March 14, 2016, - 4:22 pm
Donald Trump, Protesters & Violence – Who Is @ Fault & Who is Grandstanding
**** SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE ****
I don’t know about you, but I’m getting really sick and tired of the media and other grandstanders whining about what goes on at Donald Trump rallies. And some of the comparisons and other statements are beyond ridiculous.
Why is everyone blaming Donald Trump for what goes on at his rallies? Why aren’t they blaming leftist radicals seeking to incite riots and violence? Why aren’t they blaming Bernie Sanders who condones (and refuses to condemn) his supporters infiltrating Trump rallies for this express purpose? Why is Ted Cruz, who claims to be a Constitutionalist, blaming Trump for the behavior of the radical left?
Why? Why? Why? These are all questions that demand to be asked. Yet, no one in the media is asking them. Love him or hate him, blaming Donald Trump for the violence of radicals (and his supporters who respond and fight back) is a tactic of the left. An Alinskyite tactic.
Yes, it’s true that a 78-year-old man, John McGraw, punched out a Black protester (whose race should be irrelevant, but sadly isn’t in our Only Black Lives Matter climate) who was being kicked out of the rally. And I do think he went too far in saying, “Next time, we’ll kill them,” or something to that effect. That was dumb. But . . .
But I also know that the protester, Rakeem Jones, gave the 78-year-old and others in the audience the finger. And as I noted during my weekly appearance on the Pat Campbell Show on Friday, there is such a thing as “fighting words” under the law, and in my opinion, giving someone the finger constitutes fighting words. Not all fighting words are protected free speech, and they are words that are considered incitement. They are insults or other epithets meant to incite violence or hatred, and the Supreme Court has generally only considered “fighting words” to be those uttered in face-to-face encounters as this one was. Giving someone the finger, while not spoken, is abusive, communicated language meant to provoke violence. Yes, it is true that the Supreme Court very narrowly defined fighting words and, now, most of them are protected, but they can also be considered provocations of legitimate self-defense in certain instances.
While fighting words are not an excuse for violence, provocation sometimes is. And if I were this 78-year-old–for whom Donald Trump has said he’s “considering” paying legal bills–I’d argue that I felt this was a violent gesture and that this man represented a threat–a threat of violence that I had to stop with a punch. (And, wow, good to see a 78-year-old still has some fight left in him.) I’m not saying I definitely support the punch to that protester, but it didn’t happen in a vacuum, unprovoked, as is being portrayed in much of the media. I doubt the punch would have taken place if there was no middle-finger salute thrown his way.
Trump is not responsible for what people do at his rallies. Most attendees are peaceful and there to support and hear him speak. While he’s been blamed for saying “get ’em out,” how is that encouraging violence? Saying he would punch someone or like to punch someone is also NOT encouraging violence. When Donald Trump says, “Beat them up,” or “Hit them,” about peaceful protesters who are not provoking the crowd, then come talk to me. Until then, it’s just baloney to blame him.
Then, there are the comparisons of Trump and his rallies to Adolf Hitler and his rallies. This is an accusation that sickens me more than most. Both of my late maternal grandparents, a great-aunt, a great-uncle, and many cousins survived the Holocaust . . . barely. Most of both sides of my family were wiped out by Hitler and his minions. The stories my late grandfather told me are horrific. One of my closest friends, an Israeli Holocaust survivor man cries whenever he tells me about what happened to his family. Jews were sent to ovens, “showers,” shot in the head, forced to starve to death, and die of disease and the torture of hard labor. They were turned into lampshades and ashes galore. To compare Donald Trump and his rallies to this is beyond outrageous.
This is a man whose daughter is Jewish (albeit by a questionable, quickie conversion performed by my first cousin Georgie’s father-in-law). His son-in-law and two of his grandchildren (soon a third) are Jews. Trump has never ever done anything remotely resembling Hitler. Not even close. To make the comparison is an abomination. (I will address the David Duke and Klan stuff in another post.)
Newsflash: many of the brave American men who liberated concentration camps and their children and grandchildren are supporters of Donald Trump. Now, you’re gonna tell them they’re supporting Hitler?! PUH-LEEZE.
Then, there is this jerk, Ted Cruz, of whom I used to be a staunch supporter. But I’ve grown more and more disgusted with this fraud and, frankly, weirdo. He’s as much of an establishment type as anybody. And he’s a phony. I’ll have more to say about this in a later post. But for now, I must comment on his grandstanding and annoying blame of Donald Trump for the violence started by protesters. Really? You’re gonna defend leftist garbage who try to silence conservative speech on college campuses and now at Presidential rallies . . . just to score points with the liberal media and your new GOP establishment pals endorsing you? Schmuck. When there are violent protesters at Ted Cruz rallies, let’s see what happens. Until then, STFU.
Here’s a tip for lefty and RINO phonies “outraged” by the response to violent, disruptive, America-haters: you are no different from them. You are no different than William Ayers who did this crap in the past and is now supporting this. Yup, that guy who bombed the Pentagon. You support his brand of terrorism. You are also no different than the Chicago Seven/Eight–anti-war radicals and America-haters who tried this crap at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, including Black Panthers co-founder Bobby Seale. They were prosecuted for a reason. They were terrorists. And so are these protesters.
They have no “right” to free speech at Trump Rallies. Trump rallies are not held on public lands. They are–for the most part–private events, hosted at venues paid for by the Trump campaign. Although the public is generally invited, there is no freedom or Constitutional right to disrupt events at which you are not wanted by the host of the event. There is no right to stay when you’ve been asked to leave the party.
This is why it disgusts me to hear the ignorant hags on ABC’s “The View” whining about this. Today, Caryn Elaine Johnson a/k/a “Whoopi Goldberg” bitched that Donald Trump is denying protesters their freedom of speech. Um, no he’s not. Can I go to the set of “The View” or Ms. Johnson’s home and insist on remaining there and yelling and screaming? Nope. I would be arrested for trespassing and a number of other things.
But it wasn’t just the dogs at “The View.” It was today’s Wall Street Journal, which, in an editorial, compared Trump to Melissa Click, the Missouri professor who threatened a campus photographer–in an insane tirade, calling for “some muscle” to beat him up to stop him from filming. Here’s a tip for the haters at the Journal: the University of Missouri is public property. It’s paid for by taxpayers. That means anyone can protest there or take photos or videos. It means a professor can’t stop anyone from doing so and can’t use violence to prevent filming she doesn’t like. She doesn’t own the land. How that is the same as a Trump rally, where–again–the venue rental is paid for by the Trump campaign or another private party, I’d love to know. Maybe the geniuses at the Wall Street Journal editorial page can enlighten me. And maybe I can take advantage of their logic and show up at their offices and protest. Right? I mean, if someone has a right to speech at a Trump rally, then why don’t I have a right to speech at private offices of a newspaper?
That’s not how it works.
But, hey, who cares about logic? Who cares about leftist protesters seeking violence and the silencing of those they don’t like? Who cares about recognizing what the real Hitler actually did, rather than the guy you don’t like and affix with the unwarranted Hitlerian comparison?
This isn’t about logic or fighting the leftist usurpation of our rights or history. This is all about one thing they think trumps all principle: Stop Trump.
*** UPDATE: Adam Taxin sent me this pic of Muslim biotches from the Chicago Trump rally, ready to cause problems the same way the terrorists they support do all over the world. Note the one chick’s Palestinian flag t-shirt. Fashion that sucks. These are the creatures with whom Ted Cruz and the others are siding against Trump. Wow.
Also, this from Little Al, which I meant to post in this and which I got yesterday:
What a spectacle! Virtually every Republican Party politician and almost all of the ‘conservative’ media siding with the protesters rather than Trump. Never mind that these protesters are Muslim terrorists, Communists, BLM rabble, campus riff-raff, etc.
Comparisons have been made between this and how the me-too Republicans treated Goldwater in 1964. Valid comparisons to a point, but it is worse now.
Remember that the Harlem riot took place in the summer of 1964. While the liberals blamed poverty rather than the rioters is true, but at least the left-wing Republicans did not blame Goldwater for the riots.
Also, to me says something about Cruz; his willingness to blame Trump rather than the demonstrators. As I’ve said privately and on the blog, I do think that some of Trump’s utterances (not all of them) are unnecessarily provocative, certainly the demonstration in Chicago had an independent dynamic.
The fact that Cruz et al can take this position and still call themselves ‘conservatives’ should, I think be kept in mind when Cruz says he will appoint ‘conservative’ justices. His definition of “conservative’ is certainly much broader than mine, and I think this is important to remember when he says he will appoint ‘conservative’ justices. Conservative on settled issues such as abortion to be sure, but what about enforcing the law against terrorists, Communists, etc.?
Besides the usual gaggle of leftist suspects mentioned in this article, there’s Obama’s circle of “community organizer” friends (i.e. Van Jones, the various ACORN spinoffs) who whip up their little rent-a-mobs at the slightest notice – not to mention the funding by those like George Soros. I’ve also noticed a similarity between the blaming of The Donald for all the mayhem and strife at his rallies, and those who blame rape victims for being raped. But as for the whole Klan/Duke kerfuffle – why aren’t those who harp on that as interested in Sharpton/Farrakhan/Jackson et al. support of Dems like Hillary or Bernie?
ConcernedPatriot on March 14, 2016 at 5:05 pm