Re this tweet: Implicated as in, involved. It’s abt how POTUS views situation. When there’s suggestion his rhetoric/actions are factors (ie. enemy/people) he casts partial blame on targets. Contrast w/ mass shootings, where he offers clear moral leadership, only blames perps. =>https://twitter.com/DavidMDrucker/status/1055436800565612544 …
Appreciate your feed back. I’m fine with analysis I tweeted & think it was clear but understand some might disagree; always glad to hear from critics. Involved/implicated meant when there are suggestions (or accusations) that he is partially (or more) responsible.
-
-
If people said "David Drucker is partially to blame for the violence in politics." You'd probably respond negatively. This particular act of violence, thankfully, is complete misses, so we have all the intended victims blaming Trump, which is why Trump speaks against them.
-
Exactly, *so you agree with us*. Trump (and me and David) respond differently when we are blamed than when we are not. Glad you finally saw the obvious.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It was definitely clear David. Some people will deliberately twist an argument just to be pedantic. Ignore Joe.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.