts made in China and plastered all over the place. It'd be on billboards, flyers in the mail, and everywhere you look.

This is the proof that he didn't get shot, he got hit by shrapnel.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

But he's usually so honest and forthright

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I'm not sure why, but your name sounds violent

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

It makes sense if it wasn't a bullet. I think most of the bullets went into the crowd so its likely he was never the real target.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Just because the person shooting at you missed doesn't mean you weren't in "real danger". Anyone on the business end of a firearm, wielded intentionally or neglegently, is in real danger. The firearm doesn't become harmless due to lack of skill or intent.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But that's the thing if this is shrapnel and all the real shots hit the elevated bleachers the real risk to trump would probably not be very high. It certainly would suggest this is a mass shooting rather than a targetted assassination.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes, he was absolutely in danger. It might not have been as close of a call as Trump would like to brag about however if it was shrapnel of some sort

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

That's true enough. Probably not gonna convince the "jesus saved trump" crowd otherwise, though 🙄

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Shootings. How do they work. Nobody knows.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Complete mystery, total head-scratcher. I’m pretty sure slow cookers are involved.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

There should be a service that’s always there in secret so we can know what happens.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Fingers crossed! I have 'shrapnel' on my election bingo card! I just need "Black Hillary" (thanks for that one @[email protected]) and 'JD cries'.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

The New York times did a video analysis that pretty convincingly showed it was a bullet. Why Trump is hiding evidence is just bizarre, like the idea of having to support anything he claims - even true things! - is offensive.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/26/us/politics/trump-shooter-bullet-trajectory-ear.html

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Maybe we should ask Putin?

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 month ago (2 children)

This story could have just gone away, with most people never hearing that maybe he just has a little cut under his big gauze pad and anyone trying to bring it up looking extremely petty. But nope, Trump himself can't just let things pass unanswered.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Trying to milk the pity party as long as he can to try and keep the spotlight off of Harris is all.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Also worth noting: Wray's statements were made in response to questions asked by Jim Jordan.

This isn't something Democrats went looking to dig up. It got stirred up by one of Trump's frothiest allies.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Wait, Santorum isn't in congress though...

load more comments
view more: next ›