Yik Yak icon
Join communities on Yik Yak Download
Donald Trump is a domestic terrorist. Let me say that again. DONALD TRUMP is a DOMESTIC TERRORIST. Like, by DEFINITION.
upvote 86 downvote

default user profile icon
Anonymous 17h

false

upvote -3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 19h

I find it so funny how I’ve never seen someone say why when they make these kinda posts

upvote -8 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 16h

As the elected president of the United States he represents the interests of the United States. He can’t be a domestic terrorist. Now if you wanted to call him an international terrorist that’s another thing. But this is stupid

upvote -8 downvote
🐘
Anonymous 19h

Okay lil guy, take your meds

upvote -9 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> mr.maga 19h

Did daddy Trump invite you to change his diaper yet? 🥺

upvote 25 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> mr.maga 19h

Trump could rape you and you’d thank him for it

upvote 21 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 19h

Ok then ask why

upvote 11 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 19h

There are 3 core elements that can define and identify a domestic terrorist. 1. Performing an act that is dangerous to human life and against federal law (Epstein files? Eating babies?) 2. Intended coercion or intimidation, either against civilian people or in an effort to influence government policies (…DUH) 3. The actions take place in the US or in US territories (…)

upvote 17 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 18h

The three elements must be connected. Even if the “eating babies” wasn’t mere speculation, it would have to be connected to the coercion or intimidation. Who is Trump intimidating by eating babies, and to affect what policies? Even if it did happen, he didn’t do it to further a cause, he did it just bc his pedo friends were.

upvote -5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #5 18h

Everything is connected when you’re THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and are responsible for the living quality of US citizens. Also, that was just one example to remind you all how awful he really is. There are so many other things that I don’t have the time, typing space, or energy to share right now.

upvote 12 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 17h

Then how is a conspiracy that he ate babies years ago connected to the living quality, today, of US citizens? Lol you don’t have the energy to press little buttons on your phone? Damn our generation really does need to get outside more that’s just sad, lazy ass.

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> OP 16h

Are u bringing up Epstein files cus u think he’s protecting them. Ur aware he’s released the most of the files out of any president with like millions of files released. Biden only released a few thousand

upvote -2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 16h

says the predator

upvote 8 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 16h

hardest pill to swallow 💀💀💀💀

upvote 9 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #2 15h

u are aware that….an NPR investigation found that his administration removed proof that he was in the files right…..and ovviously they couldnt release everything during ghislaine’s conviction which, guess what moron, was during bidens presidency. pick up a book nimrod

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 15h

he’s SUPPOSED to represent the interests of the united states. in reality, he’s a man who’s only concerned with the interests of himself

upvote 15 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 15h

That’s not how it works. He’s an elected leader chosen by his country to represent their interests, that’s democracy

upvote -3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 15h

yes while this is true, and constitutionally it’s a little vague but the president seems to work more as a trustee than a delegate. however donald trump is an enemy to the constitution. im not sure he fits the complex, specific definition to be a domestic terrorist. but he does not care about our constitution or the people it protects, so he is not good for the domestic health of america

upvote 9 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 15h

Being unhealthy and being a terrorist are very different things. So thank you for agreeing

upvote -2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 15h

so i could get elected to office and decide to nuke the country because i lied during my campaign, and just because people believed what i said, that means my actions automatically have the nation’s interests at heart? that’s not how it works

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 15h

im not agreeing with either of you, and if you had basic reading comprehension, you would know that. hope this helps.

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 15h

You would get impeached for committing crimes. Although which one is it? Did Republicans knowingly elect a violent racist or were they duped into electing Trump who only after went rogue? Can’t be both

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 15h

If you don’t believe he fits the specific definition of a domestic terrorist, you don’t think he’s a domestic terrorist

upvote -2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 15h

your comment also said he cant be a domestic terrorist because he’s the president, obviously i dont agree with you

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 15h

all people can’t be grouped into a single category. many people, particularly the ones that have dropped all support of him were duped into thinking that he would make the country better even though they were warned that was a dumb decision. and others are genuinely bigots who want to see him go after minority groups. but basically, you admit then that just taking the oath of office does not mean anything you do is automatically looking out for the interests of the country.

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 15h

Obviously you CAN be president and a domestic terrorist, but then you’d be impeached for breaking the law. The definition is: The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. Until he is convicted, his political aims ARE the political aims of the country he’s elected to represent

upvote -2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 15h

a) that’s the entire point. we disagreed with you not because you said he isn’t by definition a domestic terrorist, but because you said he was elected president so he can’t possibly be a domestic terrorist. b) you don’t need to be convinced to be against the interests of the people of this country. i’d say, for instance, making billions of dollars insider trading and allowing the 1% to milk the middle class is not in the interests of the country.

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

I said he represents the United States and therefore cannot be a domestic terrorist as he decides the political goals of the country. Unless of course he gets convicted of violently breaking the law. So long as you dictate the political policy of the country, you cannot be a sitting president of the US and be a domestic terrorist. Only a former president convicted of crimes that equate to domestic terrorism.

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

The leader of a country that has the law “weekly bombing of local schools” is not a domestic terrorist if he bombs local schools

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

he has been convicted of 34 felonies btw. and the president does not define the political goals of a democratic country. if they do, wtf are the other two branches for? the other twi branches that are much more directly involved in shaping policy than the president.

upvote 2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

You think every felon in the United States is a domestic terrorist? How is that relevant

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

Checks and balances do not mean all of a sudden that the president is no longer the leader of the country. Just because he can’t do whatever he wants doesn’t mean he’s not in charge

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

please go to school omfg you genuinely have to be misunderstanding me on purpose. YOU implied that trump had not been convicted of any felonies, i was correcting you that he has. he does not fit the current definition of domestic terrorist bc the definition is flawed, and trump will never be removed from office because he put all his dicksucking goonies below and above him to keep him in his place of power.

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

by definition the president is not in charge of the other two branches. do you actually know anything about our constitution? it’s online for free. please for the love of god take a polisci class.

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

Please don’t accuse me of misunderstanding when you’re literally actively putting words in my mouth. He has not been convicted, as president, of ANY crime that equates to domestic terrorism. I don’t know where you’d get from anything I said that he hasn’t committed any crime. If the definition of the word of flawed then find another word to call him. You can’t just change definitions cuz they sound feel better coming off the tongue

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

In charge of the COUNTRY omfg. It’s like I’m saying specific words and you’re adding your own to the end for the fun of it

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

I did not call him a domestic terrorist i dont need to find new words for shit!!

upvote 2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

You just said he doesn’t fit the definition “because the definition is flawed” The fault is in the definition of the word instead of the fact that his actions don’t fit the word

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

yes i agree? i dont understand where you would have gotten that i dont agree w that

upvote 2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

but hes not. he has the least power of the branches. he isnt in charge of shit

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

Another flawed definition we should change?

post
upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

you’re giving me an actual headache with this stupidity. you can’t call him a CONVICTED domestic terrorist, but that doesn’t mean that there is no way for him to commit domestic terrorism just because he’s the president. for instance, a murderer doesn’t become one once the jury convicts, he’s a murderer when he takes a life. a jury just defines that legally in terms of punishment retroactively. also just because a jury hasn’t found someone guilty of murder doesn’t mean they didn’t do it

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

A murderer isn’t elected by the people to represent the country’s interests. It’s entirely different ballpark

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

they have been before. its not a different ballpark. this man has killed millions, most of our presidents have. hey have killed other humans either in war combat for via military action. its just not called murder

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

Again, like I said in like my second comment: That would make him an international terrorist, not a domestic one

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

this is actually so braindead. so you’re saying that because this man is elected, he can do literally FUCK ALL he damn so pleases in the name of personal gain, and because people were stupid enough to believe the lies he told in order to get power, he cannot possibly be against their interests unless he is convicted by the same people who want to keep their own power (that they also use to enrich themselves) which is directly tied to him staying in office???

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

Yeah pretty much in regards to terrorism. That’s politics. And terrorism is a completely political term

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

One minor correction tho: Not in the name of personal gain. If he states it’s in the name of the country’s best interests, then yes.

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

i never said that he was absolutely 100% a domestic terrorist. i said that he is not concerned with the interests of this country, he’s only interested in his own interests, and just because he’s president doesn’t mean that he automatically is doing things in our best interest

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

so if he said tomorrow, “it’s in the country’s best interest that i insider trade and make housing, gas, and groceries unaffordable” then it’s legitimately in the country’s best interest?

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

So then you’re not arguing with me lol. I never said that just because he’s president means everything that he does IS in the best interest, I said that for him to be a domestic TERRORIST, he has to be convicted because his politics represent the country. So long as he doesn’t break the law as president, his actions are assumed to be representative. And to be a terrorist your actions, by definition, need to break the law for political aim

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

If he legally took actions that made gas and housing more expensive, yes. Insider trading is a crime, so if convicted, no. This is fairly straightforward

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

he did break the laws while he was a president. 34 felony counts. maybe you should write this down because i think youre confusing yourself

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

Like I said before, is every felon in the United States a domestic terrorist?

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

but you put crime, not a specific crime. according to YOUR definition, i fucking guess so?

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

“if daddy trump says i have to pay more to live so he can make more money, its in my best interest as long as it’s legal because i have no opinion of my own unless it’s spoon fed to me” yeah seems pretty straightforward.

post
upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #9 14h

Check the time

post
upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

You just learn how laws work in this country?

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s good for you or in your own interest you dumbfuck. billionaires LEGALLY avoid paying taxes is LEGAL but is that good for you or this country???

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #10 14h

Again, didn’t say it was indeed in our best interests. I said so long as a president claims it is, he can’t be a domestic terrorist for doing things within what the law allows him to do. You’re doing the thing again where you change my argument because you want to dunk on who you think is defending Trump but I’m literally just arguing a legal and semantic hypothetical

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

ok i think you fundamentally are not understanding my argument here. i’m talking about how not everything he does is in your or the country’s best interest just because he is the president. and completely separately, im saying that just because he is president also does not mean that he cannot commit an act of domestic terrorism. there can be overlap but not necessarily. you can do something that is not in the best interest of the country while also not crossing into domestic terrorism.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #7 14h

the distinction here is that being president does not make you incapable of either or both. you have the potential to do either one even as the president. i’m not arguing that he himself personally has committed an act of domestic terror as the president, but i am arguing that he is not working in the best interest of the country (which is legal but ethically fucked) and that the office of president does not make it so that any future actions cannot ever be domestic terrorism.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #6 13h

Categorically…true!

upvote 4 downvote