Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

People On Joaquin Castro Target List Getting Harassed

People On Joaquin Castro Target List Getting Harassed

Donors have received threatening phone calls and have been forced to discuss situation awareness with their families.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnYTmir0x20

Earlier this week, Rep. Joaquin Castro tweeted the names of Trump-donor constituents, connecting them to the businesses with which they’re affiliated, own, or otherwise invested. He shamed the donors, saying, “their contributions are fueling a campaign of hate that labels Hispanic immigrants as ‘invaders.’”

The entire ordeal backfired. As it should have.

Castro unintentionally included several individuals who also donated to his campaign, including Wayne Harwell who told Fox News, “I was also on a list of people that gave to Castro and if he dislikes me enough that he wants to put my name out there against Trump, I’m not going to give money to him,” Harwell told Fox News. “Obviously Castro feels pretty strongly against me.”

The Michael Berry Show published a voicemail received by one of the Trump donors on Castro’s list. WARNING: nasty language.

Listen to “Threatening Voice-Mail After Joaquin Castro Posted Trump Donor Information” on Spreaker.

Yet another man, Harper Huddleston, has been forced to discuss situational awareness with his wife and kids after his father’s name was published on the list. According to Fox News, “his name appeared on Castro’s list instead of the name of his retired father, who contributed to the Trump campaign. He said the mix-up was because they share the same first name, but have different middle names, though his father does not go by the name Harper.”

Watch here:

The New York Times reported people have harassed another person named on Castro’s list:

For many businesses, a sudden deluge of phone calls might signal an influx of new customers. But most of the 25 calls Justin Herricks received before noon on Thursday were from people who wanted to tell him he was a white supremacist for donating money to President Trump.

“I’ve had people say, ‘Hey, we were going to use you for business, but we found out you’re a racist,’” Mr. Herricks, the owner of Precision Pipe Rentals, an oil and gas services company in San Antonio, said in an interview. “‘We hope that you burn in hell and your business will go with you.’”

Rep. Castro has repeatedly doubled down, defending his actions because political donations are public information.

As we’ve discussed at length here, Castro took it a step further by connecting donors with their businesses. The object was clear — to instigate backlash based solely on political affiliation.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Yes, of course they are getting harassed. And this low-rent Marxist motherfucker knew they would be. Piece of shit.

    JOHN B in reply to Paul. | August 9, 2019 at 11:23 pm

    If a Republican or conservative media person told people to surround the houses of Democratic congressmen/women the feds and state attorneys would find 20 different laws being broken and prosecute them to death – and destroy their families too.

    If they gave out names of Democratic donors and told people to harass and threaten them, a slew of Obama federal judges would issue orders putting them in lockup without bail, because they were a danger to others.

    A Democratic congressman does this – and, maybe he’ll get a Profile in Courage award from the Kennedy’s.

JackinSilverSpring | August 9, 2019 at 11:07 am

This Castro must be taking lessons from the other Castro in Cuba.

USSC has held that incitement to violence is not protected by 1A. Now the ruling holds that the incitement must be imminent, but how that plays out is vague. Characters like Linda Sarsour, this Castro clown, and others, know that they have a bunch of leashed dogs at their disposal. What form of unleashing may be considered imminent in the internet age is not yet clear.

Castro knows exactly what he’s doing in trying to entice one of the left’s more unstable types to do something. Sarsour similarly has all the unstable Muzzies. And when it comes to Muslims they seem to be perpetually enraged at the drop of a hot, at anything, at nothing.

“their contributions are fueling a campaign of hate that labels Hispanic immigrants as ‘invaders.’”

No, ILLEGAL ALIENS are the invaders. If a Hispanic immigrant wants to apply and enter the U.S. legally, they are welcomed.

    Halcyon Daze in reply to Elric. | August 9, 2019 at 11:30 am

    Demagoguery relies on conflation of issues.

    fscarn in reply to Elric. | August 9, 2019 at 11:46 am

    A similar tactic is used to portray conservatives as generally “anti-government.” This of course is preposterous. We know the necessity of some government (“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”).

    What we are most definitely are is anti-corrupt-government, i.e., government which goes beyond (and beyond some more) that to which we have consented, namely, the Constitution which properly should be called the People’s Method of Limiting Government.

    May I suggest a viewing of Overview of America (30 minutes),

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIl57cchRqs

Intimidation and coercion …. Remember “card check” laws where open ballots must be given to union bosses before votes tallied … Conformity with the Party or else. The exposed nail is always hammered …

The harassment calls are exactly what Castro wanted of his followers.

It must be embarrassing for someone to admit they are a Democrat.

To be a Democrat means that when you are discussing policy differences with an opponent and are unable to counter a position, it is acceptable to call your opponent a Racist or a Homophobe or a White Supremacist or resort to extreme character assassination until the opponent relents. It’s sad but true. They have a history of these obnoxious actions. It is their modus operandi.

They are what your mother taught you not to be!

OUTRIGHT INTIMIDATION with no consequences?
Where’s the outrage?
Where’s the FBI?

Is this how it’s gonna be?

Because your donor info is also public and this door can swing both ways.

Un-ring that bell as hard as you can lefties.

While I am only a leagal enthusiast, I see here a civil rights lawsuit begging for a lawyer. The Supreme Court has ruled campaign contributions as protected free speech. (Though I cant remember the specific case.)
By publishing the information attached to a political motive the offending party is engaged in political intimidation.

I believe that there is also a element of the RICO act that covers this. (Though not sufficient in a stand alone capacity.)

As I said I’m only an amateur. So where could you professionals take it?

    DB523 in reply to Shadow5. | August 9, 2019 at 1:12 pm

    Shadow5, thank you for expressing my thoughts for me.

    I also am simply ignorant of the regulations and laws available to the public in the Planning Department cellar in a locked file cabinet in a disused lavatory with a sign out saying
    “Beware of the Leopard.” Sigh. (Hitchhiker’s Guide for the young ones)

    And therein is the problem as The Public we no longer, know, understand nor trust our Law.

    Dearest Legal Insurrection team, could you please consider following this public, political, speech “issue?” Or could you explain why it does not merit coverage?

    It seems to me to have all the elements of another Perils of Pauline, Gibson vs Oberlin thread.

    Who would have thought years ago I would come to a “Law Blog” for my best entertainment!

defending his actions because political donations are public information.

Well, there’s an obvious fix for that.

    And SCOTUS ruled in a case involving the NAACP back in the KKK days that “encouraged hostility” allowed organizations to conceal their membership lists when disclosure would result in harassment and violence.

      Close The Fed in reply to SDN. | August 9, 2019 at 2:48 pm

      What?!
      Your post confuses me!

        In what way?

        There was a court case in the 1950s where various Southern states required membership list disclosures of “political or community organizations” whose openly acknowledged purpose was to provide names and addresses for attacks by Klan “night riders”. The NAACP sued to block them, and SCOTUS struck them down because they were being used to facilitate intimidation and encourage violence against members.

These people seem to think that only those who voted (D) are their constituents! Everyone in their district is a constituent whether they voted (D) or not. So this idiot endangered people in his own district and therefore should be subject to a recall election. You’d think at least one of the targeted would have standing and initiate the recall process.

    Close The Fed in reply to MrE. | August 9, 2019 at 2:50 pm

    No recalls under Constitution.

    Each house I believe determines the qualifications of its members?

    amr in reply to MrE. | August 9, 2019 at 2:53 pm

    Unfortunately the SCOTUS has ruled that recalls are not permitted by the Constitution.

Wow, didn’t see that one coming… Said no conservative, ever.

Comanche Voter | August 9, 2019 at 1:04 pm

The headline on Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik’s article today claimed that Castro’s release of the names of the Trump donors was “a public service”.

Hiltzik is a dipstick who is consistently wrong. But as the Los Angeles Times has shed staff in repeated layoffs over the last ten years, Hiltzik has survived all the staff cuts. I assume he’s got pictures of the Times editor in chief and or publisher in carnal congress with a barnyard beast. No other reason can explain his survival.

Democrats have forgotten that the last time they demanded a Civil War (to keep their slaves), it didn’t turn out that well. This ignorance of the past is becoming more apparent, especially since they’ve given up any pretense of principles that include American values.

Conservatives are constantly reminded that we’re better than any recent Democrat anti-civil act (since we obviously have an internal, moral obligation to a power greater than ourselves–rather than the liberal/progressive view that each individual is a god). But…at what point do we recognize that having a moral foundation doesn’t mean we take Democrat abuse and continue to ‘turn the other cheek’ if it means our destruction?

The Democrat/Hollywood/academia media is constantly lying and twisting every aspect of conservative thought and statement to the point that many Americans are convinced that Republicans that don’t believe Democrat lies are sub-human and should be destroyed. When someone tells you who they are, believe them.

I’ve been listening to what Democrats have been telling us for decades. I believe they want America and conservative Americans dead. Rep. Joaquin Castro has made that quite apparent, regardless of his weaselly follow-up statements. Actions mean more than words, Mr. Castro, and using language like Comrade Castro of Cuba is quite telling.

As most students of history know, the significant assassinations and attempts have been at the hands of Democrats:

– John Wilkes Booth, a Democrat, killed Abraham Lincoln–a Republican.
– Charles J. Guiteau, a left wing radical Democrat shot James Garfield–a Republican.
– William Schrenk, a left wing anarchist shot Teddy Roosevelt.
– As an outlier, Lee Harvey Oswald, a Communist, supposedly killed John Kennedy, a Democrat.
– Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme, a left wing radical Democrat shot at Gerald Ford–a Republican.
– John Hinckley Jr., a registered Democrat shot Ronald Reagan–a Republican.

Then there are the mass shootings that frustrated Democrats have been carrying out:

– In 1984, James Hubert, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 22 people in a McDonald’s restaurant.
– In 1986, Patrick Sherrill, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 15 people in an Oklahoma post office.
– In 1990, James Pough, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 10 people at a GMAC office.
– In 1991, George Hennard, a disgruntled Democrat, shot and killed 23 people in a Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen , TX.
– In 2007, a registered Democrat named Seung – Hui Cho, shot and killed 32 people in Virginia Tech.
– In 2010, a mentally ill registered Democrat named Jared Lee Loughner, shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed 6 others.
– In 2011, a registered Democrat named James Holmes, went into a movie theater and shot and killed 12 people.
– In 2013, a registered Democrat named Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 people in a school in Newtown ,CT and an angry Democrat shot 12 at a Navy ship yard.

The list is getting longer so in the interests of saving space, let’s just say clearly, there is a problem with Democrats and guns. Perhaps that’s why they’re so interested in outlawing guns–they recognize that they are incapable of controlling their anger at the world for not putting them in change of the rest of us.

So I believe Democrats when they scream at Senate Leader McConnell that they “…needs to stab him in the heart.” The pot is starting to boil and Democrats are turning up the heat, not taking the pot off the fire.

These are the people that want you to disarm. They say you dont need a semiautomatic weapon.

It is undeniable that Castro was ‘targeting’ these Trump supporters, and hoping that his mindless Leftist minions would engage in a little discouragement of them, which would discourage any other Trump donors, and hopefully spread nationwide.

That didn’t happen for Bill Miller BBQ. Lines around the block.
https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Bill-Miller-BBQ-becomes-a-trending-topic-after-14286533.php

So how did this turd have the information in the first place?

The Packetman | August 9, 2019 at 2:15 pm

Perhaps Castro’s security needs to be probed …

When I was peacefully demonstrating against Obama’s Administration I receive 3 written death threats. Neither the FBI, over the mailed threats, nor the country sheriff’s office would investigate the threats. I continued my political actions but recorded my standing at “my” corner so, as I told the sheriff’s office, they would have evidence if I was killed.
I suspect those being threatened/harassed will get no help. But if they are killed law enforcement would become involved. And yes I know the SCOTUS has addressed this.
When I discussed this issue of threats with the top official for my state’s CCW approval office, he said the threats were not enough to obtain a permit. I said sarcastically, “but if I was killed I could get one.” He agreed with equal sarcasm.

I listened to the threatening voicemail left by the Rep. Joaquin Castro “fan”….oh my, nice talk…!
(I’d be WAY pissed off if my mom was getting called)

A few years ago, we had a guy leaving harassing voicemails and there were a couple of different ways to find out who was calling… Is this not possible now days ?

smalltownoklahoman | August 9, 2019 at 4:42 pm

Gee who could have seen this coming? [/sarc]

If any of these people get hurt and/or suffer property damage because of Castro putting their names out like this I hope he will be brought up on charges alongside the perps who committed the deed!

I’m thinking an eye for an eye. Castro cannot be allowed to get away with this. The laws MUST be changed so these kinds of “death threats” (and that’s what they have the potential to be) cannot be allowed. Political donations are nobody’s fknggg business. I don’t give a crap about the first amendment. I’m sure when the war breaks out, Castro’s banditos will amass against the white hordes. This awakens the dark angels.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend