https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamala-harris-slams-trump-the-predator-and-fraudster-as-crowd-chants-lock-him-up?ref=home
Team Harris also highlighted Trump’s involvement in the right-wing Project 2025 and Vance’s past condemnations of the GOP nominee as a sexual assaulter.
Bullshit. I just watched that speech, and there was no chant — it was clearly one person saying “lock him up”, and they didn’t even repeat it. And she was grinning before that applause break, not in response to a random heckle at the end of it. Wtf is this.
Not bullshit. They’re not talking about the heckle they’re talking about the 10 seconds of chanting at 7:18. Watch again. https://youtu.be/2soe8ml_weg?si=uJqnlGGNU4SF8im_
I hear "KA-MA-LA" pretty clearly there, I really can't make it out as "lock him up".
Idk, to my ears, it could’ve been either. It’s a bit like the Laurel/Yanny thing or the blue and bronze dress. Would need someone who was there to confirm.
Yeah, I was thinking the same tbh. All you can really say is whatever it is has 3 syllabuls, it's so muffled everything else is pareidolia.
Honestly who the fuck cares. Some random people maybe started a chant at a political rally, candidate smiles…the fuck is this “news” story?
I'm unable to hear lock him up much at all. "Loh 'im uh!" is the closest I can get when forcing it... I'm just not hearing any Ks or Ps at the end of those words, no matter how hard I try.
I put on my sony wh-1000xm5's to get as clear audio as I could. The first few chants could be interpreted as "lock him up" but it quickly turned to a clear "Ka-ma-la" once the cheering and clapping reduced.
At 8:34 there was a single clear "lock him up" after Harris mentioned Trump's recent conviction.
So that's settled now, I they weren't chanting "lock him up"
It's "Ka-ma-la"... I just replayed it over and over, trying to hear "lock him up", and at this point I feel like I'm trying to unfocus my eyes at a Jackson Pollock and expecting to see a schooner.
don’t be like that, they are just saying that the two events happened at the same time. “Kamala Harris grins as the world marks new hottest day on record”, “Kamala Harris grins as hundreds more flights get cancelled after huge IT outage”. See? Perfectly innocent journalism!
Propaganda?
I mean, fuck Drumpf into a hole with his own arms, but this is still BS.
Maybe watch the rally? I watched the whole thing live and did not register "lock him up" on my second wacth i heard that some people do chant "lock him up" it doesn't catch on and is drowned out by Ka-Ma-La. You can't believe everything (anything) you read in a headline.
I'm not laughing. I get why some people think it's funny, but it's not a good cycle to be in.
Trump should not have been trying to sell outcomes in the justice system as a political move. It isn't going to improve the situation any to do the same back.
This should have never started. It shouldn't be perpetuated.
On the other hand, trump absolutely belongs in jail and should be absolutely locked up.
-Rapist -Pedophile -Fraud -Insurrectionist -Traitor.
Not locking him is as equally political as him trying to lock hillary up. The apolitical thing to do, as a prosecutor or investigator is to do your fucking job; by the book. In fact, a large part of the reason we're in this mess is because Trump has been left free to do as he fucking pleased for the last 3.5+ years.
The apolitical thing would be to not have chants to jail someone at a rally.
I don't care about Team Red or Team Blue. I care about Trump acting in a way that I'd consider wildly unacceptable for someone in his position. If the Dems start doing Trumplike shit because he did it first, I am going to be done with Harris too. There are other people out there too for whom the issue with Trump is how he acted. Adopt Trump's behavior, and the Dems will kill their appeal to them too.
The apolitical thing would be to not have chants to jail someone at a rally.
"People attending a political rally should be apolitical!"
Well, the proper way to put it should probably be to not insert judicial outcomes into politicking, not politics.
There are 34 convictions in New York State that are waiting on sentencing. That sentencing can - and very arguably should - include incarceration.
Lock him up.
He's literally a felon. He's facing three more court cases about serious criminal acts directly related to politics and his time in the office he's seeking. That's all directly relevant to the political campaign.
He's literally a felon who has been convicted of campaign finance fraud. But oh no, don't mention that since he's in the midst of another campaign. That would be too political.
You're saying that if someone is convicted for election malfeasance and is running in another election, their opponent shouldn't mention it? Really?
Get out of here troll. Trump rants at HUNDREDS of rally’s to lock up people he doesn’t like and ONE chant that is actually true - he should be locked up - makes you think they’re all tHE sAmE??
The apolitical thing would
Because if there's one thing a political rally is known for, its being apolitical.
The apolitical thing would be to not have chants to jail someone at a rally.
I mean, it's a political rally. Wake me up when a judge assigned to one of Trump's many cases shows up and starts chanting.
If the Dems start doing Trumplike shit because he did it first
Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez got convicted on bribery charges. Democrats dropped him like a bag of rocks. Would you say the same thing would happen if a pro Trump senator was indicted?
Oh I'm sorry - the 34 TIME CONVICTED FELON shouldn't be locked up? That's what you think?
This isn't a political outcome being sold, other than denying him the presidency means he's not simply immune. People going to prison for being found guilty of crimes in courts of law is the normal course of events.
So tell me, what's the difference between one candidate calling to lock up their opponent for 'crimes', and another letting the crowd repeat the first one's chant after they were convicted of multiple felonies and are doing their damned best to weasel out of countless more criminal proceedings? Is it minuscule, or a massive difference that makes the two situations not remotely the same? Hint: the latter one.
Fuck him, lock him up. Criminals should be called out as criminals, especially when they're running for office. Boo fucking hoo, don't like being called a criminal, don't be a criminal, and don't be super public running off your stupid dumb mouth.
Chanting "lock her up" in 2016 made you look like a mouth breathing braindead paint-eater
Chanting "lock him up" in 2024 makes you look somehow even more vitriolic, because you should know better.
Chanting "lock him up" in 2024 makes you look like you actually understand where convicted felons belong
Fixed that for you, stop defending traitor criminals
Lock him up
Maybe the civil war is inevitable. And maybe a half-decent multi-party democracy comes out of this too. Jesus christ, the internet is full of this shitshow of a "democracy" these days.
How is it not democratic to bring up the fact that the opponent is a criminal who is only not behind bars because of who he is? In an actual democracy the fucking felon wouldn't be able to run because his crimes would have disqualified him from running. But in this banana republic he gets to walk around and plot for his second attempt at a coup.
So again, fuck him, lock him up. And fuck off with this bullshit that we should forget that he's a traitor to the country and should absolutely be in jail for the crimes he committed, and he's only not in jail because of the anti-democratic moves by his toadies in congress and in the judicial system. That's the real undemocratic part of this whole campaign, not some fucking chanting at a political rally.
It's a two-party system. So first of all there is no way for you to vote if you want a middle ground. Or if you want something done that none of the two parties have in their program. There is zero political color in the US. Just Red and Blue yelling at each other. There are other democracies where you can vote for like 20 parties and multiple parties end up forming the government. There is not one winner. You'll get proportionally represented no matter what. The US system big time in this regard and is probably the number one reason for all the unrest in the country.
Secondly, everything is about the candidate all the time. It's not about the politicics at all. In a democracy it should be about the party and what they want to do. There should be a program that you can look up on their website that you can vote on. The candidate is just an interchangable delegate representing the party. So in a good democracy, you should be able to vote based on the party's program alone and the party's views should be very clear and concistent. But I'm not sure they even have a program here. All I hear is "president this, president that" and a lot of drama about the person.
Third, the actual voting system itself. There should be a direct vote for the party and not based on the states.
None of that answered how bringing up the criminality of the candidate is undemocratic, so I'm not going to respond to any of your non-sequitor.
Again, how is it undemocratic to point out that the candidate in question is a criminal and should be behind bars, but isn't because of political machinations of his party?
Seeing Trump in an orange jumpsuit, as opposed to just orange face makeup, will greatly improve my situation.
Oh for God's sakes sake quit with this they go low we go high bullshit. It's nonsense and a fever dream you're having. There's no point in playing this game with Republicans. You're wasting your time trying to go high.
I just woke up and saw this headline. My knee-jerk reaction was the same as yours, since I always hate stooping down to someone else's level like that.
Then I remembered Trump has been charged with many specific violations of the law and convicted of some of those charges already, and is only awaiting sentencing (thanks to the courts doing him so many favors, that wait keeps getting extended). We're good to call for him to be locked up at this point.
I get what you are saying. It could push us down a path where political enemies are locked up after they lose president elections, but I don't think that is the case.
(1) Jailing Trump isn't a major taking point from politicians. I think Democratic politicians present the prosecution of Trump to be a good thing especially regarding the Georgia and Florida cases, but they typically present his felony conviction as the goal. "Lock him up" typically isn't a railing cry which makes this article newsworthy.
(2) Trump is unique. The Florida and Georgia cases ARE notable. Holding onto state secrets come with a high legal burden. He fucked up. You can't pressure Georgia officials to find votes for you as President. He fucked up. I'm happy having courts investing that.
I expect if Trump actually got sentenced it would be like 8 months probation.
Boohooohooo we did some bullshit for years and now they're doing it back to us! So mean!
I get your point, and mostly agree from a political standpoint. She should ask people to stop.
But it is funny, since she's a former DA and AG, while he's a actually a convicted felon. And he started it? Yah it's a little funny. Once