Those close toĀ Donald Trump fear the former president āmay have legit PTSDā from the assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally last month.
Thatās according to aĀ Vanity FairĀ report published Wednesday that claimed those in Trumpās inner circle have noticed that heās become fixated on a seven-second clip that shows the moment he nearly lost his life.
āHeās been watching that seven-second clip of how close he was to getting shot right in the headāover and over and over again,ā said a Republican close to the campaign, reportedĀ Vanity Fair.
pissed? sure. āmurder someone about itā? unlikely. the things we get THAT upset about are entirely different.
okay but we do have information. I addressed that in points one and two. we do have information. I told you what information we have. so I return to point five, and wonder if you need a hug.
he searched for both biden and trump (and I think some others?) events because he didnāt care WHO he shot, just that it was important. the kid was a right winger, in specifically the way that children can be, and that motivated that he did a shooting, but not who he shot. correct. this is what I said originally.
that is what I meant by āin the way that kids areā
You keep implying Iām being emotional because youāre arguing with me and have no grounding, so it makes you feel like your argument is stronger. Please, go away if thatās all youāre going to keep doing. I have not been emotional. Your insults seem to imply you potentially are though, so reconsider why youāre doing this.
It seems pretty clear to me it was suicide. That was the goal, and leaving a mark was a bonus. He searched for both Biden and Trump events. It seems he would have taken either opportunity to go out while killing a (former) president and presidential candidate. It was not politically motivated and I donāt know how you can assume heās right wing?
Yet you still say heās right wing. Based on what evidence? His parentās Trump signs, or the fact he said some āconservativeā things to classmates at some point in time (and assume they can correctly identify conservative from anarchist or anything else being dumb teenagers)?
Look. I donāt really care. I just donāt appreciate dishonesty. Saying we have more information than we do is dishonest. Iām not replying to this anymore unless you actually add information. All you added this time is that āIām being emotionalā and even that wasnāt the first time you did so. If you have more information, go ahead and include it. If not, you donāt actually know his political ideology and you donāt care about honesty.
i keep imply an existential crisis about the limits of knowledge, because we pretty-much know, and thatās the only good-faith assumption I can think of that explains the uncertainty here.
How do we pretty much know? What more information do you have? You hope, and thatās it. You have faith, which isnāt useful.
Also, this isnāt existential. It happened for sure, and the reasons exist. We may never know them though, but that isnāt an existential crisis. If youāre going to use terms like that, at least learn what they mean.
I said all this.
and I ask again: are you currently having an existential crisis about the limits of knowledge and the fundamental contradictions of knowledge? are you courting chapel perilous? are you balancing on the knifes edge of zen and madness? because thatās the only way I can explain this level of skepticism.