Trump protester blindsided as led out of rally

[Jan2017]

Video: Trump protester sucker-punched at rally in North Carolina


A protester was being led out of a Donald Trump event Wednesday night when a man attending the rally sucker-punched the protester in the face, videos show.

The incident, captured from multiple angles, involved security leading the protester, a black man, out of Trump's Fayetteville, N.C. event when an apparently
white man sporting a ponytail walked over and quickly punched the protester in the face as at least one member of security watched, recordings show.

Fayetteville's WNCN reported that 78-year-old John McGraw was charged Thursday with assault and battery and disorderly conduct for allegedly striking the protestor.

The Washington Post interviewed the the protester, Rakeem Jones, who said the punch blindsided him.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/03/10/video-trump-protester-sucker-punched-rally-north-carolina/81580036/

[tod evans]

Gotta watch out for those 78 year olds..........

[jllundqu]

We are in serious trouble.... brown shirts doesn't quite cover it

[AuH20]

This is awesome. He's building an army. This epitomizes dedication, though I'd rather see the old guy save some venom for the authorities.

[Brian4Liberty]

Gotta watch out for those 78 year olds..........

Old man strength. :toady:

[Brian4Liberty]

This is awesome. He's building an army.

Retard strength. :toady:

[AuH20]

Imagine if something bad happens to Trump and then factor in spry 78 year old men like this going chimpanzee? It's a good time to be alive. I'd never thought I'd see the day when slaves would manifest their anger and start striking back.

[Danke]

Maybe he tampered with the old man's refreshments.

[thoughtomator]

An actual libertarian would recognize this guy as not a protester but a criminal committing intentional trespass with malice.

But I come to understand that in the New Libertarianism, private property is fungible if you don't like the property owner or what he does with his own property. Because principles.

[Brian4Liberty]

a black man, out of Trump's Fayetteville, N.C. event when an apparently white man

Race riot! Everybody look! :rolleyes:

Meanwhile probable Hillary supporters pull a gun on Trump supporter (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/03/hispanic-gang-members-pull-gun-on-trump-supporter/)...

[AuH20]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_1-kaGkc9ygc/TRIDdm6SXMI/AAAAAAAAACo/uIgMRfuNICM/S1600-R/wthbloggerlogo.png

[thoughtomator]

Race riot! Everybody look! :rolleyes:

Meanwhile probable Hillary supporters pull a gun on Trump supporter (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/03/hispanic-gang-members-pull-gun-on-trump-supporter/)...

Don't forget the famous "Don't Tase me, bro!" incident at a Kerry speech, or the more recent beating of Ray McGovern at a Clinton speech.

Luckily, we here at Short Attention Span Theater can completely forget about that and say that this is a sign that Trump is uniquely authoritarian, because principles.

[phill4paul]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_1-kaGkc9ygc/TRIDdm6SXMI/AAAAAAAAACo/uIgMRfuNICM/S1600-R/wthbloggerlogo.png

Your shit is just getting ridiculous.

[Root]

Imagine if something bad happens to Trump and then factor in spry 78 year old men like this going chimpanzee? It's a good time to be alive. I'd never thought I'd see the day when slaves would manifest their anger and start striking back.
The slaves didn't attack their enforcers, the men wearing the costumes who call themselves "police".

[Brian4Liberty]

Maybe he tampered with the old man's refreshments.

Heard a report earlier that the old man said the protester was flipping everyone off and yelling obscenities as he was escorted out. No excuse for the punch though. Sticks and stones, initiation of violence, and all that.

[phill4paul]

Don't forget the famous "Don't Tase me, bro!" incident at a Kerry speech, or the more recent beating of Ray McGovern at a Clinton speech.

Luckily, we here at Short Attention Span Theater can completely forget about that and say that this is a sign that Trump is uniquely authoritarian, because principles.

Who here condoned either of those? Your cognitive dissonance runs deep.

[Danke]

That punch was uncalled for, but politics were a lot rougher a long time ago than they are today.

[thoughtomator]

The slaves didn't attack their enforcers, the men wearing the costumes who call themselves "police".

If you don't see the planned-protester disruption charade as part of the enforcement, then you really don't get what is going on in the big picture.

These kind of staged-for-media events are part and parcel of how things got to where they are today. A punch in the face is the least of what those people deserve.

No true libertarian would endorse a malicious invasion of private property.

But those here blinded by anti-Trump hatred can have it all spelled out for them that this is the same kind of charade pulled against Ron Paul, down to the howler monkeys screaming racism.

This is where the difference between those who actually participate in the liberty movement and those who just say they do but are really keyboard warriors part ways. Those with experience know this script because it's been used against us so many times.

Those with no experience fall for the ploy and feel sorry for trespassers if the corporate media calls them "protesters".

Genuine protesters do it on public property or their own private property. Professional agitators with malicious intent do what these "protesters" do.

[Danke]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCT36wUAH48

[phill4paul]

If you don't see the planned-protester disruption charade as part of the enforcement, then you really don't get what is going on in the big picture.

These kind of staged-for-media events are part and parcel of how things got to where they are today. A punch in the face is the least of what those people deserve.

No true libertarian would endorse a malicious invasion of private property.

But those here blinded by anti-Trump hatred can have it all spelled out for them that this is the same kind of charade pulled against Ron Paul, down to the howler monkeys screaming racism.

This is where the difference between those who actually participate in the liberty movement and those who just say they do but are really keyboard warriors part ways. Those with experience know this script because it's been used against us so many times.

Those with no experience fall for the ploy and feel sorry for trespassers if the corporate media calls them "protesters".

Genuine protesters do it on public property or their own private property. Professional agitators with malicious intent do what these "protesters" do.

Professional protesters are $50 bucks an hr. Less than a dime a bazillion for Trumps pockets. And he get's a lot of mileage out of them. Agent provocateurs are not only employed to disrupt organizations, they can be used to cement allegiance to them. ;)

[Danke]

Professional protesters are $50 bucks an hr. Less than a dime a bazillion for Trumps pockets. And he get's a lot of mileage out of them. Agent provocateurs are not only employed to disrupt organizations, they can be used to cement allegiance to them. ;)

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQW9EDU6pJBZQGDAgP9BDJoe1KOqdS7p 3SlrnMOchMue2OUmzdR

[Valli6]

Old guy wanted to play knockout game.

[CPUd]

https://i.imgur.com/f6LMqjt.jpg

[erowe1]

Imagine if something bad happens to Trump and then factor in spry 78 year old men like this going chimpanzee? It's a good time to be alive. I'd never thought I'd see the day when slaves would manifest their anger and start striking back.

Slaves striking back means assaulting and battering an innocent person because of the color of his skin?

[jllundqu]

Slaves striking back means assaulting and battering an innocent person because of the color of his skin?

Seriously.... how far we have fallen, indeed.

[AuH20]

Slaves striking back means assaulting and battering an innocent person because of the color of his skin?

Innocent? That individual went there to instigate trouble and got what he subconsciously wanted. That's like me going to a Bernie rally and intentionally agonizing the participants.

[AuH20]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkctUfc5br0

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODmUj9gzXuE

[Danke]

Deterrence, does it work?

[thoughtomator]

Innocent? That individual went there to instigate trouble and got what he subconsciously wanted. That's like me going to a Bernie rally and intentionally agonizing the participants.

But your freedom of speech doesn't count because the media doesn't portray you in a sympathetic light. Only the freedom of speech of the media's favorites count, even if they are engaged in premeditated malicious trespass on private property and are actually violating someone else's freedom of speech at the time.

Because principles.

[RJ Liberty]

The Washington Post is reporting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-protester-sucker-punched-at-north-carolina-rally-videos-show/) that John McGraw, the old man, after sucker-punching the black guy, said this:


“We don’t know who he is, but we know he’s not acting like an American,” McGraw added. “The next time we see him, we might have to kill him.”

Whatever your feelings about protestors, I think that is extreme.

[Danke]

“It’s happening at all these rallies now and they’re letting it ride,” Jones said. “The police jumped on me like I was the one swinging.”

Then don't go to Trumps rallies. Pretty simple.

[thoughtomator]

“It’s happening at all these rallies now and they’re letting it ride,” Jones said. “The police jumped on me like I was the one swinging.”

Then don't go to Trumps rallies. Pretty simple.

He's upset that the tired old bag of media-manipulation and opposition-suppression tricks doesn't work anymore. Poor baby.

Used to be that when a man set out to look for a fight, he wasn't surprised when he got one.

[Smitty]

If a 78 year old man with a ponytail whupped my ass, I'd keep moving and hoped nobody saw it.

[GunnyFreedom]

This is awesome. He's building an army. This epitomizes dedication, though I'd rather see the old guy save some venom for the authorities.

Yeah. Awesome.

http://i.imgur.com/GTZfW3a.png

If you think that's awesome, just wait until you see:

http://i.imgur.com/7etCVZn.jpg

Now how awesome is that eh?

[GunnyFreedom]

The Washington Post is reporting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-protester-sucker-punched-at-north-carolina-rally-videos-show/) that John McGraw, the old man, after sucker-punching the black guy, said this:



Whatever your feelings about protestors, I think that is extreme.

Is sure as hell ought to be. Just look at these numb nuts falling all over themselves to defend it.

[GunnyFreedom]

An actual libertarian would recognize this guy as not a protester but a criminal committing intentional trespass with malice.

But I come to understand that in the New Libertarianism, private property is fungible if you don't like the property owner or what he does with his own property. Because principles.

Because in your stupid little universe, "liberty" means the right to sucker punch people at will, "because principles" eh?

[RJ Liberty]

Is sure as hell ought to be. Just look at these numb nuts falling all over themselves to defend it.

One of the defining principles of Libertarianism is the NAP. Threatening someone's life because they made you mad, is way over the top.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

An actual libertarian would recognize this guy as not a protester but a criminal committing intentional trespass with malice.

But I come to understand that in the New Libertarianism, private property is fungible if you don't like the property owner or what he does with his own property. Because principles.

I thought about starting a thread about this when I read, but decided not to.

But yes, you sometimes have the right to defend yourself from disruptions, and under traditional law, you can defend yourself from insults too, and you would not be the one starting it - fighting words.

But it could be taken too far, and itself be used as an excuse - so what is the limit, when are words considered force-able enough to use force - like fighting words under common law, and things like that -- and does it merit that in this particular incident?

[Jan2017]

Jake Tapper just asking Trump about this "sucker-punch" at debate.

Technical question for above discussion . . .
the black protesters were technically under custody of security being escorted out of the arena?

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

One of the defining principles of Libertarianism is the NAP. Threatening someone's life because they made you mad, is way over the top.

some words are the use of force, and always have been under the law. I suggest we go back to that time - where people could protect themselves. If you keep insulting someone, that person has the right to use force to defend himself if he chooses.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9–0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. It held that "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] … have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."

[thoughtomator]

I thought about starting a thread about this when I read, but decided not to.

But yes, you sometimes have the right to defend yourself from disruptions, and under traditionally law, you can defend yourself from insults to, and you would not be the one starting it - fighting words.

But it could be taken to far too, and itself be used as an excuse - so what is the limit, when are words considered force-able enough yo use force - like fighting words under common law, and things like that -- and does it merit that in this particular incident?

I find it difficult to imagine a situation, outside of a crime in progress, where someone can yell "Fuck you!" to your face and slugging him isn't a fully justified action. We'd have to go into weird edge cases like people suffering from Tourette's to find such a situation.

Note this trespasser and the photographer from the BLM stunt both did exactly that, proving malice if it wasn't obvious already.

[thoughtomator]

One of the defining principles of Libertarianism is the NAP. Threatening someone's life because they made you mad, is way over the top.

In this instance, the provocation is the violation of NAP, not the response. Aggression most certainly can be verbal, as the fighting words doctrine describes.

It's not because they "made you mad", it's because they intentionally sought to inflict injury onto you which justifies the response and makes it consistent with adherence to NAP.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Jake Tapper just asking Trump about this "sucker-punch" at debate.

Technical question for above discussion . . .
the black protesters were technically under custody of security being escorted out of the arena?

Yes, and I would tend to say it was wrong just for that reason. You don't hit someone already under restraint.

But if it was before that - the security had a right to remove the protester by force. The protester was not exercising free speech. He was just trespassing to disrupt someone else's speech.

[thoughtomator]

Because in your stupid little universe, "liberty" means the right to sucker punch people at will, "because principles" eh?

In my universe, Donald Trump also has freedom of speech and this little turd you're now defending was violating Trump's liberty.

Or is liberty only for people you like? Is that how it goes in Gunnyland?

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

fyi - the right to defend yourself before force has been overtly shown - ie someone is threatening you - is similar.

Picture if you will Han Solo - before George Lucus turned yellow and Mickey Mouse offed him!

Han Solo had every right to shoot Greedo. Greedo was pointing a blaster at him and threatening to kill him. Han didn't have to tell Greedo he had a blaster too - in fact it was a good thing not to.

That might have been the whole point of Star Wars. "Use the force" - Luke.

[phill4paul]

Because in your stupid little universe, "liberty" means the right to sucker punch people at will, "because principles" eh?

Be careful Gunny. thoutomater has done more for the Liberty movement than anyone on these boards and therefore no one has a right to challenge his love and support for all things Trump. Or so he says. That would include you. ;)

[phill4paul]

fyi - the right to defend yourself before force has been overtly shown - ie someone is threatening you - is similar.

Picture if you will Han Solo - before George Lucus turned yellow and Mickey Mouse offed him!

Han Solo had every right to shoot Greedo. Greedo was pointing a blaster at him and threatening to kill him. Han didn't have to tell Greedo he had a blaster too - in fact it was a good thing not to.

That might have been the whole point of Star Wars. "Use the force" - Luke.

That's the-most-fucking-god-damned-idiotic-analogy WRT this thread. Seriously. Take a break.

[RJ Liberty]

In this instance, the provocation is the violation of NAP, not the response. Aggression most certainly can be verbal, as the fighting words doctrine describes.

He wasn't using "fighting words", and he was being escorted out of the arena by security. They had the situation under control. Then this guy sucker-punched him, and later threatened to kill him. That's not NAP in any sense of the word.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

He's upset that the tired old bag of media-manipulation and opposition-suppression tricks doesn't work anymore. Poor baby.

Used to be that when a man set out to look for a fight, he wasn't surprised when he got one.

drumroll. Maybe the old man shouldn't have hit him after he was in custody, but the protester was certainly looking for trouble. Yes, under traditional law, that counted for something in judging the case.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

He wasn't using "fighting words", and he was being escorted out of the arena by security. They had the situation under control. Then this guy sucker-punched him, and later threatened to kill him. That's not NAP in any sense of the word.

I'm only talking about the situation up to the old man hitting him.

While I agree that he shouldn't have hit him after being in custody - it didn't do much harm for all the commotion, and was something the protester was trying to generate - so in a civil case, I wouldn't give him a nickle.

But that protester had the right to be force-ably removed. If he kept resisting, they could have drawn guns on him. I'm not sure why all the argument that it is ok to disrupt speeches, hurl insults, and trespass is ok - and you can't do anything about it. Those are all violations of rights caused by the disrupter first. This was hardly initiated by anyone else.

FYI - there isn't an audio feed with the video I saw. I don't know what if anything the disrupt er of the speech continued to say. Only that was why he was being removed.

[RJ Liberty]

I'm only talking about the situation up to the old man hitting him.

While I agree that he shouldn't have hit him after being in custody - it didn't do much harm for all the commotion, and was something the protester was trying to generate - so in a civil case, I wouldn't give him a nickle.

Oh, then I think we are in complete agreement there.



But that protester had the right to be force-ably removed. If he kept resisting, they could have drawn guns on him. I'm not sure why all the argument that it is ok to disrupt speeches, hurl insults, and trespass is ok - and you can't do anything about it. Those are all violations of rights caused by the disrupt-er.

I don't think anyone's saying the protester shouldn't have been removed. In fact, no one here has said the security guards shouldn't have removed him. It was the old guy sucker-punching him and threatening the dude's life that was over the top.

[puppetmaster]

Race riot! Everybody look! :rolleyes:

Meanwhile probable Hillary supporters pull a gun on Trump supporter (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/03/hispanic-gang-members-pull-gun-on-trump-supporter/)... exactly.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

That's the-most-fucking-god-damned-idiotic-analogy WRT this thread. Seriously. Take a break.

Hardly. It's a god damn long time running debate about a sissy-fying change George Lucus made that was very influential to my generation when they were growing up.

Not being able to defend yourself against someone pointing a gun at you and threatening to kill you is waayyy too far in the other direction. "but Greedo didn't use force! he was only threatening it with words!! waaah"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Han_shot_first

[Jan2017]

After videos surfaced of a protester being assaulted with a punch and elbow to the face at a Trump rally — along with reports of a top Trump aide yanking a reporter — dominated the news cycle, Mr. Trump expressed hope that the violence was not a result of his tone.

“I hope not, I truly hope not,” Mr. Trump said. He added, “People come with tremendous passion and love for the country” that sometimes turns to anger because of the state of the country."
http://www.nytimes.com/live/republican-debate-cnn-march-2016/

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Oh, then I think we are in complete agreement there.



I don't think anyone's saying the protester shouldn't have been removed. In fact, no one here has said the security guards shouldn't have removed him. It was the old guy sucker-punching him and threatening the dude's life that was over the top.

But we would have had just as much media commotion if the guards had tried to remove him, and than the guards had to physically fight because he resisted being removed with media shouts of brown shirts etc. In fact, the earlier case of the reporter appears to be an example of causing the situation (and creating a story). In fact, they were creating that story before this.

Not everyone would be in agreement with number one. Go to a good liberal site, and heaven forbid if you use force for any reason.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

He wasn't using "fighting words", and he was being escorted out of the arena by security. They had the situation under control. Then this guy sucker-punched him, and later threatened to kill him. That's not NAP in any sense of the word.

Without knowing anything, if it is like the rest of this society - after starting all that, the protester probably tried to file false charges against the old man - which is the use of force, so saying I'd kill him - which is usually not taken seriously in that context, isn't much. He didn't just say that. I don't know who he was - He could have been a terrorist, was part of it too.

Without viewing the state as special - using the state to initiate force - like through false witness - is still initiating force.

[GunnyFreedom]

In my universe, Donald Trump also has freedom of speech and this little turd you're now defending was violating Trump's liberty.

Or is liberty only for people you like? Is that how it goes in Gunnyland?

Okay look, I understand that you find complex reasoning...well....difficult. You may not be aware of this, but you really can support the freedom of association without tolerating, encouraging, cheering for, or agitating for the initiation of violence against outgroups whom you do not like.

My opposition to the idiot who punched this man and later threatened to kill him, does not in any way imply that I oppose Trump's freedom of association. If anything Trump is doing the world a favor by identifying all of you douchebags so that the rest of us know what we are dealing with.

I mean, I get that you are a Trump supporter, so do I need to try explaining that at a first grader level?

[thoughtomator]

Okay look, I understand that you find complex reasoning...well....difficult. You may not be aware of this, but you really can support the freedom of association without tolerating, encouraging, cheering for, or agitating for the initiation of violence against outgroups whom you do not like.

My opposition to the idiot who punched this man and later threatened to kill him, does not in any way imply that I oppose Trump's freedom of association. If anything Trump is doing the world a favor by identifying all of you douchebags so that the rest of us know what we are dealing with.

I mean, I get that you are a Trump supporter, so do I need to try explaining that at a first grader level?

I'm cheering it because it was well-deserved, way overdue, fully justified, and because it is part of a decades-long pattern of political manipulation which has had far far far far far worse effects than having a deserving face punched.

I don't waste a tear for the agitator because I know that because of people like him, many good people have suffered a lot worse than a punch in the face.

If the wheels of justice actually turned then your argument would be correct. But they don't. There are no lawful avenues left for redress of justifiable grievances, so I'll not be one to self-righteously jeer when someone finally gets some of what's coming to them. And the reason why there are no such avenues left is precisely because of the effect of political stunts like this was intended to be, and because of the media that sensationalizes it.

I'm not at all bothered by this because I see the big picture. In the big picture, the guy who got slugged is the bully and the guy who did the slugging acted defensively.

It's not like people are getting randomly slugged in the face by Trump supporters. And there ARE people who do randomly slug others in the face, and those are the least likely of all to be Trump supporters.

When you can show me someone peacefully going about their business having their liberty violated by a Trump supporter, then I'll be on your side in protesting it.

But someone who goes out looking for trouble? Why should I not cheer their success?

[RJ Liberty]

the protester probably tried to file false charges against the old man


He didn't just say that. I don't know who he was - He could have been a terrorist, was part of it too.

You've lost me again. The protester didn't file false charges against the old man. The old man sucker-punched him and later threatened to kill him. The old man certainly didn't believe the protester was a "terrorist", or he would have let security do their jobs. That's something he made up later, to justify his assault and death threat.

[Smitty]

I hear that they located the perp after launching a golden alert.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

This entire thread is largely based on false premises from media reporting that leaves out facts.

No, the protester was using fighting words. He was flipping off everyone as he was leaving, including the old man, and that was when he hit him. This is contrary to the whole thread so far. I started a new thread with two examples of such stories the media is twisting, and I expect it to grew quite large before the season is out.

"The videos, which appeared on social media early Thursday and are shot from different perspectives, show an African American with long hair wearing a white T-shirt leaving the Trump rally as the audience boos. He is being led out of the rally by men in uniforms that read “Sheriff’s Office.” The man extends a middle finger to the audience on his way out."

"Then, out of nowhere, the man is punched in the face by a pony-tailed man, who appears to be white, in a cowboy hat, black vest and pink shirt as the crowd begins to cheer. The protester stumbles away, and then is detained by a number of the men in uniforms."

ie the old man didn't come out of no where. he was standing right there. the protester continued to cuss out everyone including the old man. the old man hit him. end of story.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

sorry - you all lost me.

the protester was trying to incite violence by cussing at everyone. You either didn't do any research before making a judgement, or you think that is ok. No it's not.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

I'm cheering it because it was well-deserved, way overdue, fully justified, and because it is part of a decades-long pattern of political manipulation which has had far far far far far worse effects than having a deserving face punched.

I looked it up because you said it in this thread, and sure enough, in both cases people were getting into other peoples faces and saying fuck you. You were right.

It's been a long term strategy of deception since the 60s to attack someone else unrighteously with words, threats, and abuse, then when they react, change the story and try to falsely accuse them with lying about what happened. It went well with the forced school system of the 70s onward to, where kids were taught that they couldn't defend themselves.

I'm personally sick of it.

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm cheering it because it was well-deserved, way overdue, fully justified, and because it is part of a decades-long pattern of political manipulation which has had far far far far far worse effects than having a deserving face punched.

Well. That makes you a worthless anti-liberty piece of fetid crap.

In the big picture, the guy who got slugged is the bully and the guy who did the slugging acted defensively.

I hate to break it to you, but Nineteen Eighty-Four was a warning, not an instruction manual.

[GunnyFreedom]

sorry - you all lost me.

the protester was trying to incite violence by cussing at everyone. You either didn't do any research before making a judgement, or you think that is ok. No it's not.

I am pretty sure that guy didn't wake up that morning thinking, "Yeah, I want to get punched." Regardless of whether you are so sensitive as to react violently to words, or if you are a real man who understands that words are just words, the fact that he was reacting badly to being kicked out does not imply that he was trying to incite violence. That's the same kind of ignorant shit they used to justify lynchings.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

I am pretty sure that guy didn't wake up that morning thinking, "Yeah, I want to get punched." Regardless of whether you are so sensitive as to react violently to words, or if you are a real man who understands that words are just words, the fact that he was reacting badly to being kicked out does not imply that he was trying to incite violence. That's the same kind of ignorant shit they used to justify lynchings.

I'm sure the guy not only thought that, but may have been trained to do so.

People have been trained by the radical left to incite violence exactly this way. Then they change the story and lie about it. I'm sure I could dig up old 60s manuals online and post excerpts like that if I looked.

[GunnyFreedom]

I'm sure the guy not only thought that, but may have been trained to do so.

Is the NSA hiding microphones under your toothpaste too?


People have been trained by the radical left to incite violence exactly this way. Then they change the story and lie about it. I'm sure I could dig up old 60s manuals online and post excerpts like that if I looked.

Anyone who thinks it's okay to punch someone in the face because they don't like the words coming out of someone's mouth is a coward, and an intellectual imbecile.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

GunnyFreedom, I'm sure you are older then 40, and know this has been going on for more then 40 years, so I'm not sure what your beef is.

Here's one of tens of thousands of examples that could be cited from the occupy movement:

While protest leaders claim they seek nonviolence, there are indications the protesters are training to incite violence, resist arrest and disrupt the legal system. - See more at: http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/09/15/revolution-hitting-u-s-streets-tomorrow-protesters-training-to-incite-violence-resist-arrest-disrupt-legal-system/#sthash.9PMaTlUJ.dpuf
Read more at http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/09/15/revolution-hitting-u-s-streets-tomorrow-protesters-training-to-incite-violence-resist-arrest-disrupt-legal-system/#t8UPWxULMCC024RT.99

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcGT5a9-q7o

[GunnyFreedom]

GunnyFreedom, I'm sure you are older then 40, and know this has been going on for more then 40 years, so I'm not sure what your beef is.

My beef is with any troglodyte who thinks to answer to words that offend them is punching someone in the face.


Here's one of tens of thousands of examples that could be cited from the occupy movement:

While protest leaders claim they seek nonviolence, there are indications the protesters are training to incite violence, resist arrest and disrupt the legal system. - See more at: http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/09/15/revolution-hitting-u-s-streets-tomorrow-protesters-training-to-incite-violence-resist-arrest-disrupt-legal-system/#sthash.9PMaTlUJ.dpuf
Read more at http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/09/15/revolution-hitting-u-s-streets-tomorrow-protesters-training-to-incite-violence-resist-arrest-disrupt-legal-system/#t8UPWxULMCC024RT.99

If they are so stupid, anti-intellectual, and hateful minded that mere words can make them physically attack someone, then maybe they deserve to be trolled, upset, and thereby removed from the civilised population. Perhaps the mere existence of such throwbacks explains why this world is going to hell in a handbasket.

[CPUd]

My beef is with any troglodyte who thinks to answer to words that offend them is punching someone in the face.



If they are so stupid, anti-intellectual, and hateful minded that mere words can make them physically attack someone, then maybe they deserve to be trolled, upset, and thereby removed from the civilised population. Perhaps the mere existence of such throwbacks explains why this world is going to hell in a handbasket.

These are also the type of people who shouldn't be allowed to vote.

[GunnyFreedom]

These are also the type of people who shouldn't be allowed to vote.

That much is self evident to the point of axiomatic. Look what they are rallying behind.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

My beef is with any troglodyte who thinks to answer to words that offend them is punching someone in the face.

If they are so stupid, anti-intellectual, and hateful minded that mere words can make them physically attack someone, then maybe they deserve to be trolled, upset, and thereby removed from the civilised population. Perhaps the mere existence of such throwbacks explains why this world is going to hell in a handbasket.

It is a safe thing to do on the internet, and our society tried to change the rules and raise a generation contrary to traditional law and the rights men have given to them by nature and their nature.

But you have the right to defend yourself in a fight if a person will not needlessly stop verbally assaulting you. And it is funny how government recognizes that right for itself, you will be thrown in jail for doing it to a police officer or judge, but not for its citizens, a long established right. If people don't want to get in fights, they shouldn't bully and verbally assault others in the first place.

Furthermore, fuck you isn't an insult. It's a threat that translates loosely to I will do something bad to you when I get a chance, and literally it means I want to sodomize and rape you, and you have no rights and I can do anything demeaning to you. It is violent.

[P3ter_Griffin]

That much is self evident to the point of axiomatic. Look what they are rallying behind.

Yeah they are going Clinton hardcore. If they were disenfranchised Bernie would probably be winning.

[thoughtomator]

Gunny, you completely fell for a staged event designed to get you to react precisely as you have. It's pure manipulation and you should save your anger for the people manipulating you, not for your fellow victims thereof.

How many times have we seen this kind of schtick before? Five hundred? Five thousand?

And finally, it doesn't work anymore because even a dumb elderly redneck rube can see right through it.

Not worth the salt to cry over. Save it for someone who deserves actual sympathy, like the current victims of the current tyrannical police state that came to be in no small part because of staged events to undermine political opposition like this one.

[AuH20]

Yeah they are going Clinton hardcore. If they were disenfranchised Bernie would probably be winning.

I see what you did there...

[AuH20]

Gunny, you completely fell for a staged event designed to get you to react precisely as you have. It's pure manipulation and you should save your anger for the people manipulating you, not for your fellow victims thereof.

How many times have we seen this kind of schtick before? Five hundred? Five thousand?

And finally, it doesn't work anymore because even a dumb elderly redneck rube can see right through it.

Not worth the salt to cry over. Save it for someone who deserves actual sympathy, like the current victims of the current tyrannical police state that came to be in no small part because of staged events to undermine political opposition like this one.

But Selma! :) It's amazing how manipulative the BLM and the media can be. But if you're a jerk, even a black jerk, don't be surprised if reprisal comes after violently intimidating a hostile crowd.

[GunnyFreedom]

It is a safe thing to do on the internet, and our society tried to change the rules and raise a generation contrary to traditional law and the rights men have given to them by nature and their nature.

But you have the right to defend yourself in a fight if a person will not needlessly stop verbally assaulting you.

If you are so afraid that someone might intellectually best you that you have to punch them in the face to make them stop, that makes you a coward.


And it is funny how government recognizes that right for itself, you will be thrown in jail for doing it to a police officer or judge, but not for its citizens, a long established right. If people don't want to get in fights, they shouldn't bully and verbally assault others in the first place.

Furthermore, fuck you isn't an insult. It's a threat that solely translates to I will do something bad to you when I get a chance, and literally it
means I want to sodomize and rape you, and you have no rights and I can do anything demeaning to you. It is violent.

You don't....really....believe this nonsense do you?

[thoughtomator]

Just make a habit of walking onto someone's private property and shout fuck you at them to get a random polling sample of the general feelings of the population. I'd wager no fewer than one in four would sock you one for it, and none of them would ever be convicted of anything.

[GunnyFreedom]

Gunny, you completely fell for a staged event designed to get you to react precisely as you have. It's pure manipulation and you should save your anger for the people manipulating you, not for your fellow victims thereof.

How many times have we seen this kind of schtick before? Five hundred? Five thousand?

And finally, it doesn't work anymore because even a dumb elderly redneck rube can see right through it.

Not worth the salt to cry over. Save it for someone who deserves actual sympathy, like the current victims of the current tyrannical police state that came to be in no small part because of staged events to undermine political opposition like this one.

Again, opposition to someone who thinks punching a guy in the face for words that offend him does not imply support for the person who got punched. You really do have a hard time with this "logic" stuff don't you?

I suppose I shouldn't expect any different from a Trump supporter. Imbeciles gonna Imbe after all.

[CPUd]

https://i.imgur.com/rzdZjaz.jpg

[GunnyFreedom]

Just make a habit of walking onto someone's private property and shout fuck you at them to get a random polling sample of the general feelings of the population. I'd wager no fewer than one in four would sock you one for it, and none of them would ever be convicted of anything.

First of all, the crime being committed in your hypothetical is "trespassing." Secondly, in this real event the man was in the process of being removed from the group that did not want to associate with him. Thirdly, the man who did the punching in this real case was neither the property owner nor in charge of the event. Do try and think for once. At least a little bit.

[GunnyFreedom]

Yeah they are going Clinton hardcore. If they were disenfranchised Bernie would probably be winning.

Was this event at a Clinton rally or a Trump rally?

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

But Selma! :) It's amazing how manipulative the BLM and the media can be. But if you're a jerk, even a black jerk, don't be surprised if reprisal comes after violently intimidating a hostile crowd.

Yeah people fall for it over and over again. Ok, now the media is honest. Ok, now the media is honest.

I've gotten on my family for watching the news on tv, and have pointed out *how every single story* was lying, how they where lying, what the real story was, and why they were probably lying. Don't watch the media, do your own research online, which with search engines is just as quick.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Gunny, you completely fell for a staged event designed to get you to react precisely as you have. It's pure manipulation and you should save your anger for the people manipulating you, not for your fellow victims thereof.

How many times have we seen this kind of schtick before? Five hundred? Five thousand?

And finally, it doesn't work anymore because even a dumb elderly redneck rube can see right through it.

Not worth the salt to cry over. Save it for someone who deserves actual sympathy, like the current victims of the current tyrannical police state that came to be in no small part because of staged events to undermine political opposition like this one.

Yea, but he'll never admit it to himself.

[GunnyFreedom]

Yea, but he'll never admit it to himself.

So now because I won't punch someone in the face for saying words you think I am defective?

I think the defective people are the intellectual ignoramuses who think punching people in the face is a good idea because they don't like their words. Try growing a brain on top of that stem and fight words with words.

[RJ Liberty]

Gunny, you completely fell for a staged event designed to get you to react precisely as you have. It's pure manipulation and you should save your anger for the people manipulating you, not for your fellow victims thereof.

You don't think you're a victim, do you? A protester crashes an event, security escorts him out, he's physically attacked, and you're a "victim"?



How many times have we seen this kind of schtick before? Five hundred? Five thousand?

And finally, it doesn't work anymore because even a dumb elderly redneck rube can see right through it.

The "dumb elderly redneck rube", John McGraw, has been charged with assault and disorderly conduct and has now had his face plastered in dozens of newspapers (like USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/03/10/donald-trump-protester-punch/81612584/)), as someone who assaulted and threatened someone's life, someone who was already being dealt with by authorities. I'd say Mr. McGraw failed to see clearly in this situation, or he wouldn't have been arrested for assault.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

You don't think you're a victim, do you? A protester crashes an event, security escorts him out, he's physically attacked, and you're a "victim"?




The "dumb elderly redneck rube", John McGraw, has been charged with assault and disorderly conduct and has now had his face plastered in dozens of newspapers (like USA Today (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/03/10/donald-trump-protester-punch/81612584/)), as someone who assaulted and threatened someone's life, someone who was already being dealt with by authorities. I'd say Mr. McGraw failed to see clearly in this situation, or he wouldn't have been arrested for assault.

The video shows your innocent video bystander flipping everyone off and turning to the old man, and it looks like he's saying something.

I think it's rash to pass judgement on what seems like it could be a pretty normal reaction, and prejudicial not to mention that in a half recollection of the facts. I'm sorry the victim is scarred for life. And doubtless will be in the hospital for months now.

What? not even a minute. I was in the hospital 6 weeks recently. I'm sorry that the society was taught that exaggeration is an ok form of lying.

[Jan2017]

The video shows your innocent video bystander flipping everyone off and turning to the old man, and it looks like he's saying something.

I think it's rash to pass judgement on what seems like it could be a pretty normal reaction, and prejudicial not to mention that in a half recollection of the facts. I'm sorry the victim is scarred for life. And doubtless will be in the hospital for months now.

What? not even a minute. I was in the hospital 6 weeks recently. I'm sorry that the society was taught that exaggeration is an ok form of lying.

This very short youtube shows where the black protester in white shirt seems to turn back toward the stage and give a two hand middle finger salute which I didn't see in the OP imbedded video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qceor5k3TfM

crowd or someone yelling n**gers! (?)

If this was in a different street setting or in a bar, the old man would have got punched back.

[klamath]

Funny how we have Trump supporter spouting a defence of this with; "those are fighting words, he was in a private venue, he was disrupting a candidates forum with a different opinion, he was trying to start trouble....Physical violence WAS justified..."
Now let's see how they like it applied to themselves. In a private venue...Check. On another candidates forum, Check. spouting words in support of killing innocent people(fighting words.) Check.
Is the release of ip addresses and physical violence justified?

[CPUd]

http://i.imgur.com/2oFjlFF.png

[CPUd]

********** in the wild:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzU3FLZgIhc

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q8uqiMvsGM

[juleswin]

An actual libertarian would recognize this guy as not a protester but a criminal committing intentional trespass with malice.

But I come to understand that in the New Libertarianism, private property is fungible if you don't like the property owner or what he does with his own property. Because principles.

I remember a time when Trump crashed a Glenn Beck event and all you **********s were loving it, Trump didn't care about private property then or respected someone's event just because he did not like the person leasing the property at the moment. Also with his support for eminent domain laws, you guys lose every right to talk about your respect for private property.

Personally I am not a fan of people crashing anything, if you are not invited or coming to disrupt the event, I am going to turn a blind eye if someone decides to sucker punch you in the face. Not saying I condone it but I am very indifferent about it

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

This very short youtube shows where the black protester in white shirt seems to turn back toward the stage and give a two hand middle finger salute which I didn't see in the OP imbedded video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qceor5k3TfM

crowd or someone yelling n**gers! (?)

If this was in a different street setting or in a bar, the old man would have got punched back.

I don't expect the old man thought different.

But at that point I would have stepped in. A young man hitting a 78 year old man - he was really old, would be too much.

Security probably saved that young man's life.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Funny how we have Trump supporter spouting a defence of this with; "those are fighting words, he was in a private venue, he was disrupting a candidates forum with a different opinion, he was trying to start trouble....Physical violence WAS justified..."
Now let's see how they like it applied to themselves. In a private venue...Check. On another candidates forum, Check. spouting words in support of killing innocent people(fighting words.) Check.
Is the release of ip addresses and physical violence justified?

I'm not a trump supporter. I started supporting Ron Paul since 1988.

We're all tired of this nonsense. It's why the liberty movement didn't succeed. All the phonies, everyone looking to get rid of everyone else.

But I'm not here to show your weaknesses. I'm just enjoying the moment and someone that is doing good.

And trump isn't trying to show you up either. He's just succeeding.

And this thread has nothing to do with trump, other than some bad logic using a tar brush and the most remote associative thinking possible.

[tod evans]

I'm a strong advocate of fistfights but not sucker punches thrown at an idiot who is restrained....

I say turn 'em both loose and let 'em go at it.....

[Danke]

I remember a time when Trump crashed a Glenn Beck event and all you **********s were loving it, Trump didn't care about private property then or respected someone's event just because he did not like the person leasing the property at the moment.

That was one of many caucus sites Trump visited. And it was a public high school.

[juleswin]

That was one of many caucus sites Trump visited. And it was a public high school.

Makes little difference, Glenn Beck had the floor to speak and Trump walked in to disrupt his presentation. Its still a level of private property albeit reserved with a verbal contract. I bet if I walked in to disrupt his speech at a public high school, I would be rightfully escorted out by his security and punch happy supporters

[Danke]

Makes little difference, Glenn Beck had the floor to speak and Trump walked in to disrupt his presentation. Its still a level of private property albeit reserved with a verbal contract. I bet if I walked in to disrupt his speech at a public high school, I would be rightfully escorted out by his security and punch happy supporters

Glenn Beck was in another room speaking.

[klamath]

I'm not a trump supporter. I started supporting Ron Paul since 1988.

We're all tired of this nonsense. It's why the liberty movement didn't succeed. All the phonies, everyone looking to get rid of everyone else.

But I'm not here to show your weaknesses. I'm just enjoying the moment and someone that is doing good.

And trump isn't trying to show you up either. He's just succeeding.

And this thread has nothing to do with trump, other than some bad logic using a tar brush and the most remote associative thinking possible. An absolutely incoherent post.

[Peace&Freedom]

Assault is wrong, but I also blame the immediate party who incited the action. It was the protestor who "created the atmosphere" for the assault, not Trump. We all know that if the victimized provocateur had been disrupting a Ron Paul rally, flipping the bird and cursing at the attendees, that we would be citing him as the real inciter of any violence that occurred.

The NC incident in particular is being overblown as another "propaganda slam of the week" against Trump, and in fact is the kind of thing that would have been attempted against Ron or Rand, if they had gotten as far as Trump has towards the nomination.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

An absolutely incoherent post.

Ok, how about I'm not a trump supporter, but you're a communist?

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Assault is wrong, but I also blame the immediate party who incited the action. It was the protestor who "created the atmosphere" for the assault, not Trump. We all know that if the victimized provocateur had been disrupting a Ron Paul rally, flipping the bird and cursing at the attendees, that we would be citing him as the real inciter of any violence that occurred.

The NC incident in particular is being overblown as another "propaganda slam of the week" against Trump, and in fact is the kind of thing that would have been attempted against Ron or Rand, if they had gotten as far as Trump has towards the nomination.

And in fact succeeded - Iowa primary Ron Paul was about to win - it cost him the election.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

I'm a strong advocate of fistfights but not sucker punches thrown at an idiot who is restrained....

I say turn 'em both loose and let 'em go at it.....

He wasn't restrained. He was just being escourted out. The young person was a punk who had just insulted the audience where the old man
was standing or the old man. He also said something not caught on camera. The old man is 78.

[juleswin]

Glenn Beck was in another room speaking.

If that is what happened then Trump did nothing wrong. I don't know if you can tell but I did not read the article, only the headline that read "Trump crashes Glenn Beck's event". And when none of the many Trump supporters responding to the thread complained about the misleading headline, I believe it to be true.

[Peace&Freedom]

Trump Battles the Violent Left

A lesson from Hubert Humphrey from 1968.

By Jeffrey Lord – 2.25.16

It has become a staple of Donald Trump rallies. The American Left, in all its historically violent glory, is out there trying to provoke violence.

The pattern today goes like this.

Somebody, or multiples of leftist somebodies shows up at a Trump rally, and quickly proceeds not to boo but to provoke. When the candidate or his supporters are forced to take notice, the gendarmes are called, a scene ensues, and for a moment violence — small scale violence thus far — ensues.

Where have we seen this pattern before? For those old enough to remember their leftist history the answer is when then Vice President Hubert Humphrey, the 1968 Democratic nominee for president, was on the campaign trail against Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat turned third party candidate George Wallace...

http://spectator.org/articles/65588/trump-battles-violent-left

[Smitty]

If you go into an event with thousands of people there to hear someone speak,..and you cause a disruption, then start making obscene gestures to the crowd, you stand a chance of getting swatted in the eye. Maybe even more than once.

Who doesn't know this?

[Jan2017]

********** in the wild:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzU3FLZgIhc

Well, threaten to kill someone later, on camera . . . (?)

He'll have to be in productive custody during his trial or time in the joint now,
and when he gets out will have a bull's eye on his back wherever he goes.

Good luck old man.

[puppetmaster]

The collectivism is strong with the anti Trump folks. Remember he has tens of millions of supporters. So he is bound to have many a crazy in the mix. Remember Ron Paul had a few crazies also...(I think I was one). But seriously I know a a lot of Trump supporters and they aren't punching anyone. Funny the two times I have seen altercations over a candidate it was a Bernie supporter freaking out and calling everyone names and the Trump supporters just sat and laughed.

[GunnyFreedom]

The collectivism is strong with the anti Trump folks. Remember he has tens of millions of supporters. So he is bound to have many a crazy in the mix. Remember Ron Paul had a few crazies also...(I think I was one). But seriously I know a a lot of Trump supporters and they aren't punching anyone. Funny the two times I have seen altercations over a candidate it was a Bernie supporter freaking out and calling everyone names and the Trump supporters just sat and laughed.

Are you not seeing the some odd ~90%+ of RPF Trumpaloompas in this thread totally defending this guy for punching that dude? Maybe a lot of Trumpaloompas aren't punching people over offensive words, but they obviously think it's the right thing to do and are actively defending such an action.

[Smitty]

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat.”

― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn,

[Smitty]

Nip it!,..Nip it in the bud!

--Barney Fife

[Jan2017]

Nip it!,..Nip it in the bud!

--Barney Fife

"Freedom is about authority" - Rudy Giuliani

[GunnyFreedom]

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat.”

― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn,

This protestor was not a government agent, not a security operative, had no authority anywhere, and was being led out of the venue by government troops.

I know thinking is hard for Trumpaloompas, but come on...

[CPUd]

Probably more and more people showing up to trump rallies just to see the fights. They should sell beer.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

This protestor was not a government agent, not a security operative, had no authority anywhere, and was being led out of the venue by government troops.

I know thinking is hard for Trumpaloompas, but come on...

And the person that hit him after he insulted them/him/everyone was not a trump employee, campaign worker, or friend, so thy are even.

[CPUd]

He will be soon. Trump has said he will pay for damages for beating on protesters.

[MelissaWV]

1. Only saw it touched upon a time or two, which kind of surprises me, but after the guy was punched he grabbed the old man's arm on his way down. The reaction of those uniformed folks? Finish knocking him to the ground and admonish him for touching the old man. The cops took someone who'd just been punched in the face and proceeded to make it worse. Is it because you have no sympathy for the person on the ground? In other circumstances, some of you very same folks would be talking about excessive force.

2. If you flip someone off, you're going to incite a response. I don't think that's exclusive to Trump rallies and speeches. History would certainly indicate that it's not. It doesn't mean that sucker-punching someone is an appropriate response, but it's a response nonetheless.

3. Gunny, you've really lost me lately. In this thread you are shocked and outraged that someone would punch someone who was cussing and flipping them off. In a previous thread, you discussed killing someone who appeared to possibly be messing with your food. You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.

[GunnyFreedom]

And the person that hit him after he insulted them/him/everyone was not a trump employee, campaign worker, or friend, so thy are even.

Way to dodge the point. It was not my analogy that was flawed, but yours. I pointed out precisely how and why your analogy was flawed, and you cite something wholly irrelevant to the discussion, a red herring to prop up as a strawman in the hopes that people don't notice your argument being shredded. If you will examine the discussion carefully to this point, nothing I have ever said implies or relies upon the perpetrator of this assault being employed by Trump.

Let me lay this out so easily that even someone who has never taken a single course in logic can understand it:

1a) Civilized humans don't beat on people for saying words that offend them.

1b) Civilized humans do not defend or make up excuses for those who beat on people for saying words that offend them.

2) At least one Trump fan at a Trump rally beat on a person for saying words that offended them. The vast majority of Trump fans since that time have been defending and making up excuses for that very beating.

∴) Conclusion: Therefore the vast majority of Trump fans are not civilized humans.

If this still doesn't help, if you need me to I can actually draw the syllogism out and connect the salient points of reasoning with lines and arrows.

[GunnyFreedom]

1. Only saw it touched upon a time or two, which kind of surprises me, but after the guy was punched he grabbed the old man's arm on his way down. The reaction of those uniformed folks? Finish knocking him to the ground and admonish him for touching the old man. The cops took someone who'd just been punched in the face and proceeded to make it worse. Is it because you have no sympathy for the person on the ground? In other circumstances, some of you very same folks would be talking about excessive force.

2. If you flip someone off, you're going to incite a response. I don't think that's exclusive to Trump rallies and speeches. History would certainly indicate that it's not. It doesn't mean that sucker-punching someone is an appropriate response, but it's a response nonetheless.

3. Gunny, you've really lost me lately. In this thread you are shocked and outraged that someone would punch someone who was cussing and flipping them off. In a previous thread, you discussed killing someone who appeared to possibly be messing with your food. You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.

Words are harmless. Screwing with someone's food can be lethal. I may have lost you lately, but I'm still being 100% consistent.

[GunnyFreedom]

http://i.imgur.com/rT7uLqS.png

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

..

[AuH20]

Like moths to a flame...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiA7x1z3uwo&feature=youtu.be

[AuH20]

This is what we're dealing with. Sickos. Let's take the 1 million and move them into their crowded homes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdTbP4DWoAA8Y35.jpg

[Wilf]

This is what we're dealing with. Sickos. Let's take the 1 million and move them into their crowded homes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdTbP4DWoAA8Y35.jpg

I though that you wanted a police state to kill all the people who don't have a problem with minorities (from an individualist view point), you nihilist.

[AuH20]

I though that you wanted a police state to kill all the people who don't have a problem with minorities (from an individualist view point), you nihilist.

I don't want a police state. I want a free-for-all. Let's get this over with. Why play all these elaborate games with the govt? If these people want to dominate me, I'm right here. Come and personally take my possessions! Do it!

[Wilf]

I don't want a police state. I want a free-for-all.
So you do admit to being a nihilist?

[AuH20]

So you do admit to being a nihilist?

Nihilist? I'm a misanthrope.

[AuH20]

Nihilism: resignation at the pointlessness of life.
Misanthropy: contempt for one's fellow humans.

[Wilf]

Nihilist? I'm a misanthrope.

Ok, sorry about that.

[alucard13mm]

This is what we're dealing with. Sickos. Let's take the 1 million and move them into their crowded homes.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdTbP4DWoAA8Y35.jpg

We might as well drop our border and let everyone come up :P. The entire south american continent can move up here. Entire middle east and africa can move into Europe. Entire South asia can move to Australia. Thats what happening anyways. If all refugees are good people, then there wont be any good people left in the countries they left. hehehe.

Seems every country is slowly becoming more socialized with increase police and controls in place.

It seems bizarre people would want open border considering globalists are promoting open borders as well.

Also, the damn people that trumpet around how the world is becoming over populated and running out of finite resources are also most likely the same ones saying how horrible japan is for being xenophobic and for how horrible for japan to have a decreasing population. haha. Japan seems to be an alright country, not much messing around in the world. Just mostly regional disputes like claiming some islands or oil. Aside from world war 2 and fukashima, seems like an a-okay country ;3.

[AuH20]

We might as well drop our border and let everyone come up :P. The entire south american continent can move up here. Entire middle east and africa can move into Europe. Entire South asia can move to Australia. Thats what happening anyways. If all refugees are good people, then there wont be any good people left in the countries they left. hehehe.

Seems every country is slowly becoming more socialized with increase police and controls in place.

It seems bizarre people would want open border considering globalists are promoting open borders as well.

Also, the damn people that trumpet around how the world is becoming over populated and running out of finite resources are also most likely the same ones saying how horrible japan is for being xenophobic and for how horrible for japan to have a decreasing population. haha. Japan seems to be an alright country, not much messing around in the world. Just mostly regional disputes like claiming some islands or oil. Aside from world war 2 and fukashima, seems like an a-okay country ;3.

What we're witnessing is the end of the cycle that will soon burn itself out, along with Western Civilization. Those people have contributed nothing to Western Civilization. They are standing on the shoulder of giants. Do you think they know anything about resource scarcity and price discovery? Only capitalism and Western enlightenment ideals can create an environment for gullible socialists like that to to thrive and reproduce. Eventually, socialist ignorance will consume these institutions and then the cycle will begin anew. Back to the jungle we shall begin.

[afwjam]

What we're witnessing is the end of the cycle that will soon burn itself out, along with Western Civilization. Those people have contributed nothing to Western Civilization. They are standing on the shoulder of giants. Only capitalism and Western enlightenment ideals can create an environment for gullible socialists like that to to thrive and reproduce. Eventually, socialist ignorance will consume these institutions and then the cycle will begin anew. Back to the jungle we shall begin.

Ah I get it. Your one of those that calls themselves Neoreactionaries?

[AuH20]

Ah I get it. Your one of those that calls themselves Neoreactionaries?

Neoreactionaries are more hardhearted than I am. I believe that other cultures should be left alone in their own regions from foreign manipulation.

[AuH20]

Chicago about to start. This could be epic in terms of disturbances.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T4QYiztrLo

[AuH20]

It just got suspended. The Bolsheviks were out of control.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CdTs0_7XIAEpEcr.jpg:large

[AuH20]

Video coming shortly. I heard it's a madhouse. They had to shut it down. GJ Chiraq.

[Voluntarist]

xxxxx

[luctor-et-emergo]

Certainly the best and most effective way to get elected is to get the support of 30% of 50% of the country or about 15% while the rest hates you..

GREAT strategy. Brilliant, Great. Make his ego great again.

[misterx]

What we're witnessing is the end of the cycle that will soon burn itself out, along with Western Civilization. Those people have contributed nothing to Western Civilization. They are standing on the shoulder of giants. Do you think they know anything about resource scarcity and price discovery? Only capitalism and Western enlightenment ideals can create an environment for gullible socialists like that to to thrive and reproduce. Eventually, socialist ignorance will consume these institutions and then the cycle will begin anew. Back to the jungle we shall begin.

Yes, and we will all suffer for it.

[AuH20]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/11/politics/donald-trump-chicago-protests/index.html

https://twitter.com/AC360

[hankrichter12]

I thought about starting a thread about this when I read, but decided not to.

But yes, you sometimes have the right to defend yourself from disruptions, and under traditional law, you can defend yourself from insults too, and you would not be the one starting it - fighting words.

But it could be taken too far, and itself be used as an excuse - so what is the limit, when are words considered force-able enough to use force - like fighting words under common law, and things like that -- and does it merit that in this particular incident?

Whew, have not posted on here in awhile, mostly because I found this place to be full of a bunch of whiny weak left libertarians, that and I forgot my password :) but I had spelled "richter" wrong last time around so figured why not just make a new account and do it right.

Those of you who might remember me (tho I doubt my brief time here had that much impact) can go look at my old posts under my misspelled name and will clearly see I am no fan of many of these SJW sissy-marys here, and while I never actually supported Trump (despite being accused of it non-stop) I did feel he was making some positive things happen, even if it wasn't his intention.

However, I must say, I cannot for the life of me believe what I just read. You are honestly saying someone has a right to punch someone just because of words? I mean, I could see if it was a 250lb 6'5" muscle man who was saying he's going to tear your head off, but speaking out against a candidate is justification for physical violence?

Are you nuts? I have no doubt this man was an asshole sent there to purposely disrupt the rally, I agree Trump's security had every right to remove him since Trump paid for the event, but how can you possibly say a man who was restrained deserved to be punched solely for having a different political view?

I believe I spoke on this in the past, things can never land in the sensible middle, we've had the nut job leftists/marxists/SJW's whatever you want to call them pushing society into the insane, so now a much needed correction has come along, which I supported at first, but it seems history will once again repeat itself and we will get an over-correction instead. Sad, tho I can't say I'm surprised. BTW, is PaleoLibertarian still around? Always loved his "Butcher" Avatar.

[GunnyFreedom]

Way to dodge the point. It was not my analogy that was flawed, but yours. I pointed out precisely how and why your analogy was flawed, and you cite something wholly irrelevant to the discussion, a red herring to prop up as a strawman in the hopes that people don't notice your argument being shredded. If you will examine the discussion carefully to this point, nothing I have ever said implies or relies upon the perpetrator of this assault being employed by Trump.

Let me lay this out so easily that even someone who has never taken a single course in logic can understand it:

1a) Civilized humans don't beat on people for saying words that offend them.

1b) Civilized humans do not defend or make up excuses for those who beat on people for saying words that offend them.

2) At least one Trump fan at a Trump rally beat on a person for saying words that offended them. The vast majority of Trump fans since that time have been defending and making up excuses for that very beating.

∴) Conclusion: Therefore the vast majority of Trump fans are not civilized humans.

If this still doesn't help, if you need me to I can actually draw the syllogism out and connect the salient points of reasoning with lines and arrows.

http://i.imgur.com/z6CEMWU.png

I have gotten more negreps since y'all malignant morons climbed on the Trump Train than in my entire history on RPF's. All from Trumpaloompas.

[kahless]

http://i.imgur.com/z6CEMWU.png

I have gotten more negreps since y'all malignant morons climbed on the Trump Train than in my entire history on RPF's. All from Trumpaloompas.

Maybe if you should stop the personal attacks against other forum members you would stop receiving negative reps.

[GunnyFreedom]

Maybe if you should stop the personal attacks against other forum members you would stop receiving negative reps.

More butthurt from the malignant morons humping on Trump.

http://i.imgur.com/lTuvcOl.png

[openfire]

http://i.imgur.com/z6CEMWU.png

I have gotten more negreps since y'all malignant morons climbed on the Trump Train than in my entire history on RPF's. All from Trumpaloompas.

At least you don't have a neg rep stalker:

http://i.imgur.com/ShFkVfP.jpg?1

I'm sure I'll get neg repped for this post too. lol

[CPUd]

"openfire has a spectacular aura about"

[kahless]

More butthurt from the malignant morons humping on Trump.

Thanks for making my point that you are completely unable to use this forum and make your points without using personal attacks.

[GunnyFreedom]

At least you don't have a neg rep stalker:

I'm sure I'll get neg repped for this post too. lol

Well, maybe if you didn't support someone who opposes literally everything this entire community has stood for and shed blood sweat and tears for over the last 9 years, this kind of thing wouldn't happen. One would think at least if you were just compelled to support someone who actively opposed every thing this community has stood for over the last 9 years, that you would express that support somewhere else where it might actually be welcomed, instead of deliberately fracturing the Liberty Movement like you all seem to be attempting to do here and now.

[puppetmaster]

Are you not seeing the some odd ~90%+ of RPF Trumpaloompas in this thread totally defending this guy for punching that dude? Maybe a lot of Trumpaloompas aren't punching people over offensive words, but they obviously think it's the right thing to do and are actively defending such an action.
Yeah I see it.. the old man is not smart and but the protesters are poking a stick into a bee hive. This country is on the brink

[GunnyFreedom]

Thanks for making my point that you are completely unable to use this forum and make your points without using personal attacks.

You are the one who started with the (deliberate or ignorant?) misconstructions of my posts in a desperate attempt to apply sophistry to the discussion.

Sophists don't rate respect. Sophists rate distain, scorn, and rejection.

Sophists, to my mind are equivalent with sociopaths and P-Zombies.

If you don't want to be called a malignant moron, then don't try to use sophistry to pretend and have a valid argument when you have nothing but an emotional desire to propel a despotic tyrant into power.

So far as I am concerned, the enemy here are you Trumpaloompas. You knew that people of principle would hate and reject you and yet you are here raising hell, and why? Are you deliberately trying to destroy the Liberty Movement because you prefer despotic tyranny?

If you were a straight shooter, and honest dealer with a shred of integrity, then you would do your trumphumping somewhere where you might find fellowship or win recruits, not where it will destroy everything we've been working for for nigh on 10 years now.

You dingbats are the enemies of liberty, and you have well-earned that title. JUST LOOK at what you all are doing to these forums. Just look at it. Why can't you go destroy Red State or The Blaze? Instead you have to destroy RonPaulForums?? ANd why? Is it because now you hate Ron Paul too because he rejects your tinpot messiah also?

I look at what you lot are doing to these forums, and I don't even consider you proper humans anymore. Just a bunch of Philosophical Zombies and Psychopaths. As something less than human, I have no qualms about holding you in derision. You deserve at least that much. If you wanted my respect then you should have carried your trumphumping off somewhere else where people would appreciate it and it wouldn't destroy these forums.

[idiom]

One of the defining principles of Libertarianism is the NAP. Threatening someone's life because they made you mad, is way over the top.

Shooting people for trespass is apparently fine tho.

[idiom]

Yeah I see it.. the old man is not smart and but the protesters are poking a stick into a bee hive. This country is on the brink

The country has been on the Brink for some time.

The way I see it, Trump is the last shot at getting heard before people give up on the political system and move to the next box on the list.

[CPUd]

Donald Trump wavers on paying legal fees for violent supporters

(CNN)Donald Trump seemed to walk back his promise to pay the legal fees of supporters who are charged for violence at his rallies when pressed on the subject by ABC's "Good Morning America" on Tuesday.

"By paying those (legal) fees, wouldn't you be rewarding and encouraging violence?" asked host George Stephanopoulos.

"No, no I didn't say that. I haven't looked at it yet, and nobody's asked me to pay for fees, and somebody asked me a question and I haven't even seen it, so I never said I was going to pay for fees," the Republican front-runner said, at first denying what he has said both during a campaign rally and on Sunday during an interview.

At a rally in February, Trump told his supporters about protesters: "Knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. OK? Just knock the hell -- I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise."

And in an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press" this Sunday, Trump said he had directed his staff to "look into" paying the legal fees of a supporter who sucker punched a protester at a rally last Wednesday in North Carolina.

"I've actually instructed my people to look into it, yes," Trump replied when asked about paying the fees.

On Tuesday, questioned again if he was "open to that," and if paying the fees meant rewarding violence, Trump said, "Well maybe so, and maybe that's why I wouldn't do it. I don't condone violence at all, and you know I looked and I watched and I'm going to make a decision."

"I certainly don't condone violence and maybe you're right and maybe that's why I wouldn't do it," he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/15/politics/donald-trump-legal-fees-supporters/index.html

He's full of shit, he was saying in every rally he would pay their legal fees.

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzYv5foyAS8

[Origanalist]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/15/politics/donald-trump-legal-fees-supporters/index.html

He's full of $#@!, he was saying in every rally he would pay their legal fees.

But he's going to make the right decision, the best decision, he'll bring in the smartest people for this decision.

[Jan2017]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/15/politics/donald-trump-legal-fees-supporters/index.html

He's full of $#@!, he was saying in every rally he would pay their legal fees.

And now he has backed down with that as well, after Bernie smacked The Don over paying legal cost to encourage violence. (different tube)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaE3TZb5dgM


http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/bloodondonshands01a_zpsln7igklg.jpg (http://s372.photobucket.com/user/sunblush/media/bloodondonshands01a_zpsln7igklg.jpg.html)
.

[jmdrake]

An actual libertarian would recognize this guy as not a protester but a criminal committing intentional trespass with malice.

But I come to understand that in the New Libertarianism, private property is fungible if you don't like the property owner or what he does with his own property. Because principles.

False choice fallacy.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

It was the punch heard round the world.

by a 78 year old man.

[robert68]

An actual libertarian would recognize this guy as not a protester but a criminal committing intentional trespass with malice.

But I come to understand that in the New Libertarianism, private property is fungible if you don't like the property owner or what he does with his own property. Because principles.

An actual libertarian would know that candidates for President aren't the owners of the arena's they hold rally's in.

[luctor-et-emergo]

It was the punch heard round the world.

by a 78 year old man.

Was it justified ?

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Was it justified ?

That's the real point of the whole thread.

But under traditional law, it would also be asked "what was the harm"?

No one even went to the doctor, it was a 78 year old man; the protester went to the rally looking for trouble, and found it.
Threatening words and gestures were hurled from the disrupt-er to the audience and old man before it occurred.

And where was the harm from/to either of them? They both got what they consensually participated in. The rest of the crowd
was listening to the rally.

[Danke]

An actual libertarian would know that candidates for President aren't the owners of the arena's they hold rally's in.

Ya, they are renters. So what?

[luctor-et-emergo]

That's the real point of the whole thread.

But under traditional law, it would also be asked "what was the harm"?

No one even went to the doctor, it was a 78 year old man; the protester went to the rally looking for trouble, and found it.
Threatening words and gestures were hurled from the disrupt-er to the audience and old man before it occurred.

And where was the harm from/to either of them? They both got what they consensually participated in. The rest of the crowd
was listening to the rally.

It was assault. The guy later commented that 'he didn't know who he was' and that maybe next time 'we should kill him'.




It's really easy. You've got words and you've got violence. Protestor used words and maybe some pointing or whatever. Old guy smacked him in the face while he was being lead away.

Who's the criminal ?


BTW, I forgot to add this. The fact that you didn't say "Of course it's not justified." says a whole lot about you.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

It was assault.

No, it was in response to threats and fighting words.

You're allowed to defend yourself under traditional law to that.

[luctor-et-emergo]

No, it was in response to threats and fighting words.

You're allowed to defend yourself under traditional law to that.

What threats ?
He never saw the punch coming. That's assault.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

It's really easy. You've got words and you've got violence. Protestor used words and maybe some pointing or whatever. Old guy smacked him in the face while he was being lead away.

He just had turned in the old man's direction, flipped him/everyone in the audience off and appears to be saying fuck you in the video.

He was leaving, but he wasn't handcuffed, nor being led away under custody. He wasn't handcuffed till after that.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

What threats ?
He never saw the punch coming. That's assault.

Really, he had just turned to the old man because he was flipping him off, and you can also see him duck away from the old man - and from being elbowed, not punched.

Why don't you leave the old man alone? You don't know what you are talking about, and haven't even seen what you're talking about.

Only in a totalitarian society, does the state monopolizes force so much, that people can't consensually fight each other.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

That's assault.

The facts aren't what you claim, and it's justified under traditional law. If you don't want a fight, you don't use fighting words or threaten.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

The facts aren't what you claim, and it's justified under traditional law. If you don't want a fight, you don't use fighting words or threaten.

And by the way, being 78 years old, it's not debatable the old man felt threatened by the situation.

[Jan2017]

No, it was in response to threats and fighting words.

You're allowed to defend yourself under traditional law to that.

Old man had to move into the aisle about three seats over to get close for the punch, and the black protestor was in custody,
or at least being detained, while being led out of the arena.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Old man had to move into the aisle about three seats over to get close for the punch, and the black protestor was in custody,
or at least being detained, while being led out of the arena.

He was not in custody or being detained. He was asked to leave, but under his own power. He was not tackled and put into custody until after that.
He had full freedom to threaten the crowd some more, which he clearly did in the video. He had turned towards the old man, and he ducked out of way of the elbow, not a punch by any imagination.

The protester should be fined for causing a public disturbance after asked to leave.

[P3ter_Griffin]

He was not in custody or being detained. He was asked to leave, but under his own power. He was not tackled and put into custody until after that.
He had full freedom to threaten the crowd some more, which he clearly did in the video. He had turned towards the old man, and he ducked out of way of the elbow, not a punch by any imagination.

The protester should be fined for causing a public disturbance after asked to leave.

lol. He waited for the guy to get next to the row he was on then ran over quick and sucker punched him. lol.

[Jan2017]

He was not in custody or being detained. He was asked to leave, but under his own power.

Protestor was being escorted out by security . . . legally under custody or detention . . . not under his own volition.

It's why security company will be facing a civil suit as agents of jurisdiction of the arena. Let Trump pay their legal costs.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

lol. He waited for the guy to get next to the row he was on then ran over quick and sucker punched him. lol.

He didn't run - how could he both wait and run at the same time. He leaned over.

And for the tenth time, it's beyond dispute to anyone that knows what they are talking about, he didn't punch him. He used his elbow.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Protestor was being escorted out by security . . . legally under custody or detention . . . not under his own volition.

It's why security company will be facing a civil suit as agents of jurisdiction of the arena.

Sorry, words have meaning. Being asked to leave and being escorted isn't even remotely close to being under custody.

He was only brought to the ground by security after that, which used a lot more force then the old man did,
because they saw the situation as I did, that the disrupt-er had started and provoked the fight.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

It's why security company will be facing a civil suit as agents of jurisdiction of the arena. Let Trump pay their legal costs.

Sorry, the security was the sheriff's office, not a security company.

You just keep spouting and making up nonsense to justify your irrational beliefs.

[P3ter_Griffin]

He didn't run - how could he both wait and run at the same time. He leaned over.

And for the tenth time, it's beyond dispute to anyone that knows what they are talking about, he didn't punch him. He used his elbow.


:wank wank wank: Who gives a shit if it was a punch or an elbow.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LX4Q643aEU

[Jan2017]

Sorry, words have meaning.

Yep, custody and detention sure do - try a legal text. . . also look up protective custody too.
There was no opportunity for the old man to get punched back - reason why it can be called a sucker punch -
as the old man would have surely been in any bar or street fight, as the victim-protester was under the supervision of the agent of authority - acting on Trump himself's order to remove the protester.

Trump called out during this rally that "we have a protester" . . . was this one where Duhnald said "get them out" ?

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

The Sheriff's office used a lot more force on the "protester" (disrupter) then the old man did. Why are none of the protester supporters
talking about that?

http://snag.gy/TiOoz.jpg

Because the sheriff's men saw the situation in the same context I'm describing, and the protester was responsible.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Yep, custody and detention sure do - try a legal text. . . also look up protective custody too.

This isn't protective custody. Words are not however you define them, and facts whatever you make up.

http://snag.gy/TiOoz.jpg

This is right after the fight, when they brought the disrupt-er down to the ground. So six or so law officers
saw it like I'm saying.

The media and commies claim it's like you are saying.

Take your pick. It's what the thread is about.

[Jan2017]

This isn't protective custody. Words are not however you define them, and facts whatever you make up.


Didn't say that it was . . . I said try to find some legal definitions of custody and detention,
and even look up in the same legal text what protective custody is as well for your information.

What facts am I making up again ?

Not my definitions either, as it is certainly a legal "detention" being escorted out of the arena by security as agents for the facility owner.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

What facts am I making up again ?
Not my definitions either, as it is certainly a legal "detention" being escorted out of the arena by security as agents for the facility owner.

Nope. What you see in the picture after the fight is in custody.

Before that, they were just following him out after asking him to leave. To be sure, if he hadn't left, they would have arrested him.

But he wasn't under arrest, in custody, charged, questioned, or in detainment, handcuffed, or restrained. He was freely moving around. And he was using that freedom to wildly gesturate, flip people off and cuss. After being asked to leave.

He was in custody after the fight. Because he didn't leave peacefully liked asked.

[Jan2017]

Nope. What you see in the picture after the fight is in custody.

Before that, they were just following him out after asking him to leave. To be sure, if he hadn't left, they would have arrested him.

But he wasn't under arrest, in custody, charged, questioned, or detainment, handcuffed, or restrained.

He was after the fight. Because he didn't leave peacefully liked asked.
Agents of the facility escorting him out . . . definitely a legal custody or detention for the civil rights lawsuits.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Agents of the facility escorting him out . . . definitely a legal custody or detention for the civil rights lawsuits.

Police were fully justified in every action they took. Disrupter was trespassing, harassing and verbally abusing attendees, and making wild, threatening gestures.

[luctor-et-emergo]

Agents of the facility escorting him out . . . definitely a legal custody or detention for the civil rights lawsuits.


"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," - Trump

Considering the statements in this topic, he's probably right.

[Jan2017]

Police were fully justified in every action they took. Disrupter was trespassing, harassing and verbally abusing attendees, and making wild, threatening gestures.

Hah . . . this old man's punch and people trying to rationalize it are now what helps eventually take down Trump,
after all the other GOP candidates failed.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

:wank wank wank: Who gives a $#@! if it was a punch or an elbow.


Because an elbow doesn't do as much damage as a punch. The old man didn't want to hurt him.

The reason he choose to use an elbow, is the same reason you who choose to do so exaggerate and say punch.

He didn't want to hurt more than needed in fact. Others want to exaggerate and make it look more than it was.

The real tyranny is when the people choose lying as opposed to truth as a standard way to talk.

[klamath]

Considering the statements in this topic, he's probably right.There literally is not even any reason to try anymore. It impossible for them to see that what they have been doing for months on the Ron Paul Forums was exactly what those protester were doing to Trumps rally. I have even seen them threaten us for attacking Trumps "close the internet statements" for treason.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

Hah . . . this old man's punch and people trying to rationalize it are now what helps eventually take down Trump,
after all the other GOP candidates failed.

elbow.

The man was 78, and the police used far more force after that subduing the disrupt-or.

http://snag.gy/TiOoz.jpg

[CPUd]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/10345779_10208685801359984_8753125352609906237_n.j pg?oh=375f72374f31358fa92fb2d5a0c998e9&oe=57866A24



This is what I will say about the Trump rally I attended Saturday…alone.

It was scary. This man knows just what to say to fire up his crowd, no matter how factually inaccurate it may be.

Wall! ISIS! Kill Them! Mexico!

Then there was the blatant fear mongering. He told Ohioans that only oil was propping up their state, and that their economy was in serious trouble. He said this over and over again.

He also told the crowd that ISIS was out to kill them. That ISIS was putting 50 people at a time in cages and drowning them in the ocean. And that we had to kill them first.

Cheers for water boarding. Cheers for torture. Calls to cut off their heads.

If this was a brown person saying the exact same things in the Middle East, we’d call them a dangerous terrorist. But since it’s a white man in America, we call him a Presidential Candidate.

The scariest part was the crowd. They loved everything that was being said. The calls for the wall. The calls to blow up oil fields. The calls to torture and kill people.

And the protestors. Every time a protestor was kicked out, they were yells to get them out of here, even to KILL THEM!!!

Really? Kill them? For protesting?

I felt like at any point, the crowd was going to light torches and grab their pitchforks, and spill out into the streets.

The worst part was when their venom turned toward me. There were protestors around me who got ushered out, and then people started pointing at me, motioning for the Secret Service to “get him out of there”.

Now mind you, I hadn’t uttered a single word the entire rally, but people still said things like “Well what about this one? He needs to go too!”

At this point, the black kid that grew up in the projects, surrounded by drugs and gunfire, felt CONCERNED for his safety…at a Donald Trump rally.

At that rally, I saw the scary underbelly of America. I saw unadulterated hate, fueled by intentional misinformation.

These people who, just 2 hours ago, seemed like good and kind people, were now cheering for blood.

The worst part is Donald Trump knows EXACTLY what he’s doing. He’s patterned his campaign after a WWE match…

And it’s working.

https://www.facebook.com/james.e.troup?fref=photo

[Ender]

:wank wank wank: Who gives a $#@! if it was a punch or an elbow.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LX4Q643aEU

The attacker also threatened to kill him and is now under arrest.

Below is the story:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4a6rGeXsEM

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUJcoLYY9Bg

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

This is what I will say about the Trump rally I attended Saturday…alone.

It was scary. This man knows just what to say to fire up his crowd, no matter how factually inaccurate it may be.

Wall! ISIS! Kill Them! Mexico!

Crap.

[CPUd]

http://i.imgur.com/Dx19Tej.png
https://www.facebook.com/james.e.troup/videos/10208684685572090/

[klamath]

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/10345779_10208685801359984_8753125352609906237_n.j pg?oh=375f72374f31358fa92fb2d5a0c998e9&oe=57866A24


https://www.facebook.com/james.e.troup?fref=photoEvery video of a trump rally shows this. If you disagree with Trump at all, It is "Kill Them!" He definitely brings out the absolute worst in human nature.

[CPUd]

http://i.imgur.com/Unby5Hp.png
https://www.facebook.com/james.e.troup/videos/10208684512807771/

[CPUd]

http://i.imgur.com/h2TddMf.png
https://www.facebook.com/james.e.troup/videos/10208684444686068/

[Anti Federalist]

You do not punch people who are restrained, just like you do not shoot people who are retreating.

Not right for cops, not right for John Q. Citizen.

[Anti Federalist]

He’s patterned his campaign after a WWE match

http://i.imgur.com/DBebJVb.jpg

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

You do not punch people who are restrained, just like you do not shoot people who are retreating.

Not right for cops, not right for John Q. Citizen.

He wasn't restrained until after the fight, despite the frequent repeating of that.

Here is the actual video. There is no cop near him, his arms are moving wildly and freely.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-protester-sucker-punched-at-north-carolina-rally-videos-show/

I don't think the old man was right, but I don't like facts intentionally misstated or exaggerated. Nor do I think the disrupter is right. I think it is however, understandable. And that is too much for some to admit.

In a free society, no one would care, it's been puffed up way beyond importance.

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

He wasn't restrained until after the fight, despite the frequent repeating of that.

Here is the actual video. There is no cop near him, his arms are moving wildly and freely.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/10/trump-protester-sucker-punched-at-north-carolina-rally-videos-show/

I don't think the old man was right, but I don't like facts intentionally misstated or exaggerated. Nor do I think the disrupter is right. I think it is however, understandable. And that is too much for some to admit.

In a free society, no one would care, it's been puffed up way beyond importance.

It is also not true he was sucker-elbowed.

In the video he clearly looks at the old man, than chooses to duck, look the other way. I've been sucker punched a few times before. That is not being sucker punched. It's not a great feeling, but it's not blocking a punch, not not seeing it.

The whole sequence is about 3 seconds. He flips off the crowd where the old man was standing shouting something. The old man comes over. He looks at the old man again for a split second, starts to look away as the old man continues to elbow him.

He is not restrained, no cop near him, but following, off camera; he is still being a jerk, and he got in a fight with someone. The cops afterwards - see picture, then bring him to the ground - using quite a bit more force then the old man.

That is an accurate description, and why the cops acted as they did.

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCTo59LRUuA

[SpiritOf1776_J4]

there is also no pony tail of the old man in any of the still pictures I could find. So that media description may also be inaccurate.

[RandallFan]

There's more hateful rhetoric, nationalism, flag waving, sucker punching,etc. at a black basketball game or a hispanic soccer game; compared to the Trump TMZ type parties.

Sucker punches are daily in a public school.

[kahless]

I do not agree with what the old man did but what did people expect. The protester gives the middle finger to a stadium full of people and we are supposed to be shocked someone punched him in the face for it.

Such a media over reaction over a non-issue.

[RandallFan]

A black judge in Kentucky sent a black home invader free because of racism. I didnt hear many complain. This guy who punched the Black Lives Matter slob will get more time.

[Antischism]

There's more hateful rhetoric, nationalism, flag waving, sucker punching,etc. at a black basketball game or a hispanic soccer game; compared to the Trump TMZ type parties.

Sucker punches are daily in a public school.


A black judge in Kentucky sent a black home invader free because of racism. I didnt hear many complain. This guy who punched the Black Lives Matter slob will get more time.

Must be fishing season with all these red herrings coming about.

B-b-b-but the blacks! And Hispanics! What about them, huh?!

[RandallFan]

6 posts above me says spitting on people only matters if the victim is hispanic.