Trump rally interviewer backpedals after man calls to "kill them all"
Trump rally interviewer backpedals after man calls to "kill them all"
Matthew Alvarez distanced himself from the violent comments, adding: ""That is not something that I agree with, obviously."
You're viewing part of a thread.
I didn't ignore that part, I just find it quite interesting that even after going back and fixing your post with follow up comments, you doubled down with this.
Is it not a loud event? Does the moron that actually said “Kill ‘em All” - or “Joe Mall” as I heard it myself - make sense to you? I had to listen to it twice to hear “Kill ‘em All.” Maybe I need to get my hearing checked?
I was defending the reporter, but then I watched it again and was like, “oh, that part where he leads the guy on is the actual shitty thing he did that he wouldn’t be able to refute. It really doesn’t matter whether he agrees or not because I know he’s a piece of shit for that.”
Like, string the guy up for the thing he actually did, not the thing with plausible deniability because it’s not going to go anywhere.
Made pretty clear sense to me, yep. Because this isn't a new revelation, and it's not the first time we've heard this. Also, Joe Mall? Alrighty. You either haven't watched the actual video, or you're a terrible liar.
https://twitter.com/AmoneyResists/status/1685368569347932160
Go ahead and tell me how the reporter for RIGHT SIDE BROADCASTING NETWORK didn't hear this dude properly? How he didn't egg this yahoo on by saying the leftists, globalists, RINOs. Dude. You're defending a reporter that told a rally attendee that he agreed with "kill 'em all". You're really going to die on this hill and blame US for downvoting you? lmfao
Again, the ever elusive "two sides" of calling for death to political opponents is on display here and you're not even ashamed of it. Incredible.
Nope, that’s the video. Like seriously. That guy is fucking unintelligible. Am I taking crazy pills here?
Like I’m Canadian dude, I don’t even have a say over there, but if it means anything to you for context, I’m an NDP voter here.
And yeah yeah I get it. He’s a real piece of shit. I’ve never heard of this organization.
Tell me you’ve never misheard someone in a loud environment and just nodded and moved on. I won’t believe you. I’m not saying he does or doesn’t agree, I’m just saying it’s a good enough argument for them and you’re not going to get anywhere with that.
I said he was egging him on by saying that and that’s the real thing to be upset about. Is there a typo in one of my previous comments I should fix?
Overemphasizing the importance of the thing with plausible deniability while ignoring the undeniable fact that he’s biased as fuck - which are both on display in that video - will not change anyone’s mind. Making me the bad guy for suggesting we shift focus to that just allows them to keep doin it.
I was just making a stoned joke about the moron’s inability to speak clearly and now I’m a Nazi. I’m having a great day thanks for asking. How’s yours?
Am I taking crazy pills here?
Yes. Flat out, yes you are. I'm from the US, and I understood him perfectly. He even said it twice to make sure you got it.
Tell me you’ve never misheard someone in a loud environment
It wasn't a loud environment, it was outside the rally, standing in line, the guy was clearly audible, which is why the "reporter" volleyed back and forth with him, and encouraged his rhetoric TWICE. Once by adding a list of political enemies, and the second time agreeing we should "kill em all".
I haven't called you a Nazi, I'm just stunned by how happy you were to claim the reporter was totally misunderstood even though it's clear as day in the actual video that he wasn't. He said what he said, you attempted to defend him, realized your mistake, but then also kept defending him for some reason.
Maybe it’s a regional thing. I watched it again and I can not for the life of me hear “kill ‘em all” without really thinking about it. Either time.
It’s still loud in lineups outside loud events. He was audible to us because he had a microphone right in front of his face.
No, I know you haven’t called me a Nazi. I’m not defending him I’m just amazed that no one seems to be able to acknowledge that yes, sometimes people do just agree with things so they can move on.
Let me ask you some questions.
-
Is it plausible in your mind that a person going to a Trump rally in 2023 might say "kill 'em all" about political adversaries given all the other instances of the exact same thing being said we've seen over the past 6 years?
-
Is it plausible in your mind that the reporter representing an intentionally right wing news outlet that mentioned "leftists" and "globalists" to the person he was interviewing might share the same sentiment?
If you can answer yes to those, then I really don't know what you're defending here. The video was crystal clear, that microphone wasn't picking up all kinds of hooting and hollering, it was a dude interviewing another dude. The simple fact that the reporter egged him on and then agreed with "kill 'em all" should have made you question your position immediately. Like, that's not even a dog whistle, that's a clearly audible call for antisemitism and anti-left politics.
Yes and yes.
Did you miss the part where I specifically said that those mics are specifically designed to pick up voices in only one direction for the purpose of picking up voices in loud environments?
What the fuck is even happening here? I completely agree with you except that I’m like, “yeah it was loud 🤷🏻♂️” and I’m a monster for that?
I am truly dumbfounded. Disgusted, even.
You’re purposely ignoring huge chunks of my comments to make me a bad guy.
I'm not ignoring anything. I'm simply wondering what exactly you're even arguing anymore. You've got two people in this video agreeing "kill 'em all". What's your concern? You caught downvotes because everybody but you seemed to pretty clearly see what the interviewee and interviewer were agreeing about. You were corrected, you edited your comment a couple times, but kept pushing the idea that maybe the reporter didn't know.
Now you see that they did in fact know. Don't bother keep defending the reporter, we know what he said and what he meant by it. You're the only one here that was confused by it.
I’m not defending anybody. I never was. I was just saying that yeah, seems like it could be pretty loud. Maybe it was a misunderstanding, so let it go because you’ll never win that argument with the people who watch this garbage.
However there are other shitty things in this very same video you could nail him for if you’re actually involved in an ongoing conversation with someone who you’re trying to turn from this way of thinking. Which I am.
So I don’t give a fuck if he meant or not. That’s not the ammunition I’m going to use when I have to once again talk to my brother who is balls deep in this bullshit.
But you’re so fucking desperate for a gotcha that you’re looking for an enemy anywhere you can find it. You’re playing right in to the divisionary tactics.
You think I came in here with an agenda. I did not. I had no idea who this guy is or what his organization is.
I’ve explained myself enough. You’re not having a discussion in good faith and I don’t think I’m out of line to tell you to fuck off at this point. So fuck off.
Sure got sensitive. I'm over here wondering why you were making excuses for the reporter in post after post, and you're over there complaining about "tribalism" and downvotes. In a post about a guy calling for death to political opponents. Then you came back with the classic "two sides" argument, which is when I think you knew you'd just resigned yourself to this.
You talk about me not having a discussion in good faith, I think if you go back and read my comments to you, you'll see I asked pretty simple questions and tried to figure out why you're so desperate to die on the "maybe he didn't hear right" hill when he demonstrably did. And so did everybody else but you. I' not looking for a gotcha or anything else, I'm trying to figure out why that one particular thing has you twisted in knots when it's so incredibly clear that the reporter heard, understood, and agreed with what the interviewee said. It's just weird thing for you to still be defending when there's so much evidence that this guy didn't make a mistake. He only apologized because he got caught.
Anyway. I see your feelings are raw over this. So. Bye.
I’m sorry to interject, but is it a normal response to blurt out a list of people and groups when you don’t understand what is being said?
When you’re at a party, and someone says something you can’t hear, have you ever just blurted out the names of people at the party?
I don’t understand your thinking here. He either heard him and agreed, or didn’t understand him and decided the best course of action was to just list out names of the opposition. Only one of those makes any sense.
And I have to say, when I heard this without a primer, I fully understood what was being said. As did my wife.
I’m really not interested in discussing this any more. I get it I’m a terrible person. You can find your answer in one of the many comments I’ve already made. I’m done explaining myself to a bunch of people who aren’t willing to listen.
-