Maxine Waters Triggers the Trumpers

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

3 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

they're idiots?

Yes, but they're the democrats idiots so it's all good.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

The transcript does not read to me like Trump is limiting his comments to MS-13.  Or, at least, legit MS-13; I think Trump generalizes MS-13 to pretty much include all illegals, by design, which is what Ieads to this kind of unclarity.  The mention of MS-13 from the previous speaker makes the issue arguable, but Trump's comments were referring to his general deportation policies, not any sort of targeted gang policy.   There's enough room for doubt that I can understand why news organizations got cold feet about sticking with their initial takes, but at best it's unclear. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

The transcript does not read to me like Trump is limiting his comments to MS-13.   The mention of MS-13 from the previous speaker makes it arguable, but Trump's comments were referring to his general deportation policies, not any sort of targeted gang policy.   There's enough room for doubt that I can understand why news organizations got cold feet about sticking with their initial takes, but at best it's unclear. 

No it's not unclear.  He specifically said MS-13.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No it's not unclear.  He specifically said MS-13.

Who, Trump?  Are we talking about different things, because I just watched the video again and he didn't. 

[Mole 4,265]

38 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I don't think Trump meant to say all Latinos. I don't know what he actually believes, but there are other strong indications that he is a racist.

I know it feels like a victory for the Trumpists who can actually be supported by the careful examination of what Trump said, but isn't that the problem? Trump says something outrageous or unclear, and his supporters have to dig and think and reach to put some type of positive spin on it. 

We have a president who can't clearly express a thought. The paragraph in question here is a demonstration of how a president shouldn't sound: like an idiot. In fact, idiocy is sort of his defense here. Look how far back you have to go for the missing "context." Look how easy it is to hear him calling immigrants from the south animals. That's a problem. 

Trumpists have to claim this as a victory: "I know it sounds like he said something really bad, but if you go back a few paragraphs, he seems to be talking about criminals."

Sad.

 

3

For context, I'm strongly anti-Trump. Except for the part about him talking like an idiot, this is some twisted thinking. His words aren't hard to follow if you listen to the entire context of the conversation. There's isn't ambiguity within the conversation. To take his words out of context, distort them into meaning something entirely different, then blame him for all of this is just bizarre. How many truthers believed Obama was a secret Muslim hell-bent on installing Sharia law because he said "my Muslim faith?" This isn't that far removed from that lunacy. We haven't quite reached that insanity yet, but we sure have aspirations.

And this is a victory for no one. We have a president who is unfit for office, a media that can't be bothered with the truth because our president if unfit for office, and we have opposition that seems all too happy to abandon any principles because the president is unfit. That's victory for no one except maybe Russia. And the quote function on this site is terrible and broken.

[Mole 4,265]

I'm really surprised how others are interpreting the "animals" comment. I used it because it seemed to clear and unambiguous to me once you listen to the minutes preceding the comment. Maybe instead of reading the transcript, watch the video. It's a conversation. 

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

23 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Who, Trump?  Are we talking about different things, because I just watched the video again and he didn't. 

Onboard is just a liar.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

12 minutes ago, Mole said:

I'm really surprised how others are interpreting the "animals" comment. I used it because it seemed to clear and unambiguous to me once you listen to the minutes preceding the comment. Maybe instead of reading the transcript, watch the video. It's a conversation. 

I did watch the video, and what I hear is Trump using the prior speaker's statement as a jumping off point to generalize about illegals.   Just like he always does, going back to Mexico sending us their rapists, the phony inflated number of Americans killed by illegals, etc.  It may be that he was very loosely talking about MS-13, but only in the sense that he's suggesting that the bulk of illegals fall in that category, which is effectively the same thing as referring to all illegals. 

[David Dennison 17,659]

23 minutes ago, Mole said:

I'm really surprised how others are interpreting the "animals" comment. I used it because it seemed to clear and unambiguous to me once you listen to the minutes preceding the comment. Maybe instead of reading the transcript, watch the video. It's a conversation. 

I've watched it. 

He wasn't limiting his comments to MS-13.

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

No, y'all are wrong.  CNN retracted their claim.  You know, the CNN everyone trusts as being the final arbiter of truth.

You Trumpkins are truly precious.

[riloh05 107]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

It's almost as if you can't read.  I didn't say that disagreeing with some of the left's position means you support Trump.  I said IF you support Trump, and in particular I'm referring to those whose support is unwavering and universal, then your moral compass is broken.

why is that? why have you become so unhinged? you are a seasoned poster with valuable experience to share to folks just like myself who maybe your junior...you are acting no different than a birther. has that ever crossed your mind? calling folks a traitor who support trump is at best barking at clouds. like i said earlier, i hope your better than that. you are damn sure more articulate than just labeling trump supporters as traitors.

[AnonymousInternetPoster 163]

He has a raging case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, just like Windbag Brisket.

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

6 minutes ago, riloh05 said:

why is that? why have you become so unhinged? you are a seasoned poster with valuable experience to share to folks just like myself who maybe your junior...you are acting no different than a birther. has that ever crossed your mind? calling folks a traitor who support trump is at best barking at clouds. like i said earlier, i hope your better than that. you are damn sure more articulate than just labeling trump supporters as traitors.

I'm not here to win you over.  I believe what I believe.  You can think of me what you want, it makes no difference.  To equate a perspective on Trump that is fortified by literally thousands of lies SINCE HE WAS INAUGURATED with that of a "birther" is intellectually bankrupt.

[hayden_horn 11,311]

22 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Pretty sure the common denominator among Trump supporters isn’t racism, it’s ignorance.

i'm pretty sure the common denominator among trump supporters is that none of them apparently voted for him.

[hayden_horn 11,311]

4 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I don't think Trump meant to say all Latinos. I don't know what he actually believes, but there are other strong indications that he is a racist.

I know it feels like a victory for the Trumpists who can actually be supported by the careful examination of what Trump said, but isn't that the problem? Trump says something outrageous or unclear, and his supporters have to dig and think and reach to put some type of positive spin on it. 

We have a president who can't clearly express a thought. The paragraph in question here is a demonstration of how a president shouldn't sound: like an idiot. In fact, idiocy is sort of his defense here. Look how far back you have to go for the missing "context." Look how easy it is to hear him calling immigrants from the south animals. That's a problem. 

Trumpists have to claim this as a victory: "I know it sounds like he said something really bad, but if you go back a few paragraphs, he seems to be talking about criminals."

Sad.

 

this is a very good point and appears to have been largely overlooked. 

trump supporters, those on here and those pundits on the cable networks, always seem to have to find a way to stretch what trump says into some kind of positive context.

in this instance, i'll grant that it is possible he was speaking strictly about ms-13. but it's not at all clear. he speaks generally about deporting illegals, then he shunts aside into his "animals" bit without a shred of context. now that could be because he was talking strictly about ms-13 gangsters, or it could be he was talking about all illegals crossing because they are poor or dirty or something, or it could be because he hates brown people.

but the thing we're left with is we don't really know, do we? that's on him, 100%.

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

But we do know that he thinks all Mexican immigrants are drug mules, criminals, and rapists.  And, in an ironic twist very consistent with his own disgusting personal behavior, he assumes some are "good people".

[riloh05 107]

20 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm not here to win you over.  I believe what I believe.  You can think of me what you want, it makes no difference.  To equate a perspective on Trump that is fortified by literally thousands of lies SINCE HE WAS INAUGURATED with that of a "birther" is intellectually bankrupt.

i think the bankruptcy is that you think someone in dc is remotely honest. i voted for trump. he is an ass. he is a liar. he is a pos. he is twitter dumb. he is dumb. now what? if he ran again depending on the opponent, he might receive my vote again.

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

9 minutes ago, riloh05 said:

i think the bankruptcy is that you think someone in dc is remotely honest. i voted for trump. he is an ass. he is a liar. he is a pos. he is twitter dumb. he is dumb. now what? if he ran again depending on the opponent, he might receive my vote again.

Ah, the "both sides" argument.  That, combined with the rest of your post, renders my view of you complete.  Sorry, you're not worth the effort to even try to persuade -- you're a writeoff.  Good luck.  You're on the wrong side of history, and I can only hope it torments you some day.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

41 minutes ago, riloh05 said:

why is that? why have you become so unhinged? you are a seasoned poster with valuable experience to share to folks just like myself who maybe your junior...you are acting no different than a birther. has that ever crossed your mind? calling folks a traitor who support trump is at best barking at clouds. like i said earlier, i hope your better than that. you are damn sure more articulate than just labeling trump supporters as traitors.

Lulz at the birther comparison.    Yeah, disagreeing about whether statements that do not mention MS-13 should be interpreted narrowly in light of context is the exact same thing as rejecting as forgeries multiple government documents and contemporaneous evidence of Obama's birth in Hawaii.  

Oh, and the guy to whom we should be giving the benefit of the doubt on the animals comment... is one of the most notorious birthers in America. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,245]

I hate democrats so much I’ll vote for an obvious racist traitor that self-deals, lies constantly, and abuses his power to conceal his corruption.

Take that libs! 

[riloh05 107]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Ah, the "both sides" argument.  That, combined with the rest of your post, renders my view of you complete.  Sorry, you're not worth the effort to even try to persuade -- you're a writeoff.  Good luck.  You're on the wrong side of history, and I can only hope it torments you some day.

it wont. fortunately for me i am younger than you (i believe) and have had the opportunity to scratch checks for both sides. i understand the game that is being played and i wont write off anyone that i come in contact with that has a differing point of view. life is easier that way and i hope you can find happiness in the current world we live in. sorry to get on your lawn.

[riloh05 107]

6 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Lulz at the birther comparison.    Yeah, disagreeing about whether statements that do not mention MS-13 should be interpreted narrowly in light of context is the exact same thing as rejecting as forgeries multiple government documents and contemporaneous evidence of Obama's birth in Hawaii.  

Oh, and the guy to whom we should be giving the benefit of the doubt on the animals comment... is one of the most notorious birthers in America. 

not verbatim...but more of to his traitor comment. remember how crazy those claims were? seems like the left does a lot of that lately. crazy world we live in.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Just now, riloh05 said:

not verbatim...but more of to his traitor comment. remember how crazy those claims were? seems like the left does a lot of that lately. crazy world we live in.

You just admitted voting for an outspoken birther.   

[riloh05 107]

5 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

You just admitted voting for an outspoken birther.   

pretty sure everyone who vote r/d voted for a birther. thanks sid blumenthal. no?

Edited July 2, 2018 by riloh05

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

1 minute ago, riloh05 said:

pretty sure everyone who vote r/d voted for a birther. no?

Uh, no.  Obama's release of his birth certificate in June 2008 put the matter to rest for everyone except a group of nuts that include the guy you voted for.  Those are the birthers. 

[riloh05 107]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

Uh, no.  Obama's release of his birth certificate in June 2008 put the matter to rest for everyone except a group of nuts that include the guy you voted for.  Those are the birthers. 

that whole hrc/sid blumenthal messes that up. its all bullshit, but it started somewhere.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,245]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

Obama's release of his birth certificate in June 2008

2011

[David Dennison 17,659]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

Uh, no.  Obama's release of his birth certificate in June 2008 put the matter to rest for everyone except a group of nuts that include the guy you voted for.  Those are the birthers. 

Honestly, who gives a shit anyway. Obama could have been born deep in the Congo and I would have voted for him. 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

2011

Nope.  June 2008: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/

Obama's later release of yet another document was for the birthers who didn't accept the first. 

[riloh05 107]

Just now, David Dennison said:

Honestly, who gives a shit anyway. Obama could have been born deep in the Congo and I would have voted for him. 

i agree with this. the point being is how stupid the r's looked chasing down the rabbit hole (sean hannity). if you step back its basically how the left looks chasing trump shit down a trump hole. its not the same, not remotely- but quite hilarious if you can pull yourself out of the bubble and stare at each side.

[elfenix 34,000]

5 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Then you're just being a biased liar now because the transcript, and the actual video of the speech are very clear who he was talking about.  You can say what you want all day, that doesn't make it true.  There's plenty to blast him on all day, making up shit in your head just makes you look silly.

but you didn't build that amirite?

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

12 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

This whole time jimmy jazz was a brisket sock and nobody knew it.

OK, that made me laugh.  For the record, I do not own a spiral staircase.  But we live in the same neighborhood.

[Mole 4,265]

48 minutes ago, elfenix said:

but you didn't build that amirite?

This is actually a great example of something similar. Obama's comment made perfect sense in context but was twisted into something entirely different. And similarly, you can't get some people to budge from their interpretation even though when you listen to his speech, it's plain as day what he's saying.

I'd also submit Jeremiah Wright's "God Damn America" line as another example of media removing context and completely distorting the message, but I suspect there'd be less agreement there since it's pretty inflammatory. Shirley Sherrod's a good example as well.

I guess it's all of those people's fault to that their words were twisted out of context. If someone lies about you, it's your fault for using words that could be distorted.

And for those who still haven't watched it, go to about 22:25 to hear the relevant part of the conversation. Listen a little past the "animals" comment as well. 

https://www.c-span.org/video/?445674-1/roundtable-santuary-cities-immigration-laws&live=

[EMAWesome 101]

Bernie Sanders is not the left.

 

How batshit are the progressives when Sanders isn't far enough to the left for them?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,245]

The abolish ICE shit is stupid catch phrase politics.

 It’s like saying abolish the IRS.  

It’s not a realistic solution.  ICE needs reform and rebranding but not discarded outright.  

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

1 hour ago, Mole said:

This is actually a great example of something similar. Obama's comment made perfect sense in context but was twisted into something entirely different. And similarly, you can't get some people to budge from their interpretation even though when you listen to his speech, it's plain as day what he's saying.

Well, there's a difference when we're talking about a crafted speech versus off the cuff extemporaneous "speaking" (or whatever it is Donald does).  He can't spew 100 words without touching on his extreme bigotry, but sure, "both sides" and "OBAMA".

[SubliminalHorn 6,327]

3 hours ago, riloh05 said:

i think the bankruptcy is that you think someone in dc is remotely honest. i voted for trump. he is an ass. he is a liar. he is a pos. he is twitter dumb. he is dumb. now what? if he ran again depending on the opponent, he might receive my vote again.

Then you’re a moron. Period. 

[riloh05 107]

8 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Then you’re a moron. Period. 

Barking at clouds...neato.

[SubliminalHorn 6,327]

3 minutes ago, riloh05 said:

Barking at clouds...neato.

Like jimmyjazz said, you and others who would still vote for the traitor in office are worthless and not worth the time. Enjoy explaining to your grandchildren why you supported a traitor when you were young. 

[riloh05 107]

2 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Like jimmyjazz said, you and others who would still vote for the traitor in office are worthless and not worth the time. Enjoy explaining to your grandchildren why you supported a traitor when you were young. 

Still barking at clouds...I don’t have kids and will be retired in the Caribbean. Looks like this joke is on you. Or you need a better plan.

[SubliminalHorn 6,327]

Good one? Fuck trumpkins are morons. Please move to the Caribbean now and never vote here again. You’re worthless. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,336]

42 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

Bernie Sanders is not the left.

 

How batshit are the progressives when Sanders isn't far enough to the left for them?

Yep. Despite some on here saying the Democratic Party has moved too far left, Bernie Sanders, the guy who the Democratic Party rejected in favor of a Wall Street Dem Hillary, is a centrist. For a little context, his proposed top marginal tax rate of 52% is a mere 2% higher than Reagan's first meaningful tax cut of the TMR down to 50%.

 

History of income tax rates adjusted for inflation (1913–2013)[73][74]
	Number of	First Bracket	Top Bracket
Year	Brackets	Rate	Rate	Income	Adj. 2017[65][75]	Comment
1913	7	1%	7%	$500,000	$12.4 million	First permanent income tax
1916	14	2%	15%	$2,000,000	$45 million	-
1917	21	2%	67%	$2,000,000	$38.2 million	World War I financing
1918	56	6%	77%	$1,000,000	$16.3 million	-
1919	56	4%	73%	$1,000,000	$14.1 million	-
1922	50	4%	58%	$200,000	$2.92 million	-
1923	50	3%	43.5%	$200,000	$2.87 million	-
1924	43	1.5%	46%	$500,000	$7.14 million	-
1925	23	1.125%	25%	$100,000	$1.4 million	Post war reductions
1929	23	0.375%	24%	$100,000	$1.43 million	-
1930	23	1.125%	25%	$100,000	$1.46 million	-
1932	55	4%	63%	$1,000,000	$17.9 million	Depression era
1936	31	4%	79%	$5,000,000	$88.2 million	-
1940	31	4.4%	81.1%	$5,000,000	$87.3 million	-
1941	32	10%	81%	$5,000,000	$83.2 million	World War II
1942	24	19%	88%	$200,000	$3 million	Revenue Act of 1942
1944	24	23%	94%	$200,000	$2.78 million	Individual Income Tax Act of 1944
1946	24	19%	86.45%	$200,000	$2.51 million	-
1948	24	16.6%	82.13%	$400,000	$4.07 million	-
1950	24	17.4%	84.36%	$400,000	$4.07 million	-
1951	24	20.4%	91%	$400,000	$3.77 million	-
1952	26	22.2%	92%	$400,000	$3.69 million	-
1954	26	20%	91%	$400,000	$3.65 million	-
1964	26	16%	77%	$400,000	$3.16 million	Tax reduction during Vietnam war
1965	25	14%	70%	$200,000	$1.55 million	-
1968	33	14%	75.25%	$200,000	$1.41 million	-
1969	33	14%	77%	$200,000	$1.33 million	-
1970	33	14%	71.75%	$200,000	$1.26 million	-
1971	33	14%	70%	$200,000	$1.21 million	-
1981	17	13.825%	69.125%	$215,400	$580 thousand	Reagan era tax cuts
1982	14	12%	50%	$85,600	$217 thousand	Reagan era tax cuts
1983	14	11%	50%	$109,400	$269 thousand	-
1987	5	11%	38.5%	$90,000	$194 thousand	Reagan era tax cuts
1988	2	15%	28%	$29,750	$61.6 thousand	Reagan era tax cuts
1991	3	15%	31%	$82,150	$148 thousand	Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990
1993	5	15%	39.6%	$89,150	$151 thousand	Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993
2001	5	10%	39.1%	$297,350	$411 thousand	-
2002	6	10%	38.6%	$307,050	$418 thousand	-
2003	6	10%	35%	$311,950	$415 thousand	Bush tax cuts
2013	7	10%	39.6%	$400,000	$420 thousand	American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

1 hour ago, riloh05 said:

Still barking at clouds...I don’t have kids and will be retired in the Caribbean. Looks like this joke is on you. Or you need a better plan.

For someone who likes to play the "what happened to you?" card, you sure went full stop fucked up.  Enjoy your view of the mushroom clouds.  Hope you make it out before the civil war.

[zork 629]

Did Maxine get what she wanted, as a starting point, from the dude assaulting the teenagers at the Whataburger in San Antonio last night?  I guess eating a burger in the corner of the restaurant while wearing a MAGA hat is cause for assault?

 

Maybe he is a Shaggy/Surly poster with the added 'threw a coke on 'em' too action near the end of the video?  Is it safe to assume people are adults if it is 2AM?  Will he get extra punishment from the PoPo because he assaulted a teen(or teens?), not an adult?  Will the cameraman who was with him, who he left with, be an accomplice?

 

I know the reference to this on the Trump thread has had conclusions that the teens should have responded.  I personally believe they handled it perfectly by bringing out the camera and not responding.  Especially given the 3 weak or normal looking teens vs two fairly muscular adults.(watch the end of the video to see the accomplice)

Will the police do anything?

[David Dennison 17,659]

2 minutes ago, zork said:

Did Maxine get what she wanted, as a starting point, from the dude assaulting the teenagers at the Whataburger in San Antonio last night?  I guess eating a burger in the corner of the restaurant while wearing a MAGA hat is cause for assault?

Maybe he is a Shaggy/Surly poster with the added 'threw a coke on 'em' too action near the end of the video?  Is it safe to assume people are adults if it is 2AM?  Will he get extra punishment from the PoPo because he assaulted a teen(or teens?), not an adult?  Will the cameraman who was with him, who he left with, be an accomplice?

I know the reference to this on the Trump thread has had conclusions that the teens should have responded.  I personally believe they handled it perfectly by bringing out the camera and not responding.  Especially given the 3 weak or normal looking teens vs two fairly muscular adults.(watch the end of the video to see the accomplice)

Will the police do anything?

Did you get this upset about Ferguson?

[achooloco 961]

18 minutes ago, zork said:

Did Maxine get what she wanted, as a starting point, from the dude assaulting the teenagers at the Whataburger in San Antonio last night?  I guess eating a burger in the corner of the restaurant while wearing a MAGA hat is cause for assault?

 

Maybe he is a Shaggy/Surly poster with the added 'threw a coke on 'em' too action near the end of the video?  Is it safe to assume people are adults if it is 2AM?  Will he get extra punishment from the PoPo because he assaulted a teen(or teens?), not an adult?  Will the cameraman who was with him, who he left with, be an accomplice?

 

I know the reference to this on the Trump thread has had conclusions that the teens should have responded.  I personally believe they handled it perfectly by bringing out the camera and not responding.  Especially given the 3 weak or normal looking teens vs two fairly muscular adults.(watch the end of the video to see the accomplice)

Will the police do anything?

Dbl post

Edited July 5, 2018 by achooloco

[achooloco 961]

17 minutes ago, zork said:

Did Maxine get what she wanted, as a starting point, from the dude assaulting the teenagers at the Whataburger in San Antonio last night?  I guess eating a burger in the corner of the restaurant while wearing a MAGA hat is cause for assault?

 

Maybe he is a Shaggy/Surly poster with the added 'threw a coke on 'em' too action near the end of the video?  Is it safe to assume people are adults if it is 2AM?  Will he get extra punishment from the PoPo because he assaulted a teen(or teens?), not an adult?  Will the cameraman who was with him, who he left with, be an accomplice?

 

I know the reference to this on the Trump thread has had conclusions that the teens should have responded.  I personally believe they handled it perfectly by bringing out the camera and not responding.  Especially given the 3 weak or normal looking teens vs two fairly muscular adults.(watch the end of the video to see the accomplice)

Will the police do anything?

Awesome, just posted and already not aging well...

[zork 629]

57 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Did you get this upset about Ferguson?

I'm not upset.  The event is timely with respect to(wrt) Maxine's comments.  I'm not sure why you are desirous of comparing/contrasting the two events.  Make a thread on that if you want. 

We'll see how the report in the San Antonio MAGA hat caper comes out.(are potential, reportedly witness'd(allegedly), racial slurs enough to justify assault?) 

MAGA Hat caper: As you know the initial video shows the guy grabbing the hat (victim says pulling hair in process) and coke getting thrown on the group on that side of the booth.  There was another person, who left with the hat grabber/coke thrower,  who also was filming.  And maybe other witnesses.  We'll see.

Kids were stupid (on many levels)and wrong if they were indeed throwing racial slurs/jokes.(story came out this afternoon alleging that)  About the time I posted to the Maxine thread as @Achooloco alludes.  We'll see if the police do anything.  Maybe the guy gets his job back.  Maybe he goes down for physically assaulting potentially rude kids who were potentially teasing him?

I am not fully informed on the story beyond the basic internet reporting of course.  We'll see how it comes out.  

[jimmyjazz 45,055]

"Everyone"?  You're bring a whole lot of bias to the discussion.

[purplepride95 6,880]

Or he could of did it because these guys were making racist remarks

https://www.kens5.com/article/news/local/witness-claims-viral-whataburger-attack-may-have-been-motivated-by-racist-remarks/273-570979179