• merc@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    3 hours ago

    The context is:

    “We should have bipartisan agreement.”

    “How about we all come together and say ‘Let’s stop murders.’”

    “How about we all come together and say ‘Let’s stop rapes.’”

    “How about we all come together and say ‘Let’s stop attacking pedophiles.’”

    Then he shows a chart that supposedly shows the rate of various crimes fell while the national guard was in town. Based on how he phrased things, he probably meant to name another crime. Like, maybe “Let’s stop pedophiles attacking children” or something like that. But man, this definitely isn’t a slip where the other thing someone probably meant to say is obvious. And, he didn’t correct himself, so there’s no way to know what he actually meant to say.

    • unphazed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 hours ago

      He wrote that shit down and read it. He consciously looked at it, said “yep” and then said it aloud. There was no filter in his mind that what was going out into the world was absolutely heinous and deplorable. That says more to me than any Freudian slip.

      • merc@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        He (or one of his staffers) wrote something down, and thought he read what was written. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. But, you can’t convince me it wasn’t a slip.

        Let’s say he is a pedophile, or he wants to support people who are. Why would he be the one to lead the charge? Has he ever struck anybody as being brave, or as willing to lead from the front? Why would he do it at this time, and do it in such a strange way?