Utah Delegates threatened with violence, Mormon's "on the list"

Comments going around about how Utah delegates were threatened with violence, murder, told to kill themselves by Trump delegates at the National Convention. Also rumors that top Trump advisers are suggesting that Mormon's be tracked via database along with Muslims and other non-Christian groups as well as tax-exempt status be revoked for not supporting Trump.

hawkwing wrote:
Comments going around about how Utah delegates were threatened with violence, murder, told to kill themselves by Trump delegates at the National Convention. Also rumors that top Trump advisers are suggesting that Mormon's be tracked via database along with Muslims and other non-Christian groups as well as tax-exempt status be revoked for not supporting Trump.

That was my vibe from him. This reminds me so much of the candidates that were running in Joseph Smith's time. Both the Whigs and the Democrats would come to Nauvoo and talk about how they would stick up for the Mormon people, and then go around talking to others about how the Mormons were the problem. Ultimately it is what led to Joseph Smith being nominated as President, though it appears he accepted the idea half heartedly. His ideas on using the U.S. treasury to buy the freedom of slaves, and to lend support for Texas independence were revolutionary and very popular among the steam boat crowds, but deep down, I think he knew he didn't really have a chance.



Spoiler alert: In the end, no one stood up for the Mormons in Nauvoo.

hawkwing wrote:
Comments going around about how Utah delegates were threatened with violence, murder, told to kill themselves by Trump delegates at the National Convention. Also rumors that top Trump advisers are suggesting that Mormon's be tracked via database along with Muslims and other non-Christian groups as well as tax-exempt status be revoked for not supporting Trump.

This is as true as the Big XII inviting Utah and then taking Cincy -- it's pure crap. You know this because Trump has never said there should be a tracking database of all Muslims, it was just the convoluted interpretation of one of a single word answer to a question a lefty asked him.



Again, not voting for Trump, don't much like him, but this kind of over-the-top rumormongering is pretty absurd.

Agree with Schmoe, making a mountain of a molehill.



You can find what actually happened (she was told "she should die" which is much less than a death threat, and she was never touched) here...



http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/utah-delegate-threatened-bathroom

Telling someone that they should die counts as a death threat in my book and those people should be prosecuted. However, in the link provided it was Trump supporters not anyone from the actual Trump campaign that did this.



Not a big Trump fan either, but no need to lie and make stuff up. Provide links and evidence if you're going to make such claims.

he did say it was trump delegates who made the threat.

Trump delegates clearly made the thread and intimidation. There is no denying that. Rules and procedures that should have been followed at the convention were not, because of Trump delegates and supporters. As for the anti-Mormon actions Trump would pursue if he were ever to be elected, you can easily find many anti-Mormon statements from him supporters, followers, and advisers on Twitter. Trump has already said he would remove Constitutionally protected rights from Reporters, Muslims, and others who disagree with him, so it's no stretch at all to see that the same would come against Mormons when the forefront of the Never Trump campaign is Mitt Romney, and that LDS people in large percentages reject Trump and refuse to support his evil campaign.

hawkwing wrote:

...... rumors that top Trump advisers are suggesting that Mormon's be tracked via database along with Muslims and other non-Christian groups as well as tax-exempt status be revoked for not supporting Trump.

Don't believe it for a second. The Fed's can't even track illegal aliens that have committed felonies.



Not near the realm of being true. Juicy talking point though.

If you think Trump is anti LDS wait until hillary rodham attacks religion. She is clever (not the same as intelligent) in staying out of it now but if you trust her more than Trump, good luck.

nuk13 wrote:
If you think Trump is anti LDS wait until hillary rodham attacks religion. She is clever (not the same as intelligent) in staying out of it now but if you trust her more than Trump, good luck.

Bingo! Hillary is a venomous snake - coiled and ready to strike.

byufan4ever wrote:
Telling someone that they should die counts as a death threat in my book and those people should be prosecuted.

I've told a few a$$wipes at work I hope I'm there when they choke on a chicken bone so I can watch them choke to death - and I meant it. I don't think I should be prosecuted. And sadly, they didn't choke on a chicken bone. You don't always get what you want. :lol:

You should die - confusing

I'm going to kill you - death threat.

BroncoBot wrote:
You should die - confusing

I'm going to kill you - death threat.

Please put me out of my misery - but smile when you do it.



Polite request. 8)

hawkwing wrote:
Comments going around about how Utah delegates were threatened with violence, murder, told to kill themselves by Trump delegates at the National Convention. Also rumors that top Trump advisers are suggesting that Mormon's be tracked via database along with Muslims and other non-Christian groups as well as tax-exempt status be revoked for not supporting Trump.

Sen. Mike Lee was asked if the GOP was trying to punish Utah for not supporting Trump. Here's the quote from a KSL article today:

"Lee, who considers Cruz a close friend, said Monday's rules battle wouldn't have changed the outcome. Asked if he felt the national party was punishing Utah, he said, "I would hope they wouldn't do that. That would seem a little silly, wouldn't it?"



In the same article, former Utah Congressman Enid Mickelsen, who is the chairwoman of the convention's rules committee said:

"She said Utahns have to put aside their feelings about Trump and get behind the party's nominee or they'll be helping the Democratic Party's presumptive nominee, Hillary Clinton, win the White House.



"I've said Utahns are working through the five stages of grief," Mickelsen said. "I hope they get there. Because if they don't, they’re playing right into Hillary Clinton’s hands."



Which is exactly what I have been saying. Not supporting the GOP nominee is helping Hillary win the White House.



https://www.ksl.com/?sid=40721161&nid=148&title=utahs-40-gop-delegate-votes-go-to-trump-not-cruz

Anyone who supports Trump is not a true Conservative or Republican.

hawkwing wrote:
Anyone who supports Trump is not a true Conservative or Republican.

Can't quite agree with this. Trump obviously represents "republican" values. Agree with the conservative part. But I haven't associated the terms conservative and republican for close to a decade now.

hawkwing wrote:
Anyone who supports Trump is not a true Conservative or Republican.

Good grief - baloney.



With the same line of thought you could declare: Anyone who commits murder, by chopping the head off a defenseless man who's in a drunken stupor, can in no way be a true follower of Christ.



I will place my commitment to the Constitution, the rule of law, and Conservative values up against anyone here - I take a back seat to no one when it comes to standing firmly by Conservative principles and the GOP. With that GOP support, I am voting for the GOP presidential nominee in November (even though I did not support the now GOP presidential nominee in the primary process). Are you?



BTW, George W. Bush was not a real Conservative. Especially he was definitely not a fiscal Conservative, not at all. Yet, the country was definitely better off with George W. Bush in the oval office that the 2 alternatives that he defeated.

Ddawg wrote:

I will place my commitment to the Constitution, the rule of law, and Conservative values up against anyone here - I take a back seat to no one when it comes to standing firmly by Conservative principles and the GOP. With that GOP support, I am voting for the GOP presidential nominee in November (even though I did not support the now GOP presidential nominee in the primary process). Are you?

These are the very reasons I cannot and will not support the Republican nominee. He's a fraud, fool's gold, and an evil, wicked man. Donald Trump will do more to destroy the Constitution than any other candidate who has ever won a party nomination in the history of this country. I urge everyone who has even an inkling of love of God and the Constitution to find another option for this election.

hawkwing wrote:

I will place my commitment to the Constitution, the rule of law, and Conservative values up against anyone here - I take a back seat to no one when it comes to standing firmly by Conservative principles and the GOP. With that GOP support, I am voting for the GOP presidential nominee in November (even though I did not support the now GOP presidential nominee in the primary process). Are you?

These are the very reasons I cannot and will not support the Republican nominee. He's a fraud, fool's gold, and an evil, wicked man. Donald Trump will do more to destroy the Constitution than any other candidate who has ever won a party nomination in the history of this country. I urge everyone who has even an inkling of love of God and the Constitution to find another option for this election.

Disagree completely. The Constitution is hanging in the balance - look at the Supreme Court with a critical vacancy. Guaranteed Hillary will tip the Supreme Court for the next 20 years to hardcore liberal. The Constitution will be gone.



Trump has stated he will pick a Supreme Court Judge from a list prepared by the Heritage Foundation. Note, Trump picked a Conservative VP.



Here's what the National Review said about Trump and his proposed list of potential Supreme Court nominees:

"Trump’s Judicial Appoints List Is Filled with Outstanding Conservatives"



"I still don’t believe Trump is a conservative on domestic policy or responsible enough to lead our nation’s foreign policy. But he may be starting to unify the party with the right moves — if his list of potential appointments to the Supreme Court is any sign.



Everyone on the list is an outstanding legal conservative. All are young, smart, and committed. They would excel in any comparison with anyone whom Hillary Clinton would appoint to the Supreme Court. Several of the possibilities, such as Tom Lee of Utah, Allison Eid of Colorado, and David Stras of Minnesota, are former law clerks of Justice Clarence Thomas, while others, such as Steve Colloton of Iowa and Joan Larsen of Michigan, clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia. They are joined by other well-known judicial conservatives, such as Diane Sykes, Don Willet, Ray Kethledge, and Bill Pryor.



These names are a Federalist Society all-star list of conservative jurisprudence. In the interest of full disclosure, I will note that I count several of them as colleagues and friends. It is a good sign that, on one of a president’s most important decisions, Trump clearly turned to the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation for advice."



Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/435570/donald-trump-judicial-appointments-list-outstanding-conservatives





Yes Trump is a wild mustang, but he's a better bet than Hillary - who is a chronic, evil liar.

Trump can and will say anything and do something else completely. If you want to believe a hollow campaign promise now and be disappointed later that's on you. Most everyone else in the country luckily sees through his lies, flip-flops, and multiple statements saying anything and everything.