Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Republicans Discuss Personal Safety Concerns as Protests Grow Increasingly Violent

Republicans Discuss Personal Safety Concerns as Protests Grow Increasingly Violent

“How far will the progressive movement go to try to intimidate us?”

https://twitter.com/GillianNBC/status/826982753879019520

This ain’t no Tea Party.

Astroturfed progressive protests are all the rage as the “resistance” movement feels compelled to fight everything Trump might do. Look no further than the Berkeley riots and it’s easy to see just how concerning the current riot state might be for Republican lawmakers.

Yesterday, House Republicans met to discuss ways to stay safe.

From Politico:

House Republicans during a closed-door meeting Tuesday discussed how to protect themselves and their staffs from protesters storming town halls and offices in opposition to repealing Obamacare, sources in the room told Politico.

House GOP Conference Chairwoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers invited Rep. David Reichert, a former county sheriff, to present lawmakers with protective measures they should have in place. Among the suggestions: having a physical exit strategy at town halls, or a backdoor in congressional offices to slip out of, in case demonstrations turn violent; having local police monitor town halls; replacing any glass office-door entrances with heavy doors and deadbolts; and setting up intercoms to ensure those entering congressional offices are there for appointments, not to cause chaos.

“The message was: One, be careful for security purposes. Watch your back. And two, be receptive. Honor the First Amendment, engage, be friendly, be nice,” said Republican Study Committee Chairman Mark Walker (R-N.C.). “Because it is toxic out there right now. Even some of the guys who have been around here a lot longer than I have, have never seen it to this level.”

He later added: “For those of us who have children in grade school and that kind of thing, there’s a factor in all of this, saying: How far will the progressive movement go to try to intimidate us?”

The conference discussion comes as Democratic activists around the nation ramp up protests against Republican efforts to repeal Obamacare.

Last weekend, conservative Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) similarly had to be escorted out of a town hall meeting by a half-dozen police officers after the crowd turned angry. And just as Republicans were leaving their conference meeting Tuesday, more than 100 protesters showed up at one of Rep. Martha McSally’s Arizona congressional offices, according to the Arizona Daily Star.

Also discussed at the closed-door conference meeting was how to engage Democratic constituents to ensure they feel they’re being heard. After Reichert (R-Wash.) spoke about the security side, Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) stood up to talk about how to engage constituents in a “congenial” manner.

Asked about the intensity of the protests during a news conference after the meeting, Ryan said he hopes the demonstrations remain nonviolent.

“Peaceful protests are something we honor in this country,” he said. “I just hope people keep it peaceful.”

Democrats, meanwhile, dismissed Republicans’ security ramp-up as an attempt to shield themselves from criticism.

Will the protests hurt Trump? Probably not.

Julian Zelizer has a great column in the WaPo reminding us of the Reagan-era protests. I’m certainly not comparing Trump to Reagan, but the tone of the 80s protests is remarkably similar to what we hear now:

Ronald Reagan, whose approval ratings fell from 51 percent in his first year as president to a meager 34 percent by 1982, was also the focus of international and domestic fury. Reagan triggered an international uproar when he insisted on the deployment of 572 intermediate-range nuclear force missiles in Western Europe, fulfilling a NATO agreement that had been finalized in 1979. When Reagan moved forward this plan, there was an outcry from New York to the streets of Paris. Tens of thousands of moderate and left-wing Europeans demonstrated against these new weapons on the grounds that they would escalate the threat of nuclear war. Within the United States, the nuclear freeze movement ramped up into high gear, warning that this deployment was just one among many things that Reagan had done to bring the world to the brink of nuclear war.

On July 12, 1982, almost a million people came to a protest in New York City to express their support for freezing the production of nuclear weapons and to state their anger about Reagan. “My belief,” said then-Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), “is that Reagan was not put on Earth by God to bring us supply side economics. His role is to sit down with Brezhnev and end the arms race, to do for nuclear arms what Nixon did for China. My role is to create the atmospherics, the public and congressional support, that will make Reagan the greatest man who ever lived. He can reject, it, of course, but we will have tried.” The freeze movement drew millions of adherents, while in Congress, the House passed amendments that prohibited the administration from sending any more assistance to anti-communist forces overseas. The protests would continue over the following year, and Reagan’s approval ratings would remain low until 1984 (reaching 41 percent in January 1983). But it wouldn’t matter.

The problem was that Reagan’s support among Republicans kept growing.

There’s a big different between ensuring your voice, thoughts, and values are heard, and intimidating public servents. I hope for everyone’s sake progressives remember that.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Grow some goddamn balls and prosecute these thugs.

Last time I checked assault and destruction of property were FELONIES.

Throw the thugs in jail.

    JOHN B in reply to Olinser. | February 8, 2017 at 10:05 pm

    Now that we have a true justice department, federal crimes such as sending people across state borders to commit violent crimes should be prosecuted and will get us to the leaders (most of whom will be Dem party operatives.)

    He can start by indicting the Democrats who hired people to start fights at Trump events. Let the media howl, but hiring people to do violence is a major crime.

    And not prosecuting this is encouraging more and more violence.

      Milhouse in reply to JOHN B. | February 9, 2017 at 1:45 am

      He can start by indicting the Democrats who hired people to start fights at Trump events.

      Again with this lie? The O’Keefe recordings show the exact opposite; At least according to the fellow on the recording, which is the entire basis for your claim, the people they hired did not start any fights; they went to Trump rallies and let Trump supporters start fights with them.

        That’s just semantics.

        ss396 in reply to Milhouse. | February 9, 2017 at 12:42 pm

        And when the Trump rally attendees didn’t start fights, these folks started ‘nudging’ them, and ‘bumping into them’ in their efforts to escalate it into violence so that they could then claim their ‘victimhood’ status.

        If there is one thing that the Left is good at, it’s perpetually weeping about being victims.

        Their workshops train them on how far they can push before their efforts are indictable as incitement to riot. Now, why on earth would they need training in such a thing unless they were trying to incite riots? It’s all legal, sure, but malfeasant and despicable nonetheless. Don’t pretend for a moment that such action is on the side of the angels.

          Char Char Binks in reply to ss396. | February 9, 2017 at 5:11 pm

          Allen Scarsella didn’t start any fight, but he was convicted for defending his life. Juror Eileen Parker believed that he and three others had gone to the Jamar Clark encampment to start trouble, without any evidence of them doing anything at all to cause trouble except disagreeing with SJWs.

          Parker, according to MPR news, said, “I know Scarsella’s face when he was found guilty. He tried to not show anything,” Parker recalled. “I think he looked really surprised, like, ‘Oh, wow. I thought I’d get off of this like George Zimmerman did.’ But no. This is Minnesota.”

          Minnesota law is different, said Fred Goetz, an attorney who has defended clients in several high profile criminal trials.

          “If you’re on the street — in other words, not in your home — and you can retreat, you have a duty to do so,”…

          The video of the incident SHOWS THEM RETREATING FROM AN ANGRY MOB, a mob that forced them to leave, pursued them, and wouldn’t let them leave without a beating! There’s also video of masked criminals ADMITTING assaulting and punching them!

          “Parker, who is white and was raised in Canada, said she wasn’t exposed to racial tensions in America until she was an adult, and hearing racial slurs in court made her jaw drop.”

          “All of us were really surprised that people like Scarsella exist,” she said. “We didn’t know about websites like that were people had their little white supremacist rantings and stuff.”

          How can such Deplorables be allowed to breathe in this country!? It’s the current year, for godsakes! Disagreeing with and disrespecting Blacks s is provocation!

          Canadian-Minnesota values trump the law now, at least when it comes to whites defending themselves from black assailants.

        The only lie here is yours. Period.

        They were paid to go to the rallies and incite violence. They did.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to JOHN B. | February 9, 2017 at 4:51 pm

      Follow the money. Get Soros, get the Tides Foundation.

    ter·ror·ism

    noun

    the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

    texasmom43 in reply to Olinser. | February 9, 2017 at 9:17 am

    When you’re being attacked it’s too late to call police to lock them up – better have pepper spray or some other form of personal protection. These people intend a fight to the death.

    Unknown3rdParty in reply to Olinser. | February 9, 2017 at 1:35 pm

    Here’s a perfectly legitimate case for asset forfeiture. Start by ferreting out the funding sources: lock down the assorted “foundations” that are funding these protests, recover all records, take the actors (e.g., Soros and son, et al.) into custody, then freeze their assets (innocent until proven guilty). Prosecute them and, presuming they’re found guilty, then recover as many of the frozen assets as possible and put them into a fund to be used to repair the damage caused by the rioting and build the wall … essentially restoring everything these foundations were trying to dismantle.

I hope we can keep our heads and not respond in kind. The more violent the left gets the more they lose the moderates. They’re supplying President Trump with his 2020 reelection ads as we speak.

    alaskabob in reply to BrokeGopher. | February 8, 2017 at 8:16 pm

    When the news agencies and the politicians who should direct the police look the other way as people are beaten and things burned.. how can the Left “lose” moderates. The Left’s militant wing presently has no fear of accountability. It all balances on news coverage… the Left’s 5th column. Ghandi got ahead because of good press coverage… how can we expect anything from a non-sympathetic press?

    Sanddog in reply to BrokeGopher. | February 8, 2017 at 9:04 pm

    I can’t see the right taking to the streets to beat down Progressives but if you’re going to or returning from an event and you’re attacked, defend yourself vigorously. As long as we remain within the law, they are the story.

      The official story the progs are telling is “Oh, it wasn’t us, we were peaceful. It was the anarchists, the ‘Antifa’ people, they were the ones who were violent.” Which is similar to the problem with Islam. Maybe most of its adherents are peaceful, but the peaceful ones are irrelevant because they won’t point out the people in their midst who are violent.

      As long as we remain within the law, they are the story.

      False. Two words: George Zimmerman.

      Defending oneself from a mob of violent rioters goes against The Narrative(TM). You will be painted as a racist vigilante for “provoking” the mob to attack, the mob will be portrayed as peaceful choir boys just trying to be heard. And if you live in a state with a “Stand Your Ground” statute, you will be portrayed as a coward hiding behind the “license to kill”.

      The media will run with this. The rioters might be the criminal attackers, but you — and “Stand Your Ground”, where applicable — will be the story told on the nightly news.

      Yes, cliche aside, it’s better to be tried by twelve than carried by six, but when it comes to rioters, if it’s at all possible you’re better off steering clear.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | February 8, 2017 at 8:06 pm

RE: “House Republicans during a closed-door meeting Tuesday discussed how to protect themselves and their staffs from protesters storming town halls and offices…”

I’m confused. Why doesn’t the GOPe just do what they did to the Tea Party?

GOPe refused to have any public events, period.

The GOP’s socialist argument:

“there’s nothing wrong with government health care; the problem has always been the people who run it.”

GOP thinks it’s their turn to run health care and they are forecasting dire straits if we don’t let them.

Don’t replace, don’t fix, repeal the ACA now and forever more. Amen.

pass national reciprocity for CCW licensing…

that way our local governments can’t keep us helpless for our own good.

BTW: isn’t funny how, with the Left, their violence is “speech” but our speech on the right is “violence”?

it’s as if there was a double standard or something… 😎

Let the barbarians burn down the village. We live in an age of miracles. Facebook, Twitter and a host of other social media give anyone, including politicians, the means to reach millions. Learn to use it. Protect your constituents. Let them sit in the safety of their homes and interact with their elected officials safely, in real time.

When people’s live become disrupted enough, by the Progressive Yahoos, then they will vote Progressives out of office.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Mac45. | February 8, 2017 at 9:38 pm

    The below was in response to Mac45.

    “You get the feeling that “House Republicans” did this as a piece of Kabuki theater……..”

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | February 8, 2017 at 9:37 pm

You get the feeling that “House Republicans” did this as a piece of Kabuki theater……..

    Overlapping and convergent interests are not beyond the realm of possibility. Witness the trail of tears from Tripoli to Damascus to Kiev. Still, let’s not descend to the level of [class] diversitists and Pro-Choicers, but rather judge people by the content of their character and presumed innocence.

    Not really. This is a prophylactic action. It sends the message that Republican lawmakers are not going to stand around and be targets in a shooting gallery. Political venues, for Republicans, have now become the equivalent of the ghettos of the 20th century. They are dangerous. and police departments have been giving elderly and woman’s groups pointers on how to minimize their risk when in such an environment.

Start at the top: Soros.

Off with his head.

Attorney General Sessions: are you investigating?

They may have overdosed on contaminated coffee grounds. Take a puff and chill. Real mellow, yellow.

I believe that AG Sessions will have a different view of how to handle the anarchist that are inhabiting our cities. He has been in law enforcement in the days when enforcement meant enforcement. Look for some federal support for local police depts. and for the FBI to wade into the corruption behind most of this anarchy. Can you say DNC and Soros?

Noise.

When you don’t have the votes, make a lot of noise so you sound like a lot of voters. They’re trying to bluff the Repubs into surrendering. And why not? It’s worked before.

All the Repubs have to do is hold their course and resist their usual instincts to shoot their own balls off.

Meanwhile, handling rioters should be a fairly routine law-enforcement job.

How about any mayor or police chief who tells their Police department not to arrest these rioters while they destroy property loses his or her job immediately?

    ooddballz in reply to HamiltonNJ. | February 9, 2017 at 3:52 am

    How about any mayor or police chief who tells their Police department not to arrest these rioters while they destroy property loses his or her job immediately?

    Add civil suits to the mix.
    Make THEM responsible for paying for the damages their policies caused.

      Tom Servo in reply to ooddballz. | February 9, 2017 at 8:33 am

      Look at it from a different perspective = for example, think about the Ferguson rioters. What did they burn down? Their own city. So what? They have to live with the result, not me.

      Same thing the other night – what got burned and smashed? Berkely buildings. I can’t get too upset when the leftists go out and smash their own stuff, it’s like watching a 3 year old break his own toys. Well, you don’t get anymore since you tore up what you had. But it doesn’t really hurt me in any way, this knowledge that leftists busted up a leftist university.

      Now the rioting in D.C. is another thing, but then there’s no argument that the Feds have some jurisdiction to keep things under control there on any number of grounds. Other than that , the main effect of the black shirts is going to be to provide great video footage for GOP candidates to use in the 2018 midterms.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to HamiltonNJ. | February 9, 2017 at 4:30 pm

    Arrest them for criminal negligence.

    Yeah, it’s a stretch, but crazier things have happened.

Constitutional carry nation wide, and a if you loot we shoot law.
Plug a thug and stuff like this comes to a screeching halt real quick.

What we are seeing on a national level is what we in Wisconsin have been seeing against Gov. Walker since 2011. Result? Greatest Republican majorities in 60 years.

    Tom Servo in reply to badgercat. | February 9, 2017 at 8:36 am

    I have thought about that parallel a lot, especially when it comes to the fights over the courts. Result of all the screaming and protests at the capitol building? Wisconsin now has a 5-2 conservative majority on the Court, and hacks like Chisolm can only read it and weep. thanks, dems!!!

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend