Image 01 Image 03

Protesters create Mayhem at Trump Chicago rally, event canceled

Protesters create Mayhem at Trump Chicago rally, event canceled

Protesters get inside arena, scuffles — Chants of “Bernie, Bernie”

This is a developing situation.

There were large protests outside a planned Donald Trump rally in Chicago, at the University of Illinois.

The event was canceled for security reasons when a large number of protesters got inside, scuffles broke out, and at least one person managed to get on the podium.

Large groups of protesters chanted “Bernie, Bernie” and were met with chants of “Trump, Trump” as police moved to separate them.

Here is a live stream from earlier INSIDE:

Here is a live stream from earier OUTSIDE:

Trump Protest Chicago Man Inside

Trump Protest Chicago Outside Surrounding Car

Trump Protest Chicago Outside

Trump Protest Chicago Inside Liberation not Deportation

According to reports, apparently had a role in encouraging the protests, and issued a statement supporting the protests after the event was shut down. is backing Bernie Sanders:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


JOHNPAULJONES | March 11, 2016 at 7:51 pm

So is there anything the right will not do to stop Trump? Redstate has called for people to go armed to events. Should they start shooting according to you?

    stevewhitemd in reply to JOHNPAULJONES. | March 11, 2016 at 8:45 pm

    Whoa dude — who put the hash in your pipe?

    The protesters aren’t anti-Trump, GOPe style Republicans. For one thing, Republicans are polite, pick up their trash, and don’t bash people with signs.

    The protesters are the usual social justice wankers, BLMs, progressives, union thugs, etc.

    A big tip for you: they’re carrying “Bernie” signs. Think about that for a bit.

    Sanddog in reply to JOHNPAULJONES. | March 11, 2016 at 11:22 pm

    Are you suggesting “the right” sent in a bunch of suicidal Bernie supporters to make Trump look bad?

    No dear, what you’re seeing is a bunch of stupid left wingers demanding to be the center of attention.

JOHNPAULJONES | March 11, 2016 at 7:56 pm

Are you people happy? Is this good enough for the Anti Trumpers? To adopt the left’s tactics? Here is Redstate…what is Legalinsurrectiion’s hope?
My advice for reporters and protesters visiting Donald Trump events

By: Neil Stevens (Diary)

My advice for reporters and protestors visiting Donald Trump events is simple: You have a right to keep and bear arms. Use it. If Trump’s brownshirts know their targets are armed, they’ll get less handsy

Is this 1968? Is this really Mr . Trump’s doing? Will the silent majority say enough? Does our government see this as terrorism? Do we see national guardsmen out in our nation? Is this deja vu all over again? Finally, can we as a country have an adult conversation without the name calling and yelling?

    You’re forgetting who the ‘government’ is: it’s Obama/Jarrett, surrendered to by McConnell/boehner/GOPe.

    Street violence by the likes of the thugs in these photos is a good thing for them.

    The idea of Trump having street thugs is an invention by the left to blow smoke over the existence of their army of their Obama/Shaprton #blacklivesmatters and SEIU street thugs.

    Try stop watching CNN and reading the NY Times for a week.

So who are the fascists? Who wears the brown shirts?

None of the regular readers of LegalInsurrection support the leftist nonsense that comes from the Progressive left.

Nor do the regular readers of Anthony’s columns take firearms carry – concealed or otherwise – lightly.

But if a Trumpkin initiates violence against someone, they have no moral high ground to criticize anyone else because they are a thug and potentially a felon. And if people are armed then you are a thug that is endangering the lives of everyone around when you do so.

In a stand-your-ground state, then, if that violence threatens someone’s life, then you have a right to defend yourself and a responsibility to act appropriately, which means protecting yourself as well as not firing in a crowd except and unless forced. It is an incredibly dangerous situation for everyone including bystanders.

But I find the tone and demeanor of those who come in demanding of this community – with some of the finest writing on self-defense on the ‘net – where we stand repulsive.

So I Will tell the Trump thugs where I stand.

– pro-Cruz
– anti-trump
– anti-thug
– against anyone who treats violence, guns and thuggery lightly
– pro self-defense for everyone

And if some blogger takes a stronger position at Redstate I may well disagree with it. But I can’t be surprised if their language is strong, because the thuggish language and tactics of Trump supporters bring out the worst, not the best,in people.

And I have no sympathy for the Trumpkins who specialize in coarse language who can’t take it when they are the target of it.

You reap what you sow, blowhards. Your tactics are already making America worse, not great. Move along.

    Lady Penguin in reply to PrincetonAl. | March 12, 2016 at 2:01 am

    The Trump supporters weren’t acting like thugs tonight, it was the terrorist Bill Ayers, BlackLivesMatter, who are paid agitators to foment chaos and anarchy – don’t think that hiding behind it being a Trump issue is going to protect you when they come to your cities and towns and try to kill your first responders, police, etc.

    This is what Obama has worked for – with his lies and promotional of “racial divide” his entire presidency. He hates America and the people who do good. These agitators are just tools to him, and they are too stupid to know that.


    If you’re happy with your ass hanging in the air all greased up for the left use and abuse, that’s your prerogative – not ours.

    Lady Penguin in reply to PrincetonAl. | March 12, 2016 at 9:07 am

    So, you say Trump supporters had this coming? Really? You condone vs condemn? Must feel wonderful to be so filled with hate that you don’t see the danger…I don’t have to be a supporter to be concerned about organized terrorism at any of these events, no matter the political candidate., Bill Ayers, BlackLivesMatter, anarchists, Bernie Sanders supporters, etc. were all involved in a NOT peaceful protest, but in one meant to be deliberately provoking, interfering, and agitating for violence. And that’s exactly what this was.

    You just better hope that the plan for making sure a Ferguson doesn’t come to your town is in place, because that’s the end goal with these people.

    Don’t let your hatred blind you to the deliberate effort to destroy this country, which has been in the works for decades and culminated in the successful election of Barack Obama – who continues to foment a racial divide and bring about the destruction of this country.

    Sanctimony is a cold bedfellow, as we know (or should know) that they eventually come for each one of us. Enabling and allowing this kind of behavior – which is terrorism – means that Evil is winning.

I’m no Trump fan, but leftist thugs break into and shut down a Trump Rally in typical leftist fashion and the first batch of comments are about Trump’s people being thuggish? I’m not an advocate for violence, but the people shutting down Trump have been allowed to use these tactics without opposition or consequence for a long time. They’re now being confronted by people that are willing to act like them and the results are going to be ugly (Mostly because the people at Trump’s rallies are not conservatives anyway). Standing up to bullies usually starts out that way.

    stevewhitemd in reply to f2000. | March 11, 2016 at 8:46 pm

    Reminds me of the brown shirts versus the red shirts in Weimar.

    f2000 in reply to f2000. | March 11, 2016 at 8:54 pm

    What do you suppose the chances are that Bernie Sanders is going to be asked to denounce the people chanting his name at that rally?

    Wisewerds in reply to f2000. | March 11, 2016 at 8:55 pm

    Demonstrators who set out to suppress a political rally are beyond despicable.

    Those who are trying to blame Trump for this are beyond despicable.

    TV networks who encourage demonstrators who have set out to suppress a political rally and who provide a platform for those trying to blame Trump for this are especially beyond despicable.

    All three are fomenting a political climate in which encourages political violence up to and including assassination, and when that happens, they should all be held accountable.

    I am a Cruz supporter, not a Trump supporter. But if Trump wins the nomination, I am definitely going to be voting for him. If only to spite the assholes I am hearing on CNN.

I’m enjoying this. A racist,misogynistic vulgarian named Donald Trump is embraced & lauded. Trump attracting violent supporters was downplayed even applauded. Now all the sudden” its getting out of hand”.


    Wisewerds in reply to m1. | March 11, 2016 at 8:56 pm

    Yes, asshole, you do reap what you sow.

    janitor in reply to m1. | March 11, 2016 at 9:00 pm

    I suppose that you would support the protests that nearly shut down conservatives be cause at so many colleges across the country?

    If it had been Republicans rioting and shutting down an Obama rally circa 2008 in similar fashion, I somehow doubt you’d be so approving.

Well congratulations to Trump! He succeeded in getting wall-to-wall real-time national media coverage illustrating the anti-free-speech, divided, third-world mentality this country has descended to since Obama. So instead of 10,000 people at a rally, millions are seeing and talking about the nightmare that has become cities such as Chicago.

It’s also really clear that the thugs aren’t Trump supporters but rally disrupters.

No one has a “free speech” right to barge into a private venue someone else has paid for and protest.

No one has a “free speech” right to heckle and shut down someone else’s speech.

We have seen this problem over and over again at colleges anti-speakers.

It will stop once it’s no longer excused or defended, no longer supported by the federal government (Obama’s doing), and no longer trendy.

    Rick in reply to janitor. | March 11, 2016 at 10:25 pm

    Fox News foregoes its long advertised hour-long session with Ted Cruz to “cover” this Trump stuff, and the “coverage” is a non-stop interview, free association discussion by Trump.

      Lady Penguin in reply to Rick. | March 12, 2016 at 2:08 am

      I take certain pleasure in that – Cruz losing an hour to pontificate…since apparently he decided to support Bill Ayers and the mob rule of BlackLivesMatter, over the right of his political opponent to speak to decent American citizens…yes, it’s nice he lost out.

      Been a Cruz supporter from the beginning – now my family is seeing a side of him which matches the hateful we’ve had to put up with all along as conservatives, grassroots, and people who don’t want the GOP be a Uniparty in DC.

      JimMtnViewCaUSA in reply to Rick. | March 12, 2016 at 2:45 am

      It is beyond sick for Cruz to back the thugs. They’ll be coming for him next.

The lefties and anarchists are in the process of driving a Trump landslide in Illinois, all the while FOX keeps looping the same video of the worst of the behavior, and I hear chants of “Bernie, Bernie” and “we won, we won”. Just who is “attracting violent supporters”? I don’t think the blame for this rests with the candidate collecting the most votes!

    nordic_prince in reply to Walter. | March 11, 2016 at 11:03 pm

    I think a lot of people are PO’d at the antics of the protesters, and consequently many who were previously on the fence about Trump will now come down on his side – just in time for Illinois’ primary on Tuesday.

    At least that’s the impression I’m getting from Illinois 2A. online groups ~

Very, very scary. The fascism of leftest college faculties/students shutting down free speech on campus has now spread to the outside political world. This is the collegiate playbook.

Readers of LegalInsurrection should be especially aware of the suppression of free speech.

Unfortunately, if the left continues “successes” such as Chicago, the intimidation and bullying will only get worse, especially if the MSM cheers it on.

The actions are focused on Trump now, but the leftists will expand to all Republicans (really, left vs. right; PC vs. non-PC). The intimidation will be similar to that happening to police officers.

If this behavior is not quashed now, look for more leftest brown shirts at future rallies, and eventually, even debates, victory speeches, press conferences, etc., in the name of preventing “hate” or “offensive” speech.

I fear for the eventual safety of campaign workers, the security of campaign offices, and the well-being of people who have any campaign identification (buttons, bumper stickers, yard signs) with Republican candidates (analogous to Jews with identifications on college campuses). (See, e.g., yesterday’s incident in Dalton, GA, in which a homeowner was assaulted by three men with a pistol for displaying a certain political yard sign.)

Republican political events will, unavoidably, become security camps, just as campus talks by rightist speakers are necessarily secure.

Not the America in which I grew up.

    Ragspierre in reply to CameoRed. | March 11, 2016 at 9:33 pm

    Here’s something even more scary…

    T-rump is just as lawless in his own way, and proven by his history, as a lot of these protesters.

    He HATES the First Amendment. He’s used his wealth to crush the expression and due process rights of people all his life.

    He’s got no respect for or allegence to the Constitution or the federalist system, nor for the property rights or liberty of people or their enterprises.

    He EXPECTS to be a benign dictator, and that MEANS trashing the law. Much of what he’s promised is expressly illegal. Doesn’t matter.

    There will, of course, be a terrible reaction to that.

    The way out of that is simply to elect someone who respects the rule of law, starting with the Constitution.

      CameoRed in reply to Ragspierre. | March 11, 2016 at 10:01 pm

      Rags, you are using EXACTLY the arguments that the leftists on campus use to justify using anti-free speech tactics to suppress speakers they do not like. (Specifically, the Israeli’s are “lawless,” and therefore the left’s suppression tactics are OK.)

      You cannot support the Professor’s advocating the rights of anti-BDS speakers on campus, but then say Trump is “lawless,” and therefore the left’s suppression tactics are OK.

      We need an intellectual honesty check here.

        Ragspierre in reply to CameoRed. | March 11, 2016 at 10:07 pm

        Yes, we DO need an intellictual honesty check here.

        I never said what you suggest. I haven’t “excused” anyone.

        And what I DID say is supported by the FACTS, not a set of lies.

          CameoRed in reply to Ragspierre. | March 11, 2016 at 10:34 pm

          Regardless of Trump’s position on anything, he has the right to say it. Someone coming along and saying “well…., he has a position I don’t like, and let me filibuster 9 sentences telling you what that horrible position is, and BTW, I won’t even throw in the platitude of defending to the death his right to say it” is simply a change-the-subject obfuscating spin, trying to use the opportunity to paint Trump in a bad light and infer he is at least partially at fault. His specific position on anything is irrelevant to his free speech rights. That’s the point.

          The BDS folks do similar things. There should be no comment on this article even mentioning Trump’s position on anything — the position does not affect the free speech right.

          I wanted you to be the first to know; I endorsed Trump this afternoon.

          amwick in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 7:07 am

          All those splashes, those are Cruz supporters jumping ship. Hope the are good swimmers! I really think Cruz missed an opportunity after this debacle. The spin he attempts today should be interesting.

      Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | March 11, 2016 at 10:01 pm

      You’re pathetic.

      the only reason they don’t do this to your guy is because he cannot attract the thousands to a rally.

      murkyv in reply to Ragspierre. | March 11, 2016 at 11:21 pm

      Why didn’t the “Constitutional Conservative” in this race defend the 1st Amendment tonight when he was asked to comment?

        gmac124 in reply to murkyv. | March 11, 2016 at 11:53 pm

        No idea, I am not a mind reader. I could inject lots of conjecture here but that would hardly do any good. However I do know from watching Cruz in the past he doesn’t jump in with partial information and look like an ass later. My assumption is that he is gathering information and will have a definitive response in the next day or so. I prefer it that way. I don’t want anymore speeches about if I had a son.

          murkyv in reply to gmac124. | March 12, 2016 at 1:25 pm

          Actually, Cruz obviously DID comment without knowing all of the facts.

          Not only did he give this and future disruptions legitimacy, today he DOES look like an ass.

          He just pushed a lot of fence sitters over to Trumps side. IMHO

        Lady Penguin in reply to murkyv. | March 12, 2016 at 1:54 am

        Greatly disappointed in Cruz tonight. He defended the likes of Bill Ayers, a known terrorists. Though Trump is his political opponent, Cruz supporting the, blacklivesmatter, and the anarchists over the right of Trump to have a rally reflects negatively on Cruz, not Trump.

        How many cities does Mr. Cruz want burned down – because that’s what’s coming no matter who the Republican nominee is…Obama has been encouraging this for years, inciting it every opportunity that comes along. Promoting lies and false charges of racism has been his modis operandi all along – I fear the worst is yet to come.

        JackPepper in reply to murkyv. | March 12, 2016 at 3:47 am

        Trump has a right to spout all he likes at the rally he paid for the space to have. It’s his first amendment right to do so. It is a disgraceful for Cruz who has claimed to be a defender of the rights of others to set this aside to instead support the lawlessness of others.

        Since Trump has an active Secret Service detail it is most likely they are behind the cancellation decision as the are charged with keeping Trump safe from harm and their action is no different than what would expected with a POTUS.

        I am not a Trump supporter, but the more I see the crap the more I am inclined to vote for Trump; as stated above, he has a right to speak his mind, and if you do not want to hear him, find something else to do.

          Lady Penguin in reply to JackPepper. | March 12, 2016 at 9:22 am

          The Ted Cruz I thought I knew (and voted for) has made a big mistake tonight, one I wouldn’t have believed possible. He reacted politically to hurt an opponent, but didn’t make the right moral choice. The idea that ANY candidate or elected official (talking about Obama’s words last night) would support anarchy, terrorism and violence – “antipathy towards others not like themselves” is dangerous to freedom everywhere, but particularly in this country.

          It is human nature to for order not chaos and when the people see chaos and violence, they fight for survival. IMO, the Obama regime seeks to cause a Ferguson to happen everywhere in this election year, and few people are seeing what lies ahead…

          Remember the Zimmerman case? 2012, Holder’s Justice department deliberately found that case and turned the truth into a lie–just to agitate a certain Democrat voting block.

        JackPepper in reply to murkyv. | March 12, 2016 at 4:00 am

        To your specific question, Cruz, it seems, is a “constitutional conservative” when he is telling us that he is, otherwise he cannot be bothered to support his fellow candidate’s right to speak under the right protected by the very document Cruz claims all to often to support and defend.

        Tuesday is coming up. #NOCRUZEVER

      MikeInCA in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 6:11 am

      The best part of your comments, is that you use lots of CAPS to confirm that you’re the village idiot.

      And you lack any self-awareness to realize it.

      justicewarrior in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 7:32 am

      Wow you sound like a Sanders supporter or a Move-On/Occupy Wall Street Protestor.

      CloseTheFed in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 9:02 am

      Dear Ragspierre:

      Trump often and alarmingly speaks of “getting along” with people, and he often says you can’t get anything done if you don’t get along with people. He’s been very clear that Cruz probably couldn’t get anything done, because Cruz doesn’t get along with people.

      Regardless of whether you agree with what Trump wishes to accomplish, he acknowledges that he can’t do things unilaterally. Granted, he doesn’t express it as you would, but he’s not required.

      I don’t like Donald Trump’s boorishness, but I don’t believe he believes he can or should act without Congress. I don’t agree with everything he proposes, but I can agree that illegal aliens need to be deported, and trade deals thrown out.

      To save a patient you have to stop the bleeding FIRST. FIRST.

      So then voting for an unprincipled liar and GOPe hack like Cruz is out. Cruz has gone full soros anti first amendment. Cruz clearly has only onebprinciple which is take care b of Cruz first last and always.

    The actions are focused on Trump now, but the leftists will expand to all Republicans


All the Republican Candidates should with one voice denounce the mob violence directed against peaceable assembly as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, and demand that the Mayor and ‘City Council’ condemn the intimidation and take all necessary action to ensure the right to assembly.

Turning this fascist show of strength into a Trump/anti-Trump issue is offensive nonsense. There is far more at stake here. Do you really think if they are allowed to silence Trump they won’t come for Cruz, and every conservative?

    gmac124 in reply to DaMav. | March 11, 2016 at 10:23 pm

    “All the Republican Candidates should with one voice denounce the mob violence directed against peaceable assembly as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights”

    The entire Republican party should denounce the violence. They could use this to build momentum for November. Of course if they do come out they will screw up the response and give the momentum back to the Democrats because they are the masters of pulling defeat from victory.

I fear for the Man’s life. All sorts of terrible characters, eg el Chapo, want the man harmed. Reportedly, there’s a bounty on his head.

And since the beginning, there’s been an ongoing problem with protestors… Some of them paid protestors. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have each lost control of their rallies to these protestors.

The media’s attempt to shame Trumps security for dealing with the protestors is despicable. I don’t have much sympathy for that reporter who was maybe/judgment call blocking the safe exit of the man from a crowded hall.


Rahm Emmanuel is presiding over the loss of civilian control over large swaths of Chicago. Letting Magnificent mile get shut down on the major shopping days is bad. Letting local roughshod beat up a Presidential Candidate’s supporter is worse.

    nordic_prince in reply to rotten. | March 11, 2016 at 11:37 pm

    This is $h!+cago – “The City that ‘Smirks.'” Home to all kinds of violence and corruption: the 1968 Democratic Convention, the Haymarket Square Riots, St. Valentine’s Day Massacre, Al Capone, Bugs Moran, the Black Sox, Bill Ayers, the “Machine” (which Rahm Emanuel can’t control like the Daleys, and is therefore more dangerous, I would argue), numerous petty gangsters and organized crime outfits that have held sway in the city since the Civil War and continuing even to this day.

    Yup, such a wonderful place ~

This is what REAL fascism looks like.

    Ragspierre in reply to myiq2xu. | March 11, 2016 at 10:09 pm

    Respectfully, no.

    This is what anarchy BEGINS to look like.

    Fascism looks much more like “law and order” to a lot of people.

      DaveGinOly in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 12:00 am

      Many people, including many (if not most) anarchists, equate anarchy with chaos. This is simply not so. Anarchy is state in which society has no government. There is nothing objectionable to this per se. We don’t need government to get us out of bed in the morning and to work, and we don’t need a government doing many of the things it does today to make society run (it’s capable of running itself – too many confuse “government” with “society”).

      But an anarchic society demands law-abiding behavior. Because when people’s lives, property, and other interests are threatened by lawless behavior, that’s when they will begin to organize forces to defend their rights collectively. That is, they will begin to organize a government, and bring an end to anarchy. Anarchy can’t survive chaos and lawlessness – it requires exactly the opposite from those who wish to preserve such a society.

        CloseTheFed in reply to DaveGinOly. | March 12, 2016 at 9:11 am

        Yes, Edmund Burke said this in his speech to Parliament in 1775, urging Reconcilation with the Colonies.

        It was hilarious; he observed that England had removed or forbidden government in Massachusetts for some time, and the inhabitants had hardly noticed the deficiency. He was concerned they might become of the view that government was not even necessary!

        Ragspierre in reply to DaveGinOly. | March 12, 2016 at 1:54 pm

        “But an anarchic society demands law-abiding behavior.”

        You are a self-contradictory prig.

        Please, don’t condescend until you can at least be rationally consistent.

legalizehazing | March 11, 2016 at 9:50 pm

Ah Chicago, the wonderland. You don’t stop The Donald lol. Retribution will be sweet.

500+ shootings in Shitcago this year and they’re angry at Trump? I think it’s time they re-examined their priorities.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Vince. | March 12, 2016 at 12:02 am

    Yeah, it seems there was plenty of “hate” and “division” there before The Donald arrived!

Agitators including Bill Ayers . . . funded with Soros’ money . . . 0bama’s wet dream.

Ugly/scary times ahead.

good enough morgan | March 11, 2016 at 10:25 pm

I guess this is a step toward squashing the theory that Trump and Sanders voters overlap.

This ain’t the 1930s.

When the original Brownshirt tactics were in vogue, the only good way for voters to see and hear their candidate was in person. If you could break up meetings and scatter the attendees, you could prevent a man from being heard, which was just about as good as preventing him from speaking at all. Now we have TV, we have video; we can see who’s using the strong-arm stuff to shut up opponents. (Eighty years ago they did have radio, but it’s not really the same as good visuals.)

This was just about the stupidest thing any anti-Trump types, from either the Left or the Right, could have done. A prominent display by the zoo animals that they don’t like Trump is, all by itself, going to get him massive support. That stuff may work to intimidate, say, a college president, who has a board of regents to deal with, and they hate excitement—they’d much prefer a man to cave than to fight. It may work for Jesse Jackson when he shakes down a corporation by annoying business people trying to get into the company headquarters—paying him off is the quickest and cheapest way to get rid of him. But it won’t work with Trump, because peace and quiet isn’t his primary goal here. He’s in the middle of an election campaign, and nobody ever won election by keeping a low profile and hoping to conduct business without being noticed. And trying to pin all the strong-arm stuff on Trump and his minions can’t work, either—Trump isn’t sending goons to break up his opponent’s speeches and rallies. No sophistry is sufficient to make him look like the instigator of these mini-riots. (Though the “usual suspects” will certainly try.)

So, the obvious question is, just who on the Left (these goons don’t look or sound like Righties) is stupid enough to have tried this boneheaded stunt? MoveOn? Are they really that dumb?

    This was just about the stupidest thing any anti-Trump types, from either the Left or the Right, could have done.

    “Anti-Trump types” on the Right have never shown any proclivity for violence like this. Quit with the false equivalences already.

nordic_prince | March 11, 2016 at 10:37 pm

Luis Gutierrez was most certainly involved in this – he’s been banging the pots and pans all week, encouraging the rabble to come out and protest.

nordic_prince | March 11, 2016 at 10:46 pm

For those who want some details: here

Eastwood Ravine | March 11, 2016 at 10:52 pm

Non-political people and some of those on the right are tired of the people they elected not fighting back. They think they have in Trump someone who will finally fight back.

The Left has been fanning the flames of civil war by stoking an irrational hatred for people and institutions that represent and defend traditional America. I think the flames are about to hit a gas line…

Did anyone not think Obama’s presidency would likely end in this manner?

JOHNPAULJONES | March 11, 2016 at 11:56 pm

It is absolutely outrageous that people on the right who are against Trump dare call this capitalist a Nazi. And you then go on to accuse his supporters of being Brownshirts. Outrageous…I knocked on doors for Reagan, I made phone calls for Bush and now I am the enemy. Outrageous, you should be ashamed of yourselves. This is going to be a split that you will live to rue. There is absolutely NO CHANCE that I will ever look at sites like Legalinsurrection, Instapundit, Hot Air, and others in the same light…sites that have linked to me in the past when I blogged now consider me the enemy and an idiot…or worse an idiot brownshirt.

On REDSTATE today we have a blogger calling for the left to arm themselves…so now you want people to kill us. Outrageous…

    There is absolutely NO CHANCE that I will ever look at sites like Legalinsurrection, Instapundit, Hot Air, and others in the same light…sites that have linked to me in the past when I blogged

    Just out of curiosity, what was your old blog?

Subotai Bahadur | March 11, 2016 at 11:57 pm

This attack may not be the trigger. Neither may the next one. But someday, they are going to find that Americans are going to start taking Obama’s advice. ““If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”. They don’t realize that they have changed the very nature of American politics. And they are outnumbered.

The Left fears Trump as much as the GOPe Obamacons do.

Response – Lawfare. Sue the organizers of the anti-Trump protest for violations of the civil rights of the Trump supporters and the rally’s speakers. Their actions may even qualify for charges of violating some federal election and campaign laws. Anyone knowledgeable here care to comment?

    Voyager in reply to DaveGinOly. | March 12, 2016 at 2:03 am

    More like criminal charges for the organizers for conspiring and instigating a riot. Suits should be reserved for the public officials evading doing their lawful duty.

    Response – Lawfare. Sue the organizers of the anti-Trump protest for violations of the civil rights of the Trump supporters and the rally’s speakers.

    If this had been Republicans or Tea Party types using threatened and/or actual mob violence to shut down an Obama rally circa 2008, you can bet the ACLU would have been all over it.

    CloseTheFed in reply to DaveGinOly. | March 12, 2016 at 9:20 am

    Seems like some fringe group was sued 20 years ago for damages, and a judgment, a large judgment was obtained. Then the question was, did the judgment attach to the members individually… and I believe it did…. And they all scattered like roaches.

Common Sense | March 12, 2016 at 2:48 am

This is an attack on our very freedoms!
This is the progressive left who decides what speech they
approve of. If they don’t approve of it then they will
do anything to disrupt or completely stop it.
EVERY American should outraged at what happened!

The Constitutional rights of free speech and free assembly peacefully died last night in Chicago!

CNN and MSNBC should be so ashamed of their “news” coverage
They sounded like a cheering section for the progressives!

    forksdad in reply to Common Sense. | March 12, 2016 at 12:11 pm

    This happened. Now Cruz says that Trump bears responsibility. Add that to Cruz hiring Bush’s brother and finance team and what do you get? Cuckservative, bought and paid for brought to you by the rinos, dems, and Bush machine.

    Sometimes when something is too good to be true, it is.

It rather funny in a ironic sort … The left is all up in arms over Trump calling him a fascist and a Nazi while the guy who founded and funds move on is a convicted felon and a Nazi collaborator …. And Cruz can now kiss my ass I was a Cruz guy until I heard him last night

Hispanic protesters in Mexican flags and sombreros chant “We Stopped Trump!” outside canceled Trump Rally on UIC campus in Chicago.

Illegal, unafraid and ready to vote illegally. Thanks maobama.

Agreed. I’m deeply disappointed in Cruz on this one.

    clintack in reply to DaMav. | March 12, 2016 at 10:26 am

    Really, really hoping Cruz comes out with a better, longer statement today.

    Last night was off-the-cuff during a developing situation that may not have been clear.

    If he isn’t better today, I’ll be right there with you in our deep disappointment.

This is never about T-rump’s right to kick a hornet’s nest.

He has that right. He can use his speech rights ALMOST any way he wishes. He’s MORE free to do that than almost anyone in the US. How do you shut up an oligarch who knows how to manipulate the media? He just bounces to the next microphone.

When you intentionally go about rousing the rabble, the rabble will rouse. You then get to eat that.

Free speech is NOT about a suspension of consequence.

AND, I’ll say again, T-rump is as lawless in his own way as that mob last night.

You’ve been warned. And Cruz is EXACTLY right.

    JimMtnViewCaUSA in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:06 pm

    Forget about Trump.
    Do Trump supporters have the right to peaceably assemble? If not, why not?

      And there were small children at this event, too.

      Every “conservative” who is trying to make hay with this is a hypocrite. Moral relativist. Not much different from suddenly finding that Sessions, Breitbart, Palin, Carson etc. somehow were never people whose opinions they respected.

      Ragspierre in reply to JimMtnViewCaUSA. | March 12, 2016 at 1:33 pm

      OF COURSE, and NOBODY is making any counter-argument.


      I had a right to go to Altamont, too. I DID NOT have a “right” to be free of any harm that might come from my choice.

        janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:43 pm

        Yes you did.

        Just as I will when I go to the Trump rally in Palm Beach tomorrow, and I expect that no one will interfere with my ingress or egress or assault me in any way whatsoever without consequences to them.

          Lady Penguin in reply to janitor. | March 12, 2016 at 2:25 pm

          Have a great time, Janitor. At this point, the only people who seem to understand the danger and risk to a country that isn’t fascist or communist are the Trump folks. Sanctimonious prigs like the establishment conservatives are doing nothing but folding like cheap suits to political correctness and evil.

          When a man like Ted Cruz loses his moral clarity and supports the terrorism that occurred in Chicago, which was intended to create chaos and violence, well then, there isn’t much left to believe in.

          amwick in reply to janitor. | March 12, 2016 at 4:27 pm

          Be safe. Be smart. I want to see you back.

    Lady Penguin in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 2:19 pm

    So, Rags, you’re saying people who want to attend the rally of a political opponent should not be able to? Because that’s what happened, and you’re supporting agitation, interference with the right of people to peaceably assemble, terrorism, Bill Ayers, Black Lives Matters, Bernie Sanders, and essentially anarchy. Free speech for them but not for Trump?

    These terrorists are on a mission. Been in the works for decades, and Obama and been able to bring it to fulfillment. You think they’re going to stop with Trump? People have short memories – Obama and Holder’s DOJ dug up and manufactured the Zimmerman travesty in 2012 – it’s how they get their base out to vote.

    I voted for Cruz, but I sure as heck will defend the right of others to support Trump (or any other candidate).

    Rarely, do I respond to your nonsense, but blaming the innocent victims in Chicago, regular Americans who have the right to support their candidate without being intimidated and harmed, goes beyond the pale.

Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, National Review et al. are making hypocritical asses of themselves.

There is nothing that Trump has said at any of his rallies — all of which have been tens of times bigger than any other politician’s rallies, save for a couple of Bernie rallies that came up to a third of the size — that justified this organized attempt to shut down free speech. Considering the size of the crowds, equivalent to those attending a sold-out, overflow sports event, the “violence” equates to virtually nothing.

The protesters were organized and incited by the likes of Move-on, BDS, BLM, pro-illegal-immigrant and similar groups a la social media and college clubs, including paid operatives. There also were a sprinkling of anti “Drumpf” signs.

The cherry-picking of minutiae, and claims, e.g. the Rags puppet. of “lawlessness” of Trump or his supporters is despicable. Rags says:

Free speech is NOT about a suspension of consequence.

Yeah? That’s what the Muslims say when they go apeshit being “offended”.

The only ones throwing over their morals here are the ones who are distorting and exaggerating minutiae and attempting to mislead in their desperation and despair.

    Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 12, 2016 at 12:48 pm

    You poor cultist liar.

    “Yeah? That’s what the Muslims say when they go apeshit being ‘“offended”’.”

    Put up one Muslim making a claim that says that.

    On the other hand, THAT IS what Der Donald said when “defending” “draw Mohamed”. Did you forget how he “defended” the free speech of the people involved? He implied they shouldn’t be using that right.

    TRY to tie that to what I said.

    NEXT TRY to deny that free expression is NOT a suspension of consequence, especially vis the Helen Thomas firing.

    You poor, delusional cultist.

      janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:05 pm

      You’re flailing all over the place now.

      Calm down.

      Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:12 pm

      There you go.

      You’ll now lie about the words on the tape.

        janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:18 pm

        I forgive him (pre-declaration of his candidacy, note) for being taken in by media blather. After all, he’s not a lawyer.

        I also forgive those who are being taken in by the anti-Trump media distortions now.

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:30 pm

        But you’ll “forgive” him for anything, being the delusional cultist you have demonstrated you are for months.


          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:36 pm

          “Delusional cultist” is ad hominem.

          If you can’t do better than this, hang it up, sock puppet.

          Or don’t respond. You don’t have to have the last word — unless, of course, you’re not much better than the screaming “Hands Up!” type mobs who are so afraid of hearing different opinion that you’d prefer to shut it down by inhibiting others’ responses.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 2:14 pm

          No. Observing that you are…

          1. a cultist, and

          2. delusional

          is NOT “ad hominem”. You are demonstrably BOTH those things.

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 3:13 pm

          Time for your nap.

Mr. Cruz began by saying that the “protesters who took violence into their own hands” were responsible for the episode.

“But in any campaign, responsibility starts at the top,” Mr. Cruz continued. “And when you have a campaign that disrespects the voters, when you have a campaign that affirmatively encourages violence, when you have a campaign that is facing allegations of physical violence against members of the press, you create an environment that only encourages this sort of nasty discourse.”

Mr. Cruz invoked the protests and violent police run-ins at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, and predicted that future skirmishes were likely.

“When the candidate urges supporters to engage in physical violence, to punch people in the face, the predictable consequence of that is that it escalates,” Mr. Cruz said. “And today is unlikely to be the last such instance.”

Mr. Cruz also suggested that President Obama had stoked tensions since taking office, arguing that the president had “sought to divide us on racial lines, on ethnic lines, on religious lines, on class lines” in moments of crisis.

“America’s better than this,” Mr. Cruz said.

Note that’s categorically different than the partial quote that went out over a Tweet that very selectively just included the part mentioning T-rump.

**Mr. Cruz began by saying that the “protesters who took violence into their own hands” were responsible for the episode.**

    janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:10 pm

    Cruz has become a nasally sleaze bag. No one at Trump rallies has called for violence. Only for throwing out people who have broken into a private ticketed venue someone else paid for under false pretenses in the attempt to disrupt speech. They have no more right to do that than would anyone have the right to “demonstrate” inside someone’s private office or home.

    Meanwhile, how about you and your Cruz giving sanction to imagined retaliatory violence.

    Today (another large Trump rally in Ohio), Secret Service had to step in:

      clafoutis in reply to janitor. | March 12, 2016 at 2:49 pm

      Cruz used to appear bright, articulate, and principled.
      He’s morphed into a sleazy, conniving, opportunistic, hypocritical, holy-roller/snake-oil salesman.

      Anti-Trump Cruzettes: Choose your poison carefully.

        Cruz hasn’t “morphed” into anything; that your own well-considered opinion of him has changed based on the name-calling and distortions of Trump chumps says, quite frankly, more about you than it does about Cruz.

Obama told the left to “get in their faces” when arguing with people. Progressives have been throwing gas on the leftist fire for the last two decades and now they’ve encountered a group of people who are no longer willing to cower in the face of progressive outrage. What did they expect?

This has been coming for a long time and it’s not Trump’s fault. There was always going to be a point when people decided they were no longer willing to live under the thumb of left wing thugs.

JimMtnViewCaUSA | March 12, 2016 at 1:09 pm

It’s time to assert our rights. Or bow down and accept that we’ve lost them.

Cruz has shown yet again that he is an unprincipled liar and opportunist. He pretends to be an evangelical and now he has shown he only pretends to be a “principled conservative”. He rushes to join with Soros, and Black Lives Matter crowd.

A more disgusting display of crass GOPe opportunism could not have been shown by Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich.

Tammy Bruce has called for the transcripts of the Jeb Bush GOPe confabs with Cruz et al to be made public.

Jan Morgan has withdrawn her endorsement of Cruz based on this sellout to Soros and

There is only one way for the people tobshow their opposition to the thugs and the unprincipled GOPe hacks like Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich and that is to vote in mass numbers for Trump and against Cruz, Rubio and Kasich.

A vote for Trump is a vote to preserve your rights to free speech.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 1:28 pm

    Like the good fascist we both know you to be, you’ll try to exploit any “crisis”.

    T-rump HATES the First Amendment, as we all know.

    He’s historically used his wealth and influence to crush other peoples’ rights to free expression and due process.

      janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 1:38 pm

      More baseless smearing by the LI sock puppet.

        Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 12, 2016 at 1:57 pm

        I’ve provided the basis numerous times, and you simply deny it in you delusions.

        You can’t counter with facts or even sound argument, so you just resort to ad hominem.

        Poor, delusional liar.

          janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 2:13 pm

          You are the one who brings up the smear. Support it. I’m not into proving a negative, doing your research for you, or quibbling when you cherrypick miscellaneous bits of minutiae out of a long life of achievement and honor, and attempt to create a misleading picture of “historically” with that.

From where I sit, the difference between Trump and Cruz is that Trump will cut a deal when the other side has a winning point, and Cruz would rather go down in flames that settle for 75% of what he wants.

When I first tuned in to this dust-up, my immediate reaction was that this had to be something caused by the Trump organization, because it is just too good for him.

Then it turned out that it was an invasion of a Trump event by a coalition of MoveOn, BLM and others, in an effort to drown out an intimidate people who don’t agree with them, just like BDS does. Their methods were violent.

They really are that stupid.

Trump is not my favorite, but if he is the Republican nominee, I will vote for him. I will view it as getting only a very small part of what I wanted from this election, namely the acknowledged political right to plain speech.

Voters Slam Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio for Blaming Chicago Rally Shutdown on Donald Trump
Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz
The Associated Press

by Katie McHugh12 Mar 2016

Supporters of Sens. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)
took to social media to slam the freshman senators for blaming leftists shutting down a Trump Chicago rally on GOP frontrunner Donald Trump.

Cruz supporters, incensed by the Texas senator’s blame game, stormed social media to express their anger. Top comments on a Friday Facebook post promoting a Cruz “victory fund” drew furious responses (comments quoted here are unedited):

Jerry Shalow: Cruz you lost my vote for using this protest for your political game. Rubio also. Trump has my vote. How about the violations of the 1st amendment TED!!!!!!! Condone the violence what you just did.

Pappy Beagles: I’m a Texan, I voted for you for the senate, and was supporting you for president, up until you blamed Trump for the savage behavior of Hillary and Bernie supporters in Chicago. I just sent a $100.00 contribution to a billionaire, and i’m retired on a fixed income, so guess this is goodbye to you, and I am now firmly on the Trump wagon.

Gayle Natale: Mr. Cruz, I just listened to your response regarding the protestors who caused Mr. Trump to cancel his rally in Chicago. You did not mention the violation of the first amendment once during your speech. I am extremely dissapointed in you. You pride yourself daily on upholding the constitution in your speeches. All you did was put the blame on Donald Trump even though Mr. Trump never made an appearance. It is obvious to everyone that this was a carefully planned protest. And I would not be surprised if you were behind it, as part of your plan to sabotage Donald Trump. You are one of the dirtiest polititians I have ever known!

Jace Conners: Ted Cruz… i was an undecided voter who was leaning your way then you blamed trump for the actions of violent protesters. I am now voting Trump thanks for helping me make my choice tonight.

Mike John Monseur: Dear Mr. Cruz. I have been watching you in this campaign and was leaning toward supporting you. Tonight, the disgrace in Chicago took place when protesters put thousands of people in harms way. As I was watching Fox and other News, many people came on the air. Mr. Trump did and called for peace. Ben Carson also called for peace and Marco Rubio came on the air. He talked about the hired professionals creating this disruption and he also called for peace and unity. Then I watched you step in front of the camera’s and I thought you would have a strong uniting message to bring order in Chicago. Like a leader should. Like a President should in times of trouble. Then all you talked about was yourself and your campaign and used this tragic evening to better yourself. I’m so disappointed in you Mr. Cruze. You lost my vote.

Roy Stiles: Ted Cruz, I’ve been a true conservative for 40 years. I supported you here in Texas and voted for you for Senate. And while I believe Trump is the leader this country needs, I’ve been saying I’d continue to support you for the Senate, even after the shenanigans in Iowa, but after you comments tonight in response to what happened at the Trump rally in Chicago I can assure you that I will not only not support you again for Senate in Texas, but I will actively campaign against you. Our country simply cannot afford divisive selfish people like you in positions of power.

Abigail Mccamick: At least Rubio had the integrity to admit and say that many of the protesters were paid to be there and cause chaos. Ted takes advantage to use such an ugly tragedy to campaign. Undecided here but Cruz just pushed me farther away with his actions over the protest.

Dave Schiff: Cruz, how dare you try to blame Donald Trump for what happened in Chicago tonight. Trump’s first amendment rights were crushed along with the freedom to assemble of thousands of people going to the speech. You say you are a constitutional conservative defending the rights of individuals. You are a fraud and no better than Obama. How dare you. I would not ever vote for a fraud like you.

That’s only a tiny sample of outraged comments from voters. Rubio fared little better. A pale but calm Rubio also cast blame on Trump on MSNBC, absolving violent agitators attacking Trump supporters and causing chaos by saying “Words have consequences

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 2:27 pm

    Of course, as noted above, you lie WRT Cruz.

    He FIRST blamed the people directly responsible.

    THEN he pointed out the FACT that Der Donald is ALSO responsible for rousing the Bierhall faction of his voters/cultists.

    You lying SOS.

      janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 2:42 pm

      This is what peak stupid looks like:

      Arguing with a vile prog is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what you do or say it will knock over pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it won.

        Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 12, 2016 at 2:50 pm

        You HAVE no ‘argument’.

        I gave you an actuality…a T-rump video clip.

        Your reaction is to reflexively “forgive him”. You are no longer rational.

        You ARE a delusional cultist, and that pretty much makes you a liar, as noted. Since you lie.

      Cruz has been revealed as a liar unprincipled GOPe hack. When his ONLY claim for votes is his now proven false claim to be a principled contitutionist then his abject failure to unequivocally stand up for the first amendment rights of other republicans shows he can NOT BE TRUSTED.

      How quickly will he surrender our 2nd amendment rights as soon as he finds it politically convenient.

      Cruz is a liar. He surrounds himself with liars like his ex CIA campaign manager. He wants power more than anything. He worships opportunity and himself above all else. He has no principles.

      Cruz is just an unprincipled liar like Ragspierre but without the 5th grade name calling.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 3:22 pm

        Your are a Master Projectionist. On every level.

        And, as we both know, a fascist.

        Your little yellow god is the threat to the Bill Of Rights, as demonstrated by his whole life entire.

        Also, he is a threat to the rule of law. Because he’s an outlaw.

        Like the lying, narcissistic asshole we have. And you want to replace THAT one with another.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 3:34 pm

        Interesting that you’d have the stupidity to even bring up the Second Amendment.

        Cruz was successfully defending the Second Amendment at roughly the same time Der Donald was working to diminish it.

        So, TYPICAL.

        And, though I advocate for the Second Amendment, nobody in their right minds suggests that enjoying the RIGHTS it imparts should go without consequences.

        Same as the First, as I’ve been pointing out.

    Lady Penguin in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 2:41 pm

    I supported Cruz when he ran for Senate. Just voted for him in our Virginia primary, and seeing him lose his moral clarity to take a cheap shot at a political opponent is very disappointing. Cruz thinks these radicals aren’t going to come for him or someone else? Then he isn’t as bright as I thought he was.

    This is Zimmerman 2012, this is Ferguson and Baltimore. Don’t our so-called conservatives see the writing on the 2016 Election wall?

      Ragspierre in reply to Lady Penguin. | March 12, 2016 at 2:47 pm

      Cruz has had people “come after him”. He deals with them as a rational man who believes in principles would.

      He does not egg people on to violence, contra Der Donald.

      Read the Red State piece I cited above.

        janitor in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 2:53 pm

        Cruz had a handful or real and peaceful Code Pink women at a very early gathering (hardly a major rally). He did not have an organized Soros-funded mob of thousands of left-wing activists, college students without a clue out for a fun night, and GOPe operatives carrying on in order to stop free speech, coupled with a slimy agenda’d media looking to capitalize on it via audience traffic and blame Trump.

        This country is descending into the toilet, and that’s exactly why we need Trump in office and exactly why he got fed up and threw his hat into the ring.

          Ragspierre in reply to janitor. | March 12, 2016 at 3:00 pm

          You’re lying. Partly because you cannot bring yourself to read what the man said, though I posted the link above to the Cruz statement.

          It’s because you are a delusional cultist, and have lost all ability to reason.

        Lady Penguin in reply to Ragspierre. | March 12, 2016 at 5:22 pm

        I wouldn’t read a RedState piece, nor use it as a source. They’re fully in the tank for Rubio, and are owned by Salem. Almost all of their writers are part of the #NeverTrump vitriolic group.

        Considering that quite a few “normal” decent and hardworking Americans support Trump, it’s pretty condescending to act like they’re a bunch of idiots, and that’s exactly how the Conservative Establishment is acting.

        We know what Cruz, Rubio and Kasich did…aided immensely by the malignant media – who are all in the tank for the Lefties, Obama and Hillary, so why should anyone believe what they say?

          LP, this is an unfortunate stance. One thing that I emphasize to my students is the need to not only know what people who disagree with us say but to understand why they say it. One cannot construct an informed or convincing argument based on exposing oneself only to like-minded arguments. Maybe that’s why Trump supporters seem so shallow to those of us who do not share their reverence for Trump? They do tend to sound like they have no idea at all why anyone would not support their desired monarch; so focused on tearing down the GOPe, they forget that their particular avatar will also tear down our Republic. All these screechings about how anyone who doesn’t support Trump must be “for” Hillary or whingings on and on about how Ted Cruz, Ted freaking Cruz, is suddenly a GOPe puppet . . . it all just sounds crazy to anyone not on the Trump train.

          I urge you to take a few moments to read things with which you don’t agree and to try really really hard to understand why a Constitutional conservative like myself will never vote Trump, to grasp, however vaguely, that it doesn’t equate to supporting Hillary (who is actually the female version of Trump in many many ways). Having some grounding in your oppositions’ actual arguments, not the echo-chamber “booger” “Bible thumper” lunacy, might actually make you people sound more rational.

          Those poor bastard 3rd grade students of yours. Slippers your post above is so completely full of moronic self parody it is impossible to single out single examples to criticize. Lecturing LP on the virtues of understanding others viewpoints while demonstrating you understand absolutely nothing about Trump. Advising her to get beyond superficial sayings while clearly demonstrating that superficial sayings is the total extent of your knowledge of Trump.

          Here is a question for you. Please list the last 4 presidential candidates for whom you voted and explain how each one was a constitutionalist conservative deserving of your vote.


          Sorry, Gary, when you called me a “filthy whore,” I decided you were beneath my notice. Should someone I acknowledge ask this question, I’m happy to respond.

          I don’t believe I ever called you or anyone a “filthy whore”. Have got a link to support your claim. I do have a partial recollection of telling someone something like they were whoring for Cruz propaganda. That of course is not saying someone is a literal whore. So I’m going to need a link to the actual post because you demonstrate over and over again that your cognitive abilities are suspect.

          You’re right, Gary, it wasn’t “filthy” whore . . . it was “worthless whore.” I stand corrected. Gee, it’s SO MUCH better to be a “worthless” whore than a “filthy” one. You don’t know me at all, but your worthless, desperate, unhinged attacks on me–AS A PERSON–are beyond uncalled for. You have learned well from your disgusting, vile, divisive, and revolting master.

          Yes just as I recalled.

          “Again repeating the LIE. Not a single word of criticism or concern that the video is EDITED to omit the requirement of deportation.

          You are just a worthless whore for Cruz. No LI author can have any credibility or pretend to have a journalistic credibility while supporting as you do this hacked video and FABRICATED POST FROM LEVIN.”

          That is calling you intellectual whore for Cruz not a literal whore. It is a rhetorical device.

          You are vile, Gary. Vile in every way; your ad hominem attacks you mask as “rhetoric” and your attempts to specify your horrid attack on me are simply reprehensible. I want there to be no room for “rhetoric” or bizarre later claims, you are beneath contempt, Gary. Beneath. Contempt.

          If you can’t take the heat go back to the kitchen.

          Ragspierre in reply to Lady Penguin. | March 12, 2016 at 10:12 pm

          I’d say you were a bigoted prick, but a prick is a useful and noble creation.

          You’re just a bigoted asphole. Without the asp.

          Lady Penguin in reply to Lady Penguin. | March 13, 2016 at 12:48 pm

          Fuzzy, I enjoy our discussions, and certainly have no problem understanding your points. Let me say though, I consider myself fairly enlightened, though most of my political awareness came about in 2008. Have always been a social conservative, voted Republican and knew little about the process. I spent 3 yrs at RedState. Wrote articles, (Penguin2). Left there after knowing stories not only what appeared to the community on the front page, but also behind the scenes. Things that I won’t reveal because it’s in the past.

          That said, I actually write over at UnifiedPatriots.Com and while I have quit writing for the most part, I’m quite a reader. In fact, that’s one of the compliments people often given me – is my ability to understand what is written.

          I’m 63 yrs. old, married (a long time:)) raised 3 successful children. Both my husband are people who are patriotic, and we are the grandchildren of legal immigrants.

          Only shared my bio, so that people will understand that there are people of fairly good thinking skills who truly are seeing the big picture. My concern about Cruz et al, defending the disruptions and acceptance of the violence of the likes of Bill Ayers,, #BLM, George Soros funded agitators – we can’t accept that, no matter who the candidate we like (or don’t like)is.

          Evil wins, when good people do nothing. Just look around our college campuses. I’m beyond grateful my sons are done with school – white young men are the most endangered species in this country. The radicalism against Israel in the form of BDS, is nothing more than anti-Semitism. These are all the same players behind each and every event.

          Ferguson, Baltimore, Zimmerman etc. will happen with these people getting away with domestic terrorism. The GOP Establishment (liberal or conservative) getting in bed with them is dangerous for them… it’s obvious they don’t know it.

          That’s why I can defend Trump and his supporters, voters.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    Hardy surprising, you were lying even about Rubio.

Diamond and Silk have something to say:

Cruz just blew himself up. This was a perfect opportunity to rise to the occasion and stand on the principles of liberty and free speech:

‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’

Instead he waffled around and took a cheap partisan shot at Trump for offending the rioting rabble and anti-American thugs. A real tragedy is unfolding here. WTF was Cruz thinking?

    Ragspierre in reply to DaMav. | March 12, 2016 at 5:24 pm

    ‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’

    Yeah, you mole troll. He DID say that.

    He ALSO said you can’t escape the effects of the causes you entrain. Causes >>> effects.

    You can’t encourage violence and escape the consequences.

    You can’t arm yourself and use your arms irresponsibly.

    You poor lying mole troll. and other left wing hate groups say the mass thug attacks on Trump Chicago speech were a highly coordinated planned attack by several violent left wing hate groups and their organizers.

CRUZ rushes to microphones to claim the attacks on Trump speech were the innocent spontaneous reaction to an internet video of prior Trump speeches.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 8:38 pm

    It isn’t amazing you’d tell that lie. You’ll tell any lie.

    What’s amazing it that anyone would approve it.

Cruz schlongs himself. Film of Cruz, Rubio, Kasich daisy chain at 11.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 8:54 pm

    Now, now. You’d just find that stimulating.

    Like the cheap video of your head bobbing up and down in T-rump’s lap that you frap off to.

I am watching Trump live, I think, in Kansas City.

It’s all about the disruptive demonstrators, and he’s handling it beautifully.

I do believe I am watching the next US President.

Yes just as I recalled.

“Again repeating the LIE. Not a single word of criticism or concern that the video is EDITED to omit the requirement of deportation.

You are just a worthless whore for Cruz. No LI author can have any credibility or pretend to have a journalistic credibility while supporting as you do this hacked video and FABRICATED POST FROM LEVIN.”

That is calling you intellectual whore for Cruz not a literal whore. It is a rhetorical device.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 8:40 pm

    And you’re a worthless piece of shit.

    It’s a literary device. There isn’t a beast big enough to produce a pile like you.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | March 12, 2016 at 8:44 pm

    What’s amazing is that…after T-rump ADMITS what he had told the New York times, Byron York, and Sean Hannity…you are STILL mouthing that screaming LIE about a “HACKED” video.

    You are an amazing, lying, butt boi for your man-crush.

Cruz wins the Wyoming caucuses with an OVER 6:1 schlonging of Der Donald.

    Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | March 13, 2016 at 1:51 pm

    Wyoming total voters for cruz:


    That’s right, 644.

    Only republican party insiders get to vote in Wyoming.

    So cruz won 644 of the r party elite.

Common Sense | March 13, 2016 at 5:28 am

Saddle up!