Matt Gaetz: MAGA will turn to 'bloodshed' if Trump's crimes exclude him from ballot - Raw Story
By: David Edwards (Raw Story - Celebrating Years of Independent Journalism)
for somebody so opposed to a civil war, he sure likes to threaten us with those maga warriors a lot...
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Rep. Matt Gaetz (Photo by Saul Loeb for AFP)
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) predicted "bloodshed" from the MAGA movement if Donald Trump is convicted of crimes and not permitted on state ballots.
During a Wednesday interview on the Driveway Liberty Podcast, Gaetz mentioned the possibility of "violence" ahead of the 2024 presidential election.
"It turns out they'll let anybody have these jobs who gets the most votes," Gaetz said. "Well, you know, and now they're trying to change that. Like what we were talking about earlier with, you know, with secretaries of state trying to decide certain, you know, Trump can't even be on the ballot."
The podcast host argued that keeping Trump off the ballot had "been the plan from the beginning."
"I really worry that that type of action could lead to violence," Gaetz agreed. "And I am so wildly opposed to violence. I don't think it's how we should resolve our disputes."
"But when you start telling people that they can't express their participation in this American experience through a vote, then they start looking for other ways, and they're not, the vote is the best way to do it," he continued. "The other ways are not so good. And I worry if they start to take the vote away, you could see bloodshed in this country. Like none of us want."
Listen to the audio clip by clicking on the article link.
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the phrase "Trump Derangement Syndrome" or the TDS acronym in a comment will be deleted. Any use of the term "Brandon", or any variation thereof, when referring to President Biden, will be deleted.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
44 visitors
he and his pals are about to hit a wall at the end of the month...
sorry, I couldn't find a picture of this maga POS with his mouth closed...
what do these rwnj think will happen if Trump gets put back in office? a kumbaya picnic?
America desperately needs the kind of mass protests of millions of people like they had in Israel (and iran).
[✘]
Democrats are trying to use the federal government and institutions to get rid of their chief political opponent. That type of crap only happens in third world dictatorships, China, and Russia.
The fact they are shocked people are upset about it tells you just how out of touch with reality they are.
[✘]
Lock him up!
[✘]
You people have been investigating the Clintons for 30 years and have found shit.
As for Biden, keep investigating and when (and if) you find something real, I'll support indicting him too.
Lol. Except all the Clinton cronies who went to jail and Bill himself having to reach a settlement with prosecutors to avoid indictment (not to mention the money he paid Paula Jones for asexually harassing her.
And yet nothing to "lock them up" on. And if you want to talk about paying money to people who were sexually assaulted by someone, then maybe take a look at your own side. You have no moral high ground here.
[✘]
Maybe its something about the 91 indictments that makes people turn away from him...
Nice deflection! Avoiding admitting you misstated the truth by pivoting to But Trump!
My facts are right.
If you want to investigate the "Brandon Clan," then you MUST investigate the Trump Clan. something about a deal Jared made with the Saudis...
[✘]
Just looked up the Clinton "settlement with prosecutors to avoid indictment" and found the it's the same old lying about a blow job. If you think lying about a blow job is on par with the indictments that TFG is under, then that's a YOU problem, not to mention all of TFG's cronies that are under indictment or already have gone to prison. You have no moral high ground here.
You can't mention Clinton's sexual indiscretions without bringing up Trump's sexual indiscretions because, morally, they are both wrong. Trump's isn't any better because he's on your side so your "But Trump" fails bigly. Again, no moral high ground now matter which way you look at it.
All of which were extensively investigated by Republicans who, in the end, found there was no there there. Second, I don't give a shit about Hunter Biden. Lock the fucker away and throw way the key.
If your side actually finds proof, real proof, that Biden was involved, then indict him, and I'll support it.
Finally, No one wants to turn the USA into China. That's nothing but a wackadoodle conservative talking point because you can't stand that your guy broke the fucking law. But if you people really want to have a second civil war, then get off your asses and start it or STFU. You all are nothing but a bunch of keyboard warriors who won't to shit.
I can if we are only discussing the Clintons and your claim they did nothing wrong. Trump has nothing to do with what the Clintons did or didn't do.
mp's isn't any better because he's on your side so your "But Trump" fails bigly
I'm not sure you understand what's happening. You played the "But Trump" card to deflect from your clearly erroneous statement that no one found shit on the Clintons.
ain, no moral high ground now matter which way you look at it
I've been saying Trump is the same as Bill Clinton since he came on the scene. You don't have to convince me.
Ok, so they haven't found shit on the Clintons to charge them with a crime and lock them up.
First, the seed isn't about the Clintons now is it? You're side deflected from the subject of the article (which is your side's turning to blood shed if TRUMP'S CRIMES exclude him from the ballot) to INCLUDE THE CLINTONS. The article refers to TRUMP'S CRIMES, so I didn't deflect to anything. I actually brought the comments back to the subject of the article.
Second, just because YOU don't want to discuss Trump's sexual indiscretions and the judgment against him for the same, doesn't mean that his sexual infidelities are not on the table. Again, YOU just don't want to discuss it because he's on YOUR side. Citing one without the other just makes you hypocrite.
They're too chicken.
Just like little Matty Gaetz. First sound of a gunshot and he'll be running
beautiful!
According to the article:
Doesn't sound like he's calling for "bloodshed".
No? Consider this:
Does it sound like he’s calling on people to respect the process? Does it sound like he will honor decisions rendered in court by a jury?
Doesn’t sound like it to me. Sounds to me like he’s presenting a very limited choice to MAGA nation: If you don’t get what you want, you have no recourse but violence.
Sounds like he's saying:
You know, like the article states.
Nothing in the article about a jury. So why bring in something that isn't in the article? I know what you are implying and not going to play your "what if" game.
This whole article is a “what if” game.
You know what I’m implying because the course and the choices that may lie in the future are clear. They’re clear to Matt Gaetz, too. But when you realize how ugly Gaetz’s approach is, then you don’t want to play anymore.
That’s actually cool. Don’t play. It’s not a game we should be playing. I hope you see that now.
[✘]
[✘]
So do no Republicans care about the constitution or the rule of law?
... only when they need to hide behind it.
or run from it
John just said the same thing Gaetz did.
Funny how that's acceptable.
Not at all.
Gaetz says if Democrats attack Democracy and keep people from voting for who they want there may be repercussions.
You say the same will happen if Trump wins. Its not going to be a kumbaya picnic if democrats lose, right? That's what you said.
Yet, considering Trump is going to be the gop nominee in 2024 your chances of defeating Democrats in 2024 are infinitesimal...
Yeah, sure you are. Says the guy who said he was “proud of the work we did” on January 6.
Shows what you believe about Trump supporters. They don’t get what they want, they’ll get violent. Interesting that no one worries about that with Biden.
What he should be saying is that we have a system of justice; Trump will get his day (many days, actually) in court; and whatever the outcome, the rest of us will have to respect it and live with it. Same with elections, and same with the 60-something attempts Trump made to dispute the election in the courts.
Trump, Gaetz, et al are the ones trying to convince their supporters that there is no system of laws and justice, so that the only way they get what they want is through violence. And then, surprise! That indoctrination (they love that word when they use it on someone else) actually works. They go out and commit violence in real life. Well done, assholes!
"Bloodshed?" What bloodshed? So many guns in America. So many people with guns in America. There was a day way back when I can remember, people just got mad and yelled or smacked a face, or went so far as to hit them, but now so many people have guns and are itching to use them, and they do, they really do. I read about the shootings almost every single day on the American media. I have no doubt that Trump will summon his supporters to do whatever it takes to back him up.
Matt Gaetz, our local village idiot.
Ya kind of pissed me off the other day but over all.....................
Bring It MAGA Losers!