Category Archives: Protests

Not the Real President


Are judges deciding these immigration cases this way because they somehow think of Donald Trump as ‘not the real president?’ If so, the greatest threat to the United States might not be poverty, debt, Islamic radicals or the failed educational system.

The greatest threat might be from judges, protesters and elites who don’t give a damn about what is right. They care only that by raw power, violence and fear that their will be done.  

From the blog Lawfare (h/t to Eugene Volokh)

It goes, not to put too fine a point on it, to the question of whether the judiciary means to actually treat Trump as a real president or, conversely, as some kind of accident—a person who somehow ended up in the office but is not quite the President of the United States in the sense that we would previously have recognized.

That is exactly what the rest of the shadow government – the bureaucracy – has been doing. Just to reiterate: Donald J. Trump is the Commander in Chief, and folks who don’t get that are living in a fantasy world.

During the election, many folks doubted Trump’s candidacy, even after he secured the nomination. There were many formerly rational people who supposed the Republican Party was prepared to ‘step in’ and prevent his candidacy. Later, others figured an Electoral College revolt could correct this ‘mistake.’justice_SRB 1

Similar fantasy scenarios also played out with Hillary Clinton.

Fact is, votes matter.  

He’s in the White House, and yes there is a fellow trailing him with a nuclear football. Folks gotta deal with the reality.

Perhaps everything [Judges] Blackman and Margulies and Bybee are saying is right as a matter of law in the regular order, but there’s an unexpressed legal principle functionally at work here: That President Trump is a crazy person whose oath of office large numbers of judges simply don’t trust and to whom, therefore, a whole lot of normal rules of judicial conduct do not apply.

If that’s what they think, they’re no longer serving the Constitution. They are undermining the framework of the country in a way in which Donald Trump has not.

Imagine if the military took that position.

The judiciary actually has greater domestic influence. Frankly, I fear the judges more.

(Update:typo fixed.)

New Lynch Mobs


Once again, violence is apparently the answer if a college speaker is “controversial.”

Eugene Volokh quotes a Vermont paper:

Middlebury College Professor Allison Stanger was injured by protesters Thursday evening as she was escorting a controversial speaker from campus. She was treated at Porter Hospital and released….

As Stanger, [Charles] Murray and a college administrator left McCullough Student Center last evening following [Murray’s speech] they were “physically and violently confronted by a group of protestors,” according to Bill Burger, the college’s vice president for communications and marketing.

Burger said college public safety officers managed to get Stanger and Murray into the administrator’s car.

“The protestors then violently set upon the car, rocking it, pounding on it, jumping on and try to prevent it from leaving campus,” he said. “At one point a large traffic sign was thrown in front of the car. Public Safety officers were able, finally, to clear the way to allow the vehicle to leave campus.

“During this confrontation outside McCullough, one of the demonstrators pulled Prof. Stanger’s hair and twisted her neck,” Burger continued. “She was attended to at Porter Hospital later and (on Friday) is wearing a neck brace.”

Murray wrote The Bell Curve, a book which suggested there may be differences in intelligence between racial groups. Which is to say, he actually studied a topic which he knew would get him branded as a heretic, then published a book of his findings. I have no idea if he’s right.

As folks know, I teach. I know brilliant kids of all races, and children who are given lesser academic skill. That second category includes all races as well. Murray might be all wet, but apparently he wasn’t even planning to talk about this at Middlebury. 

Volokh:

He might have been right or he might have been wrong in that book, or in whatever else he was going to speak about; I don’t know enough about those questions to speak confidently about that. But the point of universities, of public debate more broadly, and especially of debate about science is to discuss whether these sorts of scientific assertions are right and wrong, not to assume that one view is right and then shout down or physically attack those who disagree with it.

A note to the campus idiots who did this:

You overpriveledged, arrogant twits have no reason to resort to violence to shut down a speaker. You’ve made yourselves the fascists, jackbooted thugs in the service of orthodoxy. If someone strays from the path, proposes a notion which you cannot process, then apparently you figure beating them, pulling their hair and sending them to the emergency room is the answer.

Have your teachers never taught you to listen to opposing views? Have your parents not taught you compassion? Does it not occur to you that a huge number of people in this world disagree with your ideas, and that one day you might be targeted with violence just for holding a controversial view? Are you prepared for that kind of world?

You are the lynch mobs. You are now Bull Connor, ordering water hoses to be used against those who hold opposing views. You are one step away from being James Earl Ray, aiming a weapon at someone whose ideas scare you. You’re wearing the brown shirts now, hoisting a beer and planning to break a few windows.

Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, Rosa Parks and all of your supposed heroes would have opposed this. I oppose it. You should be ashamed, but in your life you’ve been sheltered from that notion.

You are wrong. 

Righteous Riots and the Heckler’s Veto


From a fairly left-wing blog:

bdzep2kceaekjfg

Don’t blame your lawlessness on others.

 

Even in our politically-correct, ultra-sensitive-to-verbiage times, folks have every right to express their feelings and beliefs about others, even the nasty ones, but only if they don’t trigger violence. Absolutely a paper-thin difference at times, right?

My response:
Wrong. The threshold is not speech that triggers violence, but speech which encourages violence. The right will not allow the left to target Milo or Trump w/violence, then turn around and say their supposed hate speech caused it.

The majority of the violence in the post-election America has been by progressives, angry because they did not get their way…or convinced that their righteous riots are justified somehow. It’s called the heckler’s veto, and the right is correct to oppose you on this. People who figure they are anti-fascists have become fascists…hoping the government, Twitter, Google or some adult organization starts shutting people up.

Be careful what you wish for.

Real Headline


State Department writes anti-leak memo, which promptly leaks

The State Department legal office prepared a four-page memo for Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warning of the dangers of leaking by State Department employees. It promptly leaked, to me. That’s only the latest sign that the relationship between the Trump administration political appointees and the State Department professional workforce is still very much a work in progress.

Hope it was worth it. You all got a slightly different version.*

Image result for state department

 

*Not really, but that’s how I would have played it.

Free Speech and Hate Speech


David Solway writes for PJ Media about a conference in Canada:

There is obviously a grey area between free speech and hate speech — human life cannot be reduced to a scientific formula enabling precise distinctions — but there should be no doubt that critical speech, analytical speech, satirical speech, spontaneous speech and offensive speech should not be legislated. Free speech is not a speech act. The term “hate speech” in its current acceptation, however, is merely a pretext for the eventual passage of blasphemy laws, envisaging the death of a free and democratic society.

Canada and the U.S. have different ways to deal with speech which might become an illegal act. The First Amendment still covers Americans whose speech is insulting, critical, even racist.

The trend worldwide is actually to punish so-called hate speech. Germany, the UK and other so-called free countries are now battlegrounds in this war.

It is a war. Or at least the first salvos.  

If blasphemy laws, hate speech rules and anti-free speech codes are a part of the U.S. legal system ten years from now, I wouldn’t be surprised. At that point, opposing illegal immigration, or maintaining some semblance of liberty will be in jeopardy. 

If you can silence someone, then you can silence anyone.  That never ends well.

How many teenagers and young adults get this? And how can they learn it, before it is too late.

The young people who justify violence, seek to enforce conformity of thought, and the media who treat the phrase “hate speech” as if it is already illegal…they’ve gone in the wrong direction. Somehow, through education and conversation, this must be turned around.

David Solway:

To return to the U of T symposium. The event was scheduled to conclude with a talk by controversial author and founder of The Rebel Media Ezra Levant, the highlight of the convention. Books like Ethical Oil, Shakedown and Trumping Trudeau, and the fact that Levant is frequently embroiled in legal battles with aggrieved Muslims (and ethically compromised judges), have made him a major draw on the conference circuit. Right on cue, as Levant stepped to the podium, a throng of protestors, plainly neither conferees nor students, swarmed past a detail of useless security guards and proceeded to wreak havoc. The fire alarm was pulled and the entire building (the Sandford Fleming Engineering Building) had to be evacuated. Classes were disrupted as well as the lectures in the auditorium seating hundreds of paying attendees — and that was the end of the affair. This, as noted, is a standard tactic of the dysfunctional and anarchy-loving student left.

 

New Meanings to Common Words


The words unsafe, violence, privilege, hate speech and others are being redefined for the 21st century.

Sam White at Up All Night:

This is because the activist left has a habit of twisting words to serve its own purpose. There’s a basic disrespect for language, and an unwillingness to be precise. Buzzwords abound, and if you don’t know what they mean, then your ignorance may itself be taken down and used in evidence against you.

Add attack to the list. The long, drawn-out drama of Brett Kimberlin is an example of this. Kimberlin has repeatedly complained of being ‘attacked’ by John Hoge and Aaron Walker and manages to add his associates and family to the mix so he can claim that they’ve all been attacked.

Attacked in this sense means mentioned, reported about truthfully or in the case of Walker, it might mean there was a brief, nonviolent confrontation with Kimberlin recorded in several photographs taken two seconds apart, and adjudicated as “not an assault.” Kimberlin reported various symptoms after the so-called attack. Details here. Yet still the Team Kimberlin group claims to be attacked. Ask a veteran, boxer or mugging victim about being attacked. 

____________________________________________________

Hang around Hogewash! or Allergic to Bull for more on the Team Kimberlin group of anti-free speech numskulls. 

____________________________________________________

They’ve decided that words are violence. And not embracing gender neutral pronouns might be violence. We hear about ‘structural violence’, whereby just existing in the world can render one a victim of assault and battery.

Photo credit: CBS

“All we are saying, is give fear a chance…”