Man Arrested with Guns at Trump Rally: He's 'All in' on Trump

Monday, October 14, 2024

The man being accused of a potential third assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump spoke with Fox News Digital and says the claims against him are false.

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 08:32 AM | 90 COMMENTS | permalink

Comments

Another Trump supporter. Hm ...

#1 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2024-10-14 02:14 AM

He was released on $5K bail.

During the first day or two of these types of things the info isn't terribly reliable.

Another Trump supporter. Hm ...

Weird. Why carry guns if you have no idea how to use them?

Miller keeps interesting company.

x.com

I wonder if republicans would forfeit their second amendment rights to protect Trump.

#6
They do when attending Trump's hatefests, where magnetometers screening for weapons. None of the big league fascistii are comfortable having armed randos at their events and this has long been the case, e.g. "Bootsie" DeSantis.

Those manipulating the gun humpers can be pretty Second Amendment restrictive when it comes to their personal safety.

Why are Trumpers okay with gun restrictions at Republican events, but not at Walmart?

#6 | Posted by ClownShack

This is something I don't get. If you REALLY felt this way about 2A, can't you see the writing on the wall?

This is something I don't get. If you REALLY felt this way about 2A, can't you see the writing on the wall?
#9 | Posted by GalaxiePete

I don't get it either. People who are pro-Trump and pro-2nd Amendment should check out what gun ownership is like under the dictators Trump admires so much.

"People who are pro-Trump and pro-2nd Amendment should check out what gun ownership is like under the dictators Trump admires so much." -

#10 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday

Problem is, of course, that they never believe it will happen to them...

... until the dictator's thugs come knocking at their door to take away their guns!

The only one who has aggressively talked about taking away guns is Kamala Harris.

"Take the guns first, go through due process second," Trump said.

"The only one who has aggressively talked about taking away guns is Kamala Harris."

What a pathological liar.

"Take the guns first"
~Donald Trump

When will you be retracting and apologizing for your lie?

#12 | Posted by Bellringer at 2024-10-14 11:48 AM | Reply | Flag: MAGAts post and re-post 100% BS because they believe that everyone is as gullible and stupid as they are

"When will you be retracting and apologizing for your lie?" -

#14 | Posted by Danforth

As the Kumquat Pol Pot's mentor, Roy Cohn, advised: Never apologize, never retract (even if you're wrong), accuse your "enemy" of that which you're doing.

People like Bellringer follow that advice, too.

So I guess the answer is, "When Hell Freezes Over"

You guys make this so easy

x.com

"The only one who has aggressively talked about taking away guns is Kamala Harris."

What a pathological liar.

"Take the guns first"
~Donald Trump

When will you be retracting and apologizing for your lie?

"You guys make this so easy ... "

So easy to disprove ...

Why do you continue to make such easily disproved statements?

Are you that desperate or just detached from reality ?

Or you are too intellectually lazy or just can't bother to even google your random thoughts before make a fool of yourself by putting them out as "facts".

You are obviously not fooling anyone here. You are only fooling yourself.

When will you be retracting and apologizing for your lie?

#18 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Don't hold your breath.

The 49-year-old is a registered Republican and he ran in the GOP primary for a Nevada state assembly seat in 2022. Miller finished third in the primary. His LinkedIn profile suggests he began his online media outlet a few months after his election loss. In an interview with the Las Vegas Review-Journal in 2022, Miller said he was running for office because "this country has been taken over by tyranny" and said he will focus on alleged voter fraud if elected. On his Facebook page, Miller has posted multiple far-right conspiracy theories about COVID-19 vaccines and 9/11 and has even called for treason charges against Democrats.

www.forbes.com

The 49-year-old is a registered Republican and he ran in the GOP primary for a Nevada state assembly seat in 2022.

This MAGA Jason Bourne was going after a SS protected POTUS candidate with two short range (shotgun, handgun) weapons having never fired a gun in his life.

Wow.

" So easy to disprove ..."

I provided video proof of what she said. How do you disprove THAT?

" When will you be retracting and apologizing for your lie?

#18 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2024-10-14 12:29 PM | FLAG: |"

When you provide a link so I can see the full quote and context.

"When you provide a link so I can see the full quote and context."

What...you couldn't use Google to discover your lie?!? Try this:
thehill.com

You're up: time to apologize for barfing a lie without checking.

JEFF has the memory of a gold fish.

Speaks volumes.

I just wonder about the multiple IDs in his possession.

#17 | Posted by BellRinger

Your own link to TwitX says nothing like what you assert in #12.

Liar.

#29. Mandatory "buy back" of assault weapons. Mandatory. What do you think that means?

Moron.

#25. First off, you don't know the definition of the word "lie."

Secondly and more importantly, thank you for providing the link. Yes, I have a huge problem with what Trump is suggesting. In order to lie one has to know the truth. I wasn't aware of Trump's remarks. Now I'm aware and I thank you for the assist.

The only one who has aggressively talked about taking away guns is Kamala Harris.

#12 | Posted by BellRinger

Repubs have aggressively talked about pouring MORE GUNS onto the gun problem.

Jeff, you prove every day here that you're really not aware of diddlysquat. And the lies!? Jayzus, give it a rest Pinocchio.

""buy back" of assault weapons."

Trump wasn't even offering $$. Take the guns first.

"First off, you don't know the definition of the word "lie." "

Of course I do.

When you barf a fact easily debunked, that's a lie. Your laziness, and casual disregard for the truth, makes it a lie.

" Of course I do"

No, you don't.

" to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive"

www.merriam-webster.com

I didn't know the statement was untrue, therefore I didn't have intent to deceive. I DID unknowingly make a false statement.

" Of course I do"

No, you don't.

" to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive"

www.merriam-webster.com

I didn't know the statement was untrue, therefore I didn't have intent to deceive. I DID unknowingly make a false statement.

#35 | Posted by BellRinger

TH: Well what was the original lie?

The only one who has aggressively talked about taking away guns is Kamala Harris.

#12 | Posted by BellRinger

Your intent was to deceive because the statement is patently false.

You just lied about lying, a compound lie if you will.

BTW, can you post a quote that Kamala Harris EVER said she would take away guns?

I suspect not, since you're a well known liar.

"I DID unknowingly make a false statement." -

#35 | Posted by Bellringer at 2024-10-14 09:16 PM | Reply | Flag: Unusual admission

can you post a quote that Kamala Harris EVER said she would take away guns?

www.msn.com

"On September 19, 2024, at a campaign event with Oprah Winfrey, Harris joked, "If somebody breaks into my house, they're getting shot." Some considered this to be a faux pas since Harris has pushed for extensive gun control laws to be passed.

Some of the measures she supports are:

Nationwide mandatory buyback for "assault-style weapons."
Universal background checks on all gun sales, private or commercial.
Expanded red flag laws.
Ban "high-capacity" magazines.
She's also previously stated that if elected president, she'll give Congress 100 days to pass a comprehensive gun control bill or take executive action to accomplish the above."

#29. Mandatory "buy back" of assault weapons. Mandatory. What do you think that means?
Moron.
#29 | Posted by BellRinger

I remember her talking about offering a buy back program but not a mandatory one. I guess I could have missed it. Link?

Despite Lies Spread by Trump and the NRA, Harris and Walz Do Not Want To Take Everyone's Guns Away

Vice President Kamala Harris and Gov. Tim Walz do not support mandatory gun confiscation and have strong records advocating for constitutional gun safety laws.

www.americanprogressaction.org

@#35 ... I didn't know the statement was untrue ...

So, your current alias admits that it has not a clue regarding the veracity of what it posts?

Quelle surprise.

You guys make this so easy
x.com
#17 | Posted by BellRinger
I provided video proof of what she said. How do you disprove THAT?
#23 | Posted by BellRinger

Nowhere on that video does she say "mandatory buy back".

My link a little more current but I didn't spend a lot of time finding it.

On September 19, 2024, at a campaign event with Oprah Winfrey, Harris joked, "If somebody breaks into my house, they're getting shot." Some considered this to be a faux pas since Harris has pushed for extensive gun control laws to be passed.

Some of the measures she supports are:

@#39

So, you admit you have nothing in response to "can you post a quote that Kamala Harris EVER said she would take away guns?"

I see nothing in your post that says she would take away guns.

What else yer got?

@#45

Repeating a reply in bold does not make that reply a better answer to the question asked.

-I see nothing in your post that says she would take away guns.

mandatory buy back isn't taking them away?

I'm not a gun guy at all and I'm actually in favor of her taking guns away so I'm not trying to stoke fear or mislead anyone.

Some of the measures she supports are:
Nationwide mandatory buyback for "assault-style weapons."

Yes, I see that listed in the article you linked to, Eberly, but when I go to her campaign website, which is the link the article supplies to verify the information it provides, I don't see anything about "mandatory buybacks for assualt-style weapons." I see banning of assault weapons going forward, but maybe I'm missing something and you can find it. Here's what I found:

Make Our Communities Safer From Gun Violence and Crime

As a prosecutor, Vice President Harris fought violent crime by getting illegal guns and violent criminals off California streets. During her time as District Attorney, she raised conviction rates for violent offenders " including gang members, gun felons, and domestic abusers. As Attorney General, Vice President Harris built on this record, removing over 12,000 illegal guns from the streets of California and prosecuting some of the toughest transnational criminal organizations in the world.

In the White House, Vice President Harris helped deliver the largest investment in public safety ever, investing $15 billion in supporting local law enforcement and community safety programs across 1,000 cities, towns, and counties. President Biden and Vice President Harris encouraged bipartisan cooperation to pass the first major gun safety law in nearly 30 years, which included record funding to hire and train over 14,000 mental health professionals for our schools. As head of the first-ever White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, she spearheaded policies to expand background checks and close the gun show loophole. Under her and President Biden's leadership, violent crime is at a 50-year low, with the largest single-year drop in murders ever.

As President, she won't stop fighting so that Americans have the freedom to live safe from gun violence in our schools, communities, and places of worship. She'll ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, require universal background checks, and support red flag laws that keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. She will also continue to invest in funding law enforcement, including the hiring and training of officers and people to support them, and will build upon proven gun violence prevention programs that have helped reduce violent crime throughout the country.

kamalaharris.com

What's ironic is that the people attacking Bell for lying about this WANT Harris to do exactly what Bell accused her of.

This isn't about Harris, nor even guns.....it's about Bell.

He lives rent free in all your empty heads.

Well, I didn't accuse him of lying. I simply asked for a link to substantiate his claim that Harris supports "mandatory buybacks".

maybe MSN is lying if Harris's website doesn't specifically say that?

"Well, I didn't accuse him of lying"

fair enough. Do you think he's lying?

fair enough. Do you think he's lying?
#52 | Posted by eberly

I don't even know what he is being accused of lying of in this thread. I confess I didn't read the whole thing that closely.

" BTW, can you post a quote that Kamala Harris EVER said she would take away guns?

I suspect not, since you're a well known liar.

#37 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2024-10-14 09:23 PM | REPLY "

I lposted it on the wrong thread:

Trump Reveals Plans to Squash Dissent
" Harris: Well, there are approximately 5 million, to your point Craig. We have to have a buyback program and I support a mandatory buyback program. It's got to be smart, we got to do it the right way, but there are 5 million at least some estimate as many as 10 million and we're going to have to have smart public policy that's about taking those off the streets."
www.nraila.org

POSTED

@#48 ... mandatory buy back isn't taking them away? ...

Not really.

A buy back of assault weapons (mandatory or otherwise) is not taking away guns.

During the first day or two of these types of things the info isn't terribly reliable.

#3 | Posted by BellRinger

For some reason, I don't think it would take Hans long to find a post where you've said that's when the most reliable reports are, since after that the mainstream media kicks in.

Frankly, as a good conspiracy fan, I agree with that and always have. Just saying what the bellringer manifestation may well have once said....

I stand corrected, that quote does state she would have supported a gun confiscation program, back in 2020, for assault weapons.

That part of the lie was not a lie.

the rest of the patently false statement was a lie, so there is that

This is news, jeff only partially lied.

This is I remember hearing her say earlier this summer:

Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz oppose gun confiscation

Just as former President Barack Obama never confiscated firearms from law-abiding gun owners, Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz oppose confiscation. PolitiFact rated the confiscation accusations against Harris as "mostly false." During her presidential primary campaign in 2019, Harris said she supported "a mandatory gun buyback program," but only for assault weapons. In July 2024, the Harris campaign said she still supports an assault weapons ban but not a requirement to sell existing assault weapons to the federal government.

PolitiFact "found no examples that she supports mandatory gun confiscation now and the majority of guns sold in the U.S. are handguns."

www.americanprogressaction.org

"A buy back of assault weapons (mandatory or otherwise) is not taking away guns."

I think your alias is lying.

Amazing I can get your alias to do that.

Too bad we can't say you only partially tried to out the identity of a poster here.

That makes you an online predator, twoothy

The fact you suck so bad at it is irrelevant

Too bad we can't say you only partially tried to out the identity of a poster here.

That makes you an online predator, twoothy

The fact you suck so bad at it is irrelevant

@#59 ... I think your alias is lying. ...

How so?

Let me ask ...

What are the details of the mandatory buy-back that you assert? Please be specific.

And then I'll ask, how do those details result in the confiscation of guns?

#62. Do you not know the definition of mandatory.

Gal Tuesday,

So this is yet another position she has done a 180 on in 4 years. I can see evolving on an issue or two but numerous in 4 short years? Something is seriously wrong with that.

-How so?

You equate mandatory buy backs as confiscation.

Because everyone does.

@#64 .. .You equate mandatory buy backs as confiscation. ...

I do not.

That is an assumption of you.

What else yer got?

@#64

And, if I may ask...

In your comment #45, you stated... "Nationwide mandatory buyback for 'assault-style weapons.'"

Do you have a link to explains that assertion?

Your alias is obviously lying but it doesn't matter.

At this point your alias will argue lavender isn't purple.

Your alias is that desperate

-So this is yet another position she has done a 180 on in 4 years.

It doesn't matter anyway. No chance she gets a meaningful piece of legislation passed and she knows it.

She might as well propose a plan to confiscate (sorry ... .mandatory buy back for Lamplighter) of jello pudding pops because they are bad for you.

-Do you have a link to explains that assertion?

No, I have a link TO that assertion.

@#67 ... Your alias is obviously lying ..

If it is so obvious, what evidence have ye?

" It doesn't matter anyway. No chance she gets a meaningful piece of legislation passed and she knows it."

Absolutely true.

@#69 ... I have a link TO that assertion. ...

So, you admit you cannot substantiate the assertion you proffer.

-the assertion you proffer.

What's my assertion?

@#71 ... Absolutely true. ...

Yup.

At this point both the House and the Senate are in the margin of error.

@#4 ... Weird. Why carry guns if you have no idea how to use them?

Yeah. Maybe, let's pull this thread back on topic?

" It doesn't matter anyway. No chance she gets a meaningful piece of legislation passed and she knows it.

She might as well propose a plan to confiscate (sorry ... .mandatory buy back for Lamplighter) of jello pudding pops because they are bad for you.

#68 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 2024-10-14 11:05 PM | FLAG: "

It does matter.

Biden circumvented the Constitution to cancel student debt loans and even AFTER being shot down by SCOTUS he has continued to do it anyway.

Trump did an end-around on Congress to secure funding for his border wall and while only a fraction of the funds were spent, he wasn't stopped by the courts.

On 22 separate occasions Obama claimed he couldn't rewrite immigration law and then did just that with DACA (didn't even follow the procedures provision in doing so). When Trump tried to rescind it SCOTUS shot him down because he didn't follow the procedures provision needed to reverse it.

After Biden won in 2020 Dems pressed to abolish the filibuster. Make Puerto Rico and DC into states (4 more Dem Senators). And pack SCOTUS with 4 Biden appointed justices to tilt SCOTUS back to a lefty majority. The only thing stopping them at the time was opposition from Manchin and Sinema, neither of whom are in the Senate any more.

All I can say, did this guy really think that after the recent events, that the Secret Service/local LEO's would actually not care that he had multiple weapons in his vehicle and would let him in just because he claimed so be "all in for Trump"?

OCU

@#76 ... Biden circumvented the Constitution ...

And, yet, the GOP wants Pres Biden to act in a similar manner regarding the southern border?

All the while, they negate a bi-partisan bill to help secure the secure border.

" And, yet, the GOP wants Pres Biden to act in a similar manner regarding the southern border?"

No. That is a really bad take. Existing law gave Biden the tools necessary to not only keep Trump's enforcement initiatives but even further tighten them. Instead he went 180 degrees in the opposite direction. After 3 years of the left condescending that we didn't have a border issue at all, thanks to horrible polling on the issue, are beginning to hint that we have a small' problem that is somehow Trump's fault even though it occurred to this degree after he left office and the policies and rhetoric he established were kicked to th3 curb with glee by Democrats who propagat3d this current situation.

Very few outside of lefty bubble are buying into this absurd nonsense. It's why Harris is trying to memory-hole her long established views on this and pretend to be a border hawk.

@#79 ... Existing law gave Biden the tools necessary to not only keep Trump's enforcement initiatives but even further tighten them. ...

Yeah, when it gets to the specifics ...

Pres Biden has reduced the ability of asylum applicants to enter, in spite of fmr Pres Trump killing that bill that said similar things in addition to providing for the hiring of many more border agents..

So, what other tools does Pres Biden have?

Two thoughts.
First, clearly no one considers him a threat, or he would never have been released on such a small bond.
And second, as in Second Amendment.."A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Now, when that was written, America had no national guard, no standing army...so of course the people needed to be allowed to have weapons. But now, America has the most powerful military in the history of the world, and every state has a well trained militia, called the National Guard.
So if everyone starts wandering around, totally untrained, with shotguns and other firearms, well, we all see the carnage.
The Second Amendment is an anachronistic holdover from the time of the founding of this country.

This thread is so special. Just look at all the democrats now supporting the 2nd amendment.

Gotta shore up Hoecapontus now that she's said all that extreme stuff about guns. I'm surprised she wasn't hunting with all the old white guys the other day. You know, the day Tim couldn't even load his shotgun.

Just look at all the democrats now supporting the 2nd amendment.

Most democrats are supportive of the 2nd amendment, not just how the NRA and GOP interpret the 2nd amendment.

I for one am not supportive of free and easy access to a weapon that causes police to cower in fear for an hour while children and teachers are systematically murdered with their bodies being so destroyed that the only way to identify the remains is by their sneakers.

Most democrats are supportive of the 2nd amendment, not just how the NRA and GOP interpret the 2nd amendment.

Cannot be repeated enough. Many Democrats simply don't see how allowing non-military trained citizens access to modern military-style weapons makes our society safer. The logic is simple: If the Founders could have foreseen handheld weapons capable of shooting tens of bullets in less than a second with magazines holding dozens of bullets, it's logically unlikely that they would have wanted every single citizen to have the right to wield these guns outside of participating in their state's militia to protect the entirety of society.

#82 | Posted by lfthndthrds (NSFW) at 2024-10-15 08:33 AM | Reply | Flag: Doing his part to help elect Kamala Harris POTUS