Is it appropriate for the President to violently clear out protestors for a photo op?

I did see people on Twitter belittling him for retreating to the bunker and not acknowledging the protesters outside. But if the secret service takes him down there - along with his family - it must be for a reason. He is POTUS, whether we like him or not. What I don't understand is why he felt it necessary to tell Fox that he was down there to do an inspection. And if that was the case, were Melania and Barron part of that inspection? If he didn't want to admit being taken down there for protection, perhaps for image sake, perhaps he understood the optics of it.

 

I haven't seen any Blacks protesting the COVID 19 lockdown. Can you provide any pictures or links? Google sites?

 

I always do. I always have. Never personally saw the police do anything unreasonable. Clearing a street is not unreasonable.

 

Every citizen should own guns.

 

The church isnt across the street from the white house?

 

Because the evidence shows he is correct. The police used smoke, not tear gas. Even Barr himself had something thrown at him.

 

Consindering that your flying a nazi symbol in your avatar.... I dont think we can take your opinion as very relevant.

 

It's not a Nazi symbol. I found it here

https://www.cafepress.com/+gop_5x7area_rug,1198820485

Nothing at the site mentions any connection whatsoever to Nazi imagery

 

If they were requested to relocate and refused multiple times they are not really all that peaceful? Violence was a fringe element in all these protests. The SS has a duty and obligation to protect the President and first family regardless of his/her level of popularity.

 

I see that Trump's bible waving photo-op was on a par with Winston Churchill inspecting bomb damage in London. Aren't there any Republicans in this country who have a sense of history?

 

Are there any Democrats with a sense of proportion?

 

Is it appropriate for the President to violently clear out protestors for a photo op?

No but it wasn't a violent clearing. How do I know? I watched the whole thing on TV.

 

I voted yes to be a smart ass, but I suppose if it ever actually happens then I might vote no.

 

you mean accept for today when they confirmed that they gassed them?

 

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/...-spray-before-trumps-church-photo-op/2332942/

 

Why should tear gas not be used to control crowds?

 

I voted "yes" -- even though the way the OP was phrased was entirely slanted and biased against Trump. To begin with, when there are rioters, arsonists, anarchists, and looters running amok in the streets, it is ENTIRELY proper for the President of the United States to use his security forces to clear them out as he pursues his duties as HE sees them!

And, if the "rioters, arsonists, anarchists, and looters" don't like it, they can always vote for somebody else in the next election....

 

I said what I meant. No need to repeat it.

 

I'll add another option of my own,

0 - 'no, just HELL no

 

oh gasp, let's all clutch our pearls. Black men have guns too!

 

I doubt very much that #bunkerbitch put up much of an argument if it was the Secret Service that suggested he and Melania, along with the other stoogies like Mark Meadows and Stephen Miller should retreat to the safety of the bunker. Old Colonel Bonespurs is a coward, always has been.

 

Why do peaceful protesters need to be controlled? Eh Commrad?

 

Except what you said was totally wrong. But hey. Thats okay. You Trumpsters should be good at ignoring the truth and burying your head in the sand at this point.

 

Nothing like an insult to drive home your point, huh?

 

Because they weren't all peaceful.