Those close toĀ Donald Trump fear the former president ā€œmay have legit PTSDā€ from the assassination attempt at a Pennsylvania rally last month.

Thatā€™s according to aĀ Vanity FairĀ report published Wednesday that claimed those in Trumpā€™s inner circle have noticed that heā€™s become fixated on a seven-second clip that shows the moment he nearly lost his life.

ā€œHeā€™s been watching that seven-second clip of how close he was to getting shot right in the headā€”over and over and over again,ā€ said a Republican close to the campaign, reportedĀ Vanity Fair.

  • Cethin@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    Ā·
    3 months ago

    You keep implying Iā€™m being emotional because youā€™re arguing with me and have no grounding, so it makes you feel like your argument is stronger. Please, go away if thatā€™s all youā€™re going to keep doing. I have not been emotional. Your insults seem to imply you potentially are though, so reconsider why youā€™re doing this.

    pissed? sure. ā€˜murder someone about itā€™? unlikely. the things we get THAT upset about are entirely different.

    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 donā€™t know how you can assume heā€™s right wing?

    I dont know if he knew what he believed

    that is what I meant by ā€˜in the way that kids areā€™

    Yet you still say heā€™s right wing. Based on what evidence? His parentā€™s Trump signs, or the fact he said some ā€œconservativeā€ 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 donā€™t really care. I just donā€™t appreciate dishonesty. Saying we have more information than we do is dishonest. Iā€™m not replying to this anymore unless you actually add information. All you added this time is that ā€œIā€™m being emotionalā€ and even that wasnā€™t the first time you did so. If you have more information, go ahead and include it. If not, you donā€™t actually know his political ideology and you donā€™t care about honesty.

    • primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      Ā·
      3 months ago

      i keep imply an existential crisis about the limits of knowledge, because we pretty-much know, and thatā€™s the only good-faith assumption I can think of that explains the uncertainty here.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        Ā·
        3 months ago

        How do we pretty much know? What more information do you have? You hope, and thatā€™s it. You have faith, which isnā€™t useful.

        Also, this isnā€™t existential. It happened for sure, and the reasons exist. We may never know them though, but that isnā€™t an existential crisis. If youā€™re going to use terms like that, at least learn what they mean.

        • primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          Ā·
          3 months ago

          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 thatā€™s the only way I can explain this level of skepticism.