Why do people who defend Trump always resort to logical fallacy? Because there is no logic to that maneuver.
Just because someone else does something, doesn’t mean that the other person doesn’t. And just because I dislike and denounce one, doesn’t mean I like the other.
That out of the way—tear gas was used once by the border guards during Obama’s tenure (not directly authorized by him) because a riot began at the border and projectiles were being hurled at the officers. In that case, tear gas was used as a non violent alternative to harming people. In this case, for weeeks Trump drummed up dictions and racial hatred, dispatched more than 5,000 armed troops to the border (which should have made the need for tear gas moot, with that much support, provided the previous administrations policies of processing were the goal) and authorized them to use lethal force. Not to defend themselves should they be rooted against, but as a measure of REPELLING the immigrants. Tear gas was lobbed from the line into another country, not as self defense but as an opening volley. In this case it was used as a non violent alternative to the actual orders of the President. Not as an SOP reply to attack.
So there are some very important differences.
I’ve never said Obama had good policy. Truth is, while I liked his persona and his decorum, he was prevented from doing much, was too moderate, and didn’t change a few a key things that would have done a great deal for this country. And I’ve never defended Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton. I think both of them give off the aura of sociopath at one hundred paces. But their politicians. Most politicians in this system, with these rules in place, will be a sociopath or at the very least, a narcissist.
Its all a game, friend. They’re all gamers. Think of it like that. Which gamers will do what you want in the process of trying to earn points.
Simon's Tumblr Dump 
Leave a Reply