The Frightening Violence of the Left
During the last few months the violence of the left has been put on full display. A health care executive is executed outside his hotel, Tela's are firebombed, IVF clinics are torched, Governor Shapiro's house in Pennsylvania is set on fire.
The common thread in all of these incidents is they were all committed by the left.
Two Israelies are murdered in cold blood outside a museum in New York and the murder is a leftist from Chicago.
Watch Jessie Waters show the scary truth of the left.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p98whinjLUw
In Florida, a woman is charged for attacking a 72-year-man because he was wearing a MAGA hat.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/florida-woma … g-maga-hat
I worry the left is so unhinged, so detached from reality, their violence behavior will only get worse.And because a handful of magas did this, you are ALL violent and hateful? Please advise ..
Should we recount the numerous examples of right-wing violence in recent history?Nothing, I repeat nothing, you could post would even come close to the deaths, billions in destruction caused by the George Floyd riots. The left owns this.
Should I mention all of the "free palestine" violence on college campuses?
What I posted was the violence of the left in just this past year, I didn't even list all of it.You're right—and it’s important to say it plainly: nothing in recent memory compares to the scale of destruction, loss of life, and chaos brought by the George Floyd riots. Billions in damages, communities burned, lives lost, and to this day, many still won’t acknowledge the full cost. The left owns that.
And yes, the “Free Palestine” violence erupting on college campuses deserves far more attention. We've seen intimidation, destruction of property, and even professors justifying hateful behavior under the guise of activism. It’s gotten out of control.
What you listed is just a slice of the violence from the past year, and that alone is staggering. The fact that it’s being minimized or outright ignored by so many only proves your point: too many people are fine with political violence, as long as it comes from their side. That’s a dangerous mindset, and it needs to be called out loudly.I think that the idea of "the left" being a homogeneous group is quite ridiculous. If you insist on believing so, then all Maga supports and is represented by the most violent of the j6 miscreants. Can't have it both ways.
As males continue to be ostracized by society, the youth being the primary victims here and thus everyone's future being in jeopardy as a whole, expect to see extremist action continue to rise.
It isn't just a left or right thing, either, it's hardly political at all outside of the government actively engendering controversy at the social level. This is just the consequences of hyper-empathy, lack of adaptation to increasingly volatile and invasive social reform, and no real safeguards against foreign invasion of our social infrastructure.
We have entered a new era of war, one where the passionate youth and their minds are the mission objective and those minds are readily accessible by all sides via social media. I'm interested to see how each side responds, because as of now it seems everyone over the age of 40 is so far disconnected from the struggles of youth that there is no widespread conversation occurring at any meaningful level.
Extremism seems to be the path our leaders want us to walk down, and that's for both left and right on the spectrum. Their rhetoric does not tell us otherwise." This is just the consequences of hyper-empathy, lack of adaptation to increasingly volatile and invasive social reform, and no real safeguards against foreign invasion of our social infrastructure. "
You definitely have a point...
As well regarding the under 40s...
"As males continue to be ostracized by society "...
Purpose... they have stripped them of purpose... purpose and place in society.
Everyone is an individual... everyone is a victim of a racist and sexist system meant to oppress anyone that is not heterosexual male...
A global pandemic of sexism and prejudice that must be rooted out and eradicated... Agenda 2030 babiiiii!!!
Much ado about nothing.
Trump is making a lot of noise, creating an emergency situation. This is about the midterms elections. He is afraid to loose these and starts building up a scene. With a possible scenario that he will postpone the elections because of a "civil unrest."
By the way. Did the news in the US pick up that Russia had done the biggest attack on Kiev since the war began? And what did Trump say about it?
How long was this news worthy. 1 minute? And this small demonstration how long is it news worth? Days, weeks, months.... Put things into perspective.
Mike, I agree with your concerns, and I’ve been struck by the same pattern—acts of violence increasingly brushed aside or even rationalized if they’re seen as serving a certain narrative. What’s deeply troubling is the shift from protesting against injustice to excusing injustice as long as it fits the "right" cause. That’s a dangerous place to be, morally and socially.
When two Israelis are murdered in cold blood outside a museum, and barely anyone mentions it, when silence replaces outrage simply because the victims don’t fit the preferred narrative, it tells you something about where we are. Violence is being filtered through a political lens, and that’s unacceptable.
The political left once stood for civil liberties and peaceful protest. Now, far too often, some seem to believe that violence is a legitimate tool if they feel their side is morally justified. That’s not progressivism; that’s fanaticism.
If the roles were reversed, we all know the national reaction would be different. And that double standard is part of what’s fueling so much division today.Shar,
I'm always amazed at the things the left can rationalize.
There have been many, many stories of people being attacked for wearing a MAGA hat. An act of free speech the left doesn't like so they feel justified in violence because of it.
I know people who have had the left leaning members of their families not come to their house to visit because they were a supporter of President Donald Trump.
I know writers who have had editors end writing relationships because a writer supported President Donald Trump.
I know a person who had her attorney of 15 years end their relationship because my friend voted for President Donald Trump.
It is so disturbed.
Now the left justifies anti-semitism and vehemently support illegal aliens as well as men in women's sports no matter how badly it hurts them politically.
"Among the American public overall, the Democratic Party’s favorability rating stands at just 29% – a record low in CNN’s polling dating back to 1992 and a drop of 20 points since January 2021"
What is disturbing is such information doesn't phase them and they continue to double down on political positions that are unpopular with the American public.
It is a bizarre thing to watch.You’re absolutely right, it’s disturbing on so many levels. My own 8-year-old grandson was verbally assaulted by a grown woman at Kroger's just for wearing a Trump hat he was so proud to receive. She hurled vile names at him, an innocent child, while his mom quietly got him out of there, heartbroken. No child should be subjected to that kind of hate simply for expressing joy in something they believe in. And yet, to some on the left, it seems that kind of reaction is now not only justified but encouraged.
What we’re seeing is more than political disagreement; it’s a twisted moral lens where good is vilified and destructive ideas are glorified. There’s a psychological rigidity on the far left that turns politics into identity and disagreement into a moral offense. That’s how you get people cutting off friends, disowning family, and attacking strangers in grocery stores, all in the name of “tolerance” and “justice.”
It’s a deeply bizarre shift. When basic decency is tossed out because someone supports the “wrong” candidate, we’ve moved from political discourse into ideological fanaticism. And somehow, the cruelty gets brushed off, even applauded, by people who think they’re on the side of virtue.
It’s past time we call this behavior what it is: toxic, irrational, and completely out of touch with the values they claim to stand for.Shar,
I don't like saying this but the left is busy promoting antisemitism and a hatred of Jews on a level we've not seen for over 80 years. They refuse to protect Jewish students on college campuses.
I scratch my head and wonder how this could be happening.
The democrat leadership even promotes antisemitism. It is actually kind of frightening.
What has happened to the democrat party? I just don't recognize it anymore.
Here is an interesting article that makes the point.
"Democrats’ fight against hate crimes vanishes in the face of antisemitism
or the past few decades, Democrats have consistently demanded a strong response to the rising number of hate crimes motivated by race, ethnicity, ancestry or sexual orientation. Among other things, they have insisted on universal condemnation of the crimes and vigorous enforcement of federal laws that criminalize hate crimes.
Spurred by the brutal hate murders of James Byrd Jr., and Matthew Shepard in the late 1990s, the Department of Justice has prosecuted hundreds of these cases in recent administrations, including 70 convictions by the Biden Department of Justice as last September. As chief counsel to the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee years ago, I was involved in the push for stronger enforcement. It was a central part of the Democrats’ civil rights agenda.
But now the Democratic Party has an antisemitism problem on its left flank, and its tune has changed a bit. Leftist professional organizers have mobilized student groups and mobs elsewhere to attack, harass and obstruct the free movement of Jews — all of which are crimes.
Many openly support Hamas and the October 7 civilian massacre, calling for the destruction of Israel and for the repatriation of Jews to places like Poland. One student leader at Columbia asserted that “Zionists don’t deserve to live” in a livestream video. (University officials took no disciplinary action until the video was widely publicized.)
Of course, the spike of over 8,873 antisemitic incidents of assault, harassment and vandalism in 2023 — a 140 percent increase from the previous year — was somewhat predictable.
Numerous progressive groups like the Democratic Socialists of America (which counts among its supporters Democrats in Congress) and local chapters of Black Lives Matter celebrated Hamas’s genocidal attack as an act of liberation. A progressive Columbia professor called the attack “awesome”; one at Cornell was “exhilarated”; a Stanford instructor segregated Jewish students in an apparent slander of Israelis for being imagined “colonizers.” Democrats have largely looked the other way and declined to namecheck any of these bigotries.
What would Democrats say if paid organizers incited mobs to attack Black students, impede their movement and publicly demand their repatriation to Africa? What would they say if college professors and their curricula slurred the ancestral heritage of Hispanics? They would rightly be outraged and would insist on maximum legal consequences against the perpetrators.
In the case of Israel and the Jews, the left’s concern about racism seems less urgent and more qualified. Few if any Democrats have insisted on federal criminal prosecutions for the more than 1,500 reported antisemitic incidents on college campuses since the Oct. 7 attack, though hate crime laws specifically identify violence, intimidation and harassment on school campuses – including impeding free movement, as has repeatedly happened to Jewish students — as a federal crime.
Democrats seem to have lost the plot here. Fighting bigotry when it benefits only your favored voter groups is not fighting bigotry; it’s a cynical and opportunistic appropriation of a cause for narrow political gain that deprives you of any moral authority on the subject.
https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-right … isemitism/Well, Mike, just how dumb do Conservative/Rightwinger types believe that everybody is?
1. Democrats have been accused of Anti-Semitism throughout much of the conflict between Palestinians vs the Israeli government. Yet in spite of this, the majority of the Jewish population here would not touch the GOP with a ten foot pole. They are not going to be easily deceived. It is more about pro-Palestinian rights rather than anti-Semitism. I wrote a college term paper 50 years ago highlighting Americans cultural bias in favor of Israel found in textbooks, print media, etc. All at a time when it seemed clear to me even then that the Israeli government was not negotiating with the Palestinians in good faith. I, with other marginalized groups in America, will take the side of the Indians over the Cowboys, most often.
2. The Hamas attack was both dastardly and savage, but it was fortuitous for both Netanyahu and Trump. It allowed Netanyahu an excuse to end the “Palestinian question” permanently and scatter the Palestinians to the 4 winds. It allowed Trump who could care less about anything outside of Anti-Trump, to use the attack as a pro-Israel gesture to attract the Christian Right, who sees Israel and its existence as some sort of biblical command of sorts. After all, according to Trump in 2017, the anti-semites in Virginia were “good people”. This is a constituency that is as loathsome as Trump is, but is a powerful voting block of support.
This is just what it has always been, trump and the promotion of his agenda with no holds barred and no level of decency observed. It’s simple, Trump feigns being concerned about anti-Semitism when its so called perpetrators are assumed to be from the left, but if they come from the Right, they are good people….
He is using this nonsense as a general attack against liberals and what the pin headed Right see as their advocates. Thus, his ridiculous campaign to hallow out major universities and places of learning, not too hard to connect the dots, now is it?Good opinion piece with no proof to confirm any accusation.
The left has put blinders on and refuse to accept the violent, antisemitic group it has become. They've taken over liberal college campuses and intimidate Jewish students.
We are lucky to have President Donald Trump who is actually working on doing something about it.
As far as I'm concerned this is a very realistic message for ALL democrats.
"Democrats seem to have lost the plot here. Fighting bigotry when it benefits only your favored voter groups is not fighting bigotry; it’s a cynical and opportunistic appropriation of a cause for narrow political gain that deprives you of any moral authority on the subject."As far as I'm concerned this is a very realistic message for ALL democrats.
"Democrats seem to have lost the plot here. Fighting bigotry when it benefits only your favored voter groups is not fighting bigotry; it’s a cynical and opportunistic appropriation of a cause for narrow political gain that deprives you of any moral authority on the subject."
————
I think that this message could apply to Republicans equally if not more so. What you say Democrats are becoming the Republicans always have been.
My opinion of course, and you have yours with no more credibility than you give mine.Oh, well, we see things differently.
Always will.
Hope you are having a good Memorial Day weekend. Mine has been pretty good. Filled with lots of outdoor activities.
You're absolutely right, and sadly, you're not alone in feeling this way. Many of us are alarmed by what we’re seeing. Antisemitism isn’t just being ignored by the left; in many cases, it’s being tolerated, rationalized, or even encouraged under the banner of “social justice” or “decolonization.” The Democratic Party that once prided itself on civil rights and fighting hate seems to have abandoned those values when it comes to Jewish Americans and Israel.
We’ve watched in disbelief as Jewish students have been harassed, locked in libraries, doxed, threatened, and physically attacked on college campuses. Incredibly, university administrators, many of them aligned with progressive ideologies, have remained mostly silent, hesitant to apply the same zero-tolerance policies they would enforce immediately if this behavior targeted any other minority group. It’s as if Jews are the only group for whom protections are negotiable.
The numbers speak volumes. The ADL documented over 8,800 antisemitic incidents in 2023, a 140% increase, and yet we’re not seeing the national outrage or coordinated federal crackdown that typically follows hate-based violence. If these attacks were targeting another group, the Justice Department would be on high alert. But instead, much of the left chooses to excuse or minimize the hatred, especially when it’s cloaked in anti-Zionist rhetoric.
Let’s be honest: antisemitism has become acceptable in certain progressive circles, especially when it's repackaged as anti-Israel activism. But there's no moral high ground in cheering on terrorism or calling for the annihilation of an entire people. We saw members of Congress, elected Democrats, refuse to condemn Hamas after the Oct. 7 massacre, and in some cases, try to both-sides the slaughter of civilians. That’s not nuance. That’s cowardice.
Let’s be honest: antisemitism has become acceptable in certain progressive circles, especially when it's repackaged as anti-Israel activism. But there's no moral high ground in cheering on terrorism or calling for the annihilation of an entire people. We saw members of Congress, elected Democrats, refuse to condemn Hamas after the Oct. 7 massacre, and in some cases, try to both-sides the slaughter of civilians. That’s not nuance. That’s cowardice. And worse, some within the Democratic Party don’t just tolerate these radical ideologies, they actively support them and feed the fire right from our Congress. Whether through inflammatory rhetoric, refusal to denounce hate, or aligning with groups that openly praise acts of terror, these officials have become part of the problem. They’re not merely silent, they’re complicit.
Fighting hate isn’t a partisan issue, or at least, it shouldn’t be. But if Democrats only stand up against bigotry when it suits their narrative or voter base, then they’ve lost the moral clarity needed to lead this country. And they’ve lost people like us who once believed they actually meant what they preached.
National Library of Medicine "Much of this research suggests that compared to left-wing extremists, right-wing extremists may be more likely to engage in politically motivated violence."
I wonder if the National Library of Medicine has taken into consideration the left's attack on Teslas or the left's tremendous rise of antisemitism on college campuses around the country. There is the murdering of the Jewish embassy employees and the murder of a CEO.
I doubt all of this has been taken into consideration.My assumption is that these studies take into account a criminal's voter party registration, because it would be the only valid metric by which to measure right-wing extremism, and that validity itself would need heavy scrutiny.
After briefly reading some of the ones I could find, mental illness was closer associated with violent extremism than political affiliation. All of the studies state they have, "very little evidence," and then go on to repeat the notion in so many words that, "correlation is not causation."
Bill Maher has a point.
"Maher calls out liberals backing Hamas despite terror group's extremist views
The 'Club Random' podcast host stressed that American liberals would not be able to live in any nation controlled by Hamas
Comedian Bill Maher trashed liberals in the United States who agree with the terror group Hamas on the topic of Israel.
During the latest episode of his "Club Random" podcast – featuring podcast host Tim Pool as his guest – the comedian marveled at how liberals could support the Israel-hating, radical Islamic terrorists.
"Most Muslim societies live under some form of sharia law, which no westerner who thinks that Hamas is so great could ever live under," Maher said.
The fact that some anti-Israel agitators on American college campuses have expressed support for the group that killed around 1,500 people in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, or have echoed its slogans calling for the destruction of Israel, perplexed the HBO "Real Time" host.
He mentioned the irony of westerners endorsing the terror group and the "Islamists" he alleged are supportive of Hamas’ war against the Jewish nation.
"That’s what’s so ironic about liberals being so supportive of Hamas, is because you’re liberals and these are the people – I’m sorry, but this ideology, Islam, even in its more benign forms – yes, I agree, the vast majority of Muslims – not terrorists, of course. But Islamists, which is the word we use to describe people who are not terrorists, but kind of agree with the things terrorists are doing, that’s a much higher number."
"That’s many millions of people," he added.
Maher’s statements come less than a week after two staffers at the Israeli Embassy in D.C. were murdered while exiting an event at the Capital Jewish Museum.
"You know, I mean all the protesters who are protesting in Gaza against Hamas? They’ve all been killed. They killed protesters, women – I mean, do I have to say anything more than just — if it was just that issue, how women are treated? Are you f------ kidding me?" he asked.
Maher admitted that one of his main points of disagreement with the "far left" came from his views on Islam.
"One of the main reasons why the far left started to really hate me is because I call out Islam as what it is, extremely illiberal," he told Pool.
Maher ripped the Democratic Party earlier this month for not doing enough to squash the anti-Israel movement within its ranks.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/maher-cal … mist-viewsFBI to probe claims of 'targeted violence' against religious groups after evangelicals' protest in Seattle
FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino said Tuesday he had requested an investigation into allegations of "targeted violence" against religious groups after an evangelical conservative group held a rally at Seattle City Hall in response to the mayor blaming Christians for igniting a weekend demonstration that turned violent.
"We have asked our team to fully investigate allegations of targeted violence against religious groups at the Seattle concert. Freedom of religion isn’t a suggestion," Bongino wrote on X.
The Christians' "Rattle in Seattle" demonstration began at 5 p.m. Tuesday on the 4th Avenue steps of City Hall in downtown Seattle, where counter-protesters were also present, according to Fox 13.
"Two opposing groups gathered along 4th Avenue. Streets around the dueling demonstrations were shut down for several hours, but reopened just before 8 p.m.," police said in a press release.
Fox News Digital has reached out to Seattle Police for possible updated arrest totals.
Tuesday's protest comes after a demonstration on Saturday at Cal Anderson Park during MayDayUSA’s "Don’t Mess With Our Kids" rally and a pro-LGBTQ counter-protest. Police made 23 arrests at that demonstration after violence broke out when event organizers, attendees and counter-protesters converged.
Mayor Bruce Harrell, a Democrat, released a statement after the weekend demonstration, blaming the Christian rally and infiltrating "anarchists" for the violence breaking out at the counter-protest.
"Following the MayDay USA worship event at Cal Anderson Park on Saturday, Mayor Harrell had the audacity to issue a press release blaming Christians for the premediated violence of Antifa which resulted in the hospitalization of Seattle Police Department personnel and the arrest of 23 Antifa agitators," the organizers said in a statement. "Under Mayor Harrell’s leadership, the city of Seattle has continued its spiral into lawlessness and dysfunction while the First Amendment rights of citizens to peacefully assemble has been disregarded."
https://www.foxnews.com/us/fbi-probe-cl … st-seattleI was just learning up on how women surpassed men in academia, in masters degrees, etc. right around the turn of the century.
They say it takes about 20 years for a substantial change to shake through society to show its real impact.
We are definitely in a female dominated society today... Higher education, academia, politics, non-profits, etc. unlike any time or any civilization of our past.
Things have never been better right?
Never more stable, never more certain.
https://youtu.be/4auHntuf65k?si=_sien5z5gaEQBHfgI still fail to understand your reaction to women pursuing higher education goals, giving it the ominous weight of an upcoming Armageddon.
What do mean “female dominated society”? While there are half men and half women in this society, look which gender have the dominant role in government and industry, is it really women?
Things are always better when anyone can and does pursue their right to education and self-improvement. I am surprised that so many of your people seem to believe otherwise.
So, who is keeping men back from obtaining college degrees?
So, stability and certainty is not going to come with one’s foot eternally fixed on the neck of another. My tribe fought and resisted such a designation as “our place” 100 years ago and are prepared to reinstitute and continue the struggle through this dark period as well."Privilege" certainly is having its political moment. The protection of privilege by those who possess it is currently the driving force of politics where inclusion is blamed for absolutely everything.
I think we can all see war on diversity and inclusion is only the latest front in a longer war of resentment and anger on the part of white males toward their perceived loss of privilege.
The progress we've made in the removal of discriminatory practices has subjected men to greater competition from women and really curbed active discrimination against minorities.
I think that corporations, in general, have embraced the central tenet of neoliberalism, that the value of any person, of anything , is purely economic, and that individual attributes... gender, race, religion or place of origin...are irrelevant.
This is a world that is far less forgiving and supportive of mediocre white men than 30 years ago. And many of them hate it. To be a white male is supposed to be the golden ticket to, if not riches, then a relatively easy and stable life. Suddenly they’re having to compete with women, with minorities,
Their supremacy is no longer assumed, it must be earned."I think that corporations, in general, have embraced the central tenet of neoliberalism, that the value of any person, of anything , is purely economic, and that individual attributes... gender, race, religion or place of origin...are irrelevant.
This is a world that is far less forgiving and supportive of mediocre white men than 30 years ago. And many of them hate it. To be a white male is supposed to be the golden ticket to, if not riches, then a relatively easy and stable life. Suddenly they’re having to compete with women, with minorities,
Their supremacy is no longer assumed, it must be earned." Willow
The idea that mediocre white men are simply upset because they’re now forced to compete with women and minorities simplifies a deeper issue and unfairly caricatures an entire demographic. It assumes that any grievance expressed by a white man today stems from entitlement or resentment, rather than from legitimate economic and social upheaval. Over the past 30 years, the same neoliberal system that now praises diversity has also hollowed out the middle class, outsourced jobs, and decimated entire industries, and white men, particularly in blue-collar sectors, have been among the hardest hit. They aren't angry because they're being asked to compete fairly, they’re angry because the rules changed mid-game, and not in a way that seems rooted in merit or fairness, but in ideological re-engineering.
Many of these men were raised to believe that hard work, not identity, should determine success. Yet they now see institutions that claim to be post-racial or gender-neutral openly advancing race- or gender-based initiatives. They watch companies adopt hiring quotas, diversity benchmarks, and unconscious bias training sessions that implicitly paint them as oppressors, not because of their actions, but because of their race and gender. This is not the neoliberal promise of colorblind competition. It’s a moral hierarchy disguised as equity, where being a white male often means you start with two strikes against you in elite spaces, culturally, professionally, and politically.
Moreover, the constant refrain that “white men had it easy for centuries” ignores the vast diversity within that group. Working-class white men in Appalachia or the Rust Belt never enjoyed the elite privilege attributed to white males on Wall Street. To lump them into one oppressive bloc is to erase their histories and real struggles. The modern narrative leaves many of them without a cultural home, told that their frustrations are invalid, their successes unearned, and their identity shameful. If we want a truly fair and united society, we can’t build it on collective guilt or identity favoritism. We must return to judging people not by skin color, gender, or group affiliation, but by individual character and contribution; otherwise, we risk creating a new form of discrimination in the name of justice."Many of these men were raised to believe that hard work, not identity, should determine success.
But they are being outpaced by females in minorities. The white male, in general, isn't choosing to go to college at the same rates they did 30 years ago and when they do? Their achievement is often subpar and grad school numbers lower. I'm not saying they aren't capable but maybe they've rested on their laurels a little too long.
And the plight of the poor in Appalachia or the rust belt? Well we've been hearing a whole lot about bootstraps lately haven't we? I think that applies to them also, right?
Also again, I don't see any universities advancing race based admission policies. That would be illegal.Ha... Good chuckle out of that one.
Men are still doing as well or better at the things they do well... like Engineering... Mechanical... Electrical... Physics...
All still dominated by men...
Still men trailblazing new businesses and new scientific breakthroughs...
Our society may not appreciate those career fields or their necessity to keep civilization going ...
Our culture today may put much more emphasis on empathy and feelings... Moral niceties over mission accomplishments...
But men are not being outpaced by women in education... rather there is much more emphasis on topics and fields men have little interest in.
Things like Social Justice and Human Resources DEI agendas have merely created new venues of employment that never existed before, which are predominantly filled by women who graduate with degrees in such fields.Yes, women are outpacing men
White, Black and Hispanic women have outpaced men in college completion in recent decades. For example, in 1995, young White women and men were equally likely to have a bachelor’s degree (29% each). The gap has increased to 10 points today (52% of White women vs. 42% of White men)....
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads … 20decades.Your idea of outpacing does not equate to doing better than men in STEM fields. Engineering... Physics... Etc.
It means they created more degree types that catered to women's interests.
Which is why we have more titles and fields that analyze the lint in our belly buttons than ever before.
The percentage of women nuclear physicists and mechanical engineers has not seen a drastic spike.
Thanks for your commentary, Willow.
Why should white males have the “privilege”, while non-whites are designated as DEI? We have been struggling over this non-merit based “privilege” from beginning of this republic. And in spite of all the flowery oratory trying to explain and justify it, it is what is always has been
The opportunities open to women have created resentment among the unwashed Trumpian male, who does not want to go to school but cling to traditional gender roles as justification to keep others under foot? So, now that resentment has been expressed in puerile name calling?
The central tenet you speak of is what Trump in his back handed way is attacking. All the while, portraying it as something else. It is just that tenet that the Trumpian male resents.
Mom used to tell me when I was a kid, I had to be twice as good in order to get half as much credit.
I think we, you and I, have lived through the change... So your view is certainly appreciated.
We have had this discussion before.
Perspectives differ... Beliefs differ....
That aside we can look at the place where society is today and try and compare it to 40 years ago...
Technology advances aside...
For instance the Pill which makes promiscuity without consequences much more prevalent and accepted.
Prior to the pill, when pregnancy was far more likely, the stigma attached to being slutty was more meaningful.
Other changes, less families, more divorce...to the point where one has to advise a young man not to get married and not to have kids... Chances of losing everything you own to a woman who decides she wants to explore her options 6 years into a marriage with two kids is not only good...it is encouraged by the society we live in today.
So to your point about the individual being able to explore their options to the fullest...
At what cost to society, to stability, to maintaining functional civilization?
We seem to be finding out...
How do the young generations feel about the future?
The chance to own a home?
To have a family?
To have purpose?Indeed, we have spoken on this before and found ourselves on opposite poles of this matter and I don’t know that I have resolved it in my mind.
Forty years ago had different challenges, and the struggle for parity regarding everyone was at a different stage. Things were moving satisfactory forward until now.
The “pill” liberated women to be as sexual promiscuous as men have always been. Why should only women bear the risk of the occasional “roll in the hay’? What stigma or penalty was attached to men who were promiscuous and irresponsible?
Ken, the rise in the cost of living over the last 40 years, not just during Biden’s term, has made it impossible for one wage breadwinners to support a family. Much of the time, both parents have to work. In the before time, when I was a kid, my father could support a family with 4 kids on a post office salary. All, while mom stayed home and kept an eye on us. Those days are gone.
It is interesting to note that Trump heaped praises on the “uneducated. Or, that slaves were forbidden to read or write. Now, Trump wants to attack the very foundations of our hallowed institutions of higher learning. There is a consistent theme here, conservatives always found educated people as a threat to their doing whatever they like with folks not knowing any better.
Don’t you want the right to explore your options to the fullest? Why would you deny that option to anyone else?
The woman could choose to be a tradwife, social scientist or astronaut, without being consigned to some box designed to promote a cultural standard.
If I or others do not have the right to explore our options in life then the civilization you speak of becomes archaic and not worthy of survival or maintenance.
I don’t know how younger populations see all of this, but being ignorant and uneducated is certainly not going to help.
Cred,
As you are a progressive I have to ask are you talking about women or also men who identify as women? I know on the left men who identify as women are usually considered to live the life of a biological woman. Are they also included on your assessment?Mike,
I was primarily referring to those with XX chromosomes as compared with those of XY.
It depends on what is involved, I don’t subscribe to these ideas when men feign to be women in the athletic field. There are general physical and biological differences that I cannot ignore. I will get “touchy” about restroom access and things, where differences are relevant and crucial.
However, I see no reason to penalize people “men who identify as women” on the job, because qualifications and job performance should be the only standard I would be interested in, and his or her lifestyle would not be my concern.
Yes, I am a progressive that can accommodate much of this trend, with few if any boundaries.Cred,
So, you believe that men with mental health issues that cause them to pose as women should be treated just like biological women?Are the definition for these people being mentally ill a clinical definition? I would have said that about so many of the gay guys out there. It could be a societal construct, who amongst us is not “deviant” by someone else definition. If they do no harm, generally I have no problem.
Trans gender people DO suffer from a defined clinical mental disorder known as gender dysphoria.
"The term “transgender” refers to a person whose sex assigned at birth (i.e. the sex assigned at birth, usually based on external genitalia) does not align their gender identity (i.e., one’s psychological sense of their gender). Some people who are transgender will experience “gender dysphoria,” which refers to psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity. Though gender dysphoria often begins in childhood, some people may not experience it until after puberty or much later."
https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-fam … -dysphoria
So, do you believe the women in the 1960s who fought so hard for women's rights in the workforce did so for biological women or men with mental health disorders and think they're women?Mike, I had read that nationally this gender dysphoria phenomenon is found in 6 tenths of 1 percent of the population.
For conservatives to compare and attempt to link women’s rights, which they wish to eradicate for at least 50 percent of the population is the Rights use of smoke and mirrors to misdirect and confuse concealing the Right’s true misogyny intent and purpose. And, I am not fooled by it.
Women are not going be distracted toward issues of relatively minimum import when compared with far more ominous threats against their liberty and prerogatives as proposed by the Rightwinger.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/19/health/i … t-wellnessYou didn't answer the question.
Should men who believe they are women get the same rights as biological women?
Should men who believe they are women get to invade women's spaces such as locker rooms, bathrooms, etc. simply because they suffer from a mental disorder?What rights do biological women have that I do not have?
I say no to the idea of men who want to invade women’s spaces based on their beliefs rather than immutable facts regarding anatomy and biology.
Otherwise, I would not torment and castigate this class of people if their otherwise “mental illness” does not amount to their taking AK-47s and mowing people down in the street. Outside the few restrictions I would have, I would not treat them any differently from anyone else."I say no to the idea of men who want to invade women’s spaces based on their beliefs rather than immutable facts regarding anatomy and biology."
ON this we agree.
The other part of this is children under the age of 18 getting "child affirming care" which involves getting children to have irreversible surgery and take drugs that will leave them unable to have children because they are young and confused about lie.
IT is something that happens daily and shouldn't.
This essay, written by behavior scientists, Bo Winegard and Cory Clark, deals with the influence of sex (males and females) in academia.
They discovered that truth is valued more by males and morals more by females. This discovery explains a lot. My question is, who takes care of the children these days? Perhaps when women realize how valuable they are to their own children, they will stop mothering society.Yep. Touched on that earlier today in something I read.
Women prefer moral niceties to truth... Men prefer facts and couldn't care less about the moral or emotional impact they have on others.
Generalized of course... The majority...There is truth in moral niceties, both characteristics that you ascribe to men and woman is needed in the balance of the world today
But when boys are not raised properly by their mothers, where will balance come from. Boys are loosing something masculine, it seems.
From what sources are you promoting your hypothesis that boys are not being raised properly by their mothers? As for boys losing masculinity that is a reach on your part, that is highly subjective. It is used by the
Trumpian as an excuse for why they fall behind women in certain areas.
Well, Ken, I read an interesting article that explained the rightwing bent of younger men these days. It gave me reason to look in closer to some of the points that you made in our previous discussions.
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-paci … 7240331fd0
men complain about losing ground to women who were never in a parity situation in the first place.
It is interesting that Black men, regardless of the aberration or two overwhelming supported Harris over Trump.
"I wonder if the National Library of Medicine has taken into consideration the left's attack on Teslas or the left's tremendous rise of antisemitism on college campuses around the country. There is the murdering of the Jewish embassy employees and the murder of a CEO. I doubt all of this has been taken into consideration."
The National Library of Medicine takes into consideration facts.In my opinion, boys need a different learning environment than what has been the standard for way too long. We need a revolution in raising boys. Men must come to the table regarding this revolution. A transformation must take place if we are to maintain a population of happy, robust citizenry and only men can determine how it should take place. Will the women in their lofty academic and work place positions listen to them?
WonderingThe left's war on Christians and Jews has to stop
"FBI to probe claims of 'targeted violence' against religious groups after evangelicals' protest in Seattle
FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino said Tuesday he had requested an investigation into allegations of "targeted violence" against religious groups after an evangelical conservative group held a rally at Seattle City Hall in response to the mayor blaming Christians for igniting a weekend demonstration that turned violent.
"We have asked our team to fully investigate allegations of targeted violence against religious groups at the Seattle concert. Freedom of religion isn’t a suggestion," Bongino wrote on X.
The Christians' "Rattle in Seattle" demonstration began at 5 p.m. Tuesday on the 4th Avenue steps of City Hall in downtown Seattle, where counter-protesters were also present, according to Fox 13.
A total of eight people were arrested for assault during dueling demonstrations as of 8 p.m., according to Seattle Police. No injuries were reported.
"Following the MayDay USA worship event at Cal Anderson Park on Saturday, Mayor Harrell had the audacity to issue a press release blaming Christians for the premediated violence of Antifa which resulted in the hospitalization of Seattle Police Department personnel and the arrest of 23 Antifa agitators," the organizers said in a statement. "Under Mayor Harrell’s leadership, the city of Seattle has continued its spiral into lawlessness and dysfunction while the First Amendment rights of citizens to peacefully assemble has been disregarded."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-probe-cl … 51809.htmlThe left's violence knows no boundaries.
WILD SCENE: Pastor claims Antifa militants threw water balloons filled with urine at worship event
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgcCm2sPux8
'HORRENDOUS': Official recounts violence from Christian counter protest
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqO4OBRoQCEShocking videos, but not surprising. Many leftists who protest against Christianity do so because they view it not just as a personal faith but as a symbol of institutional power, tradition, and social control. They often associate it with historical and ongoing forms of oppression, particularly in the areas of gender roles, sexuality, race, and class. Their issue is usually not with individual belief, but with how Christianity has been used politically or culturally to reinforce what they see as unjust systems.
Ideologies like critical theory, radical feminism, and intersectionality frame Christianity, especially in its traditional or conservative expressions, as complicit in upholding patriarchy, colonialism, and heteronormativity. In their view, Christian values have been weaponized to suppress abortion rights, oppose LGBTQ+ identities, and defend social hierarchies they believe should be dismantled.
In recent years, this hostility has intensified, particularly due to the perceived merging of evangelical Christianity with right-wing politics in the U.S. For some on the far left, this overlap makes Christianity seem like an obstacle to what they define as progress or liberation. As a result, what begins as ideological opposition can spiral into outright hostility.
Disturbingly, some individuals or groups have adopted the belief that it's acceptable, even justified, to use intimidation or violence to push back against Christian institutions or public displays of faith. Vandalism of churches, disruptions of religious events, or aggressive counter-protests are increasingly seen by a radical fringe as legitimate forms of resistance. While not representative of all leftists, this growing willingness among some to cross the line into aggressive or destructive behavior highlights how deep the cultural and ideological divide has become.One of the problems is that this type of violent behavior is not only condoned but encouraged by democrat leaders.
Absolutely no one is condoning or advocating for violence...
Montage of democrats calling for violence.
This is the SHORT list.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CvnBPriheYm/?hl=enLOL not calling for violence and all taken out of context...
I completely agree with that comment, one of the major problems we’re facing is that certain types of violent behavior are not just tolerated but, in some cases, openly encouraged or excused by Democrat leaders. A clear example that backs this up is when then-Senator Kamala Harris promoted the Minnesota Freedom Fund during the 2020 riots. This fund helped bail out individuals who were arrested during violent protests, including some charged with serious crimes like assault and arson. Rather than condemning the destruction of property and attacks on law enforcement, her actions signaled that this behavior was acceptable, or even worthy of support. That kind of messaging only emboldens more chaos and lawlessness, and it sends the wrong message to both the perpetrators and the public.
Another strong example comes from Representative Maxine Waters, who publicly encouraged supporters to confront members of the Trump administration in public spaces. Her exact words were: “If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them.” Statements like that can easily be interpreted as incitement, especially in such a politically charged environment.Shar,
If you have a minute this is something worth watching.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CvnBPriheYm/?hl=en
"Rightwing groups tend to be more violent, although leftwing groups more frequently target law enforcement as the willing tool of the oppressive regime." US Department of Justice
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-libra … and-threatAgain, the violence of the left knows no boundaries
"Footage shows LGBTQ protester attacking conservative at California track championship amid trans athlete drama
Clovis police charged a 19-year-old with assault and vandalism after alleged attack outside Buchanan High School during state championship
California's track and field state championship in Clovis, California, turned into a crime scene Friday as tensions rose between opposing protesters.
One LGBTQ protester was arrested after allegedly attacking a conservative protester outside Veteran Memorial Stadium at Buchanan High School, the Clovis Police Department confirmed to Fox News Digital.
The man allegedly attacked is California right-wing activist and content creator Josh Fulfer, who goes by the nickname "Oreo Express" on social media.
Footage obtained by Fox News Digital shows the LGBTQ protester, who police have identified as 19-year-old Ethan Kroll, striking Fulfer with a flag pole that had a large transgender pride flag attached.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/footage- … lete-dramaYou're really expect people to believe that ONE 19 year old individual represents an entire group of people?
"striking Fulfer with a flag pole that had a large transgender pride flag attached".
Oh my... Yes, we can certainly agree that striking people with flagpoles is WRONG...
But you do realize that Trump pardoned a j6 rioter who was convicted of beating a Capitol police officer with a flagpole... But you have a problem with this man using flagpole? What's the difference? Is there a proper protocol for using a flagpole as a weapon?
Here's to hoping that they throw the full weight of the law against the individual using the flagpole as a weapon and let's also hope that if he is convicted that some one doesn't pardon him LOL"Trump pardoned a j6 rioter who was convicted of beating a Capitol police officer with a flagpole"
So?
biden pardoned people who were convicted murderers and rapists.
"Biden commutes sentences of 37 of 40 federal death row inmates to life in prison without possibility of parole"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-comm … w-inmates/
When you take all the violence perpetrated by the left the only logical conclusion is that the left are a very violent group of people.Your generalizations are erroneous. But good to know you don't support one individual attacking another with a flagpole.
Maybe you could tell us a little more about the pardons Trump has recently made...Biden pardoned, I would think, the most violent criminals of any president in our history.
Cases Involving Violent Crimes
1. Adrian Peeler (Connecticut)
Conviction: Conspiracy related to the 1999 murders of Karen Clarke and her 8-year-old son, Leroy “BJ” Brown.
Details: Peeler was convicted on conspiracy charges connected to the deaths, which were carried out by his brother to silence witnesses against their drug gang. Peeler served 25 years in state prison and was serving a 35-year federal sentence for cocaine trafficking.
Clemency Action: In January 2025, President Biden granted clemency, leading to Peeler's scheduled release on July 16, 2025.
Public Reaction: The decision faced bipartisan criticism, with some viewing it as a miscarriage of justice.
2. 37 Federal Death Row Inmates
Action: In December 2024, President Biden commuted the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates to life imprisonment without parole.
Rationale: This move aligned with Biden's opposition to the federal death penalty, aiming to prevent future administrations from resuming executions.
3. Beverly Ann Ibn-Tamas (Ohio)
Conviction: In 1977, at age 33, Ibn-Tamas was convicted of killing her husband.
Circumstances: She testified that her husband had physically and verbally abused her and had assaulted her moments before the shooting, while she was pregnant. The court did not permit expert testimony on battered woman syndrome, a psychological condition affecting victims of domestic violence.
Sentence: One to five years of incarceration with credit for time served.
Post-conviction: Her case became a landmark in recognizing battered woman syndrome in legal contexts. She has since worked in healthcare and continues to serve as a case manager.
4. Leonard Peltier
Conviction: In 1977, Peltier was convicted of the 1975 murders of two FBI agents during a shootout on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota.
Clemency Action: On January 19, 2025, President Biden commuted Peltier's life sentence to home confinement, effective February 18, 2025.
5. Ferrone Claiborne and Terence Jerome Richardson
Conviction: Both men pleaded guilty in state court to charges connected to the 1998 killing of a Sussex County, Virginia, police officer during a botched drug bust.
Details: Although they accepted plea agreements to avoid the death penalty, both maintained their innocence. They were later sentenced to life in federal prison on drug charges related to the incident.
Clemency Action: In December 2024, President Biden commuted their sentences, leading to their release.
Kaboni Savage
Conviction: Savage, a Philadelphia drug kingpin, was convicted of multiple murders, including a 2004 firebombing that killed six people.
Clemency Action: In December 2024, President Biden commuted Savage's federal death sentence to life imprisonment without parole.
James H. Roane Jr. and Richard Tipton
Conviction: Roane and Tipton were accomplices in the 1992 Virginia slayings committed by the Newtowne Gang, responsible for multiple murders.
Clemency Action: In December 2024, President Biden commuted their death sentences to life imprisonment without parole.
Wikipedia
Marvin Gabrion
Conviction: Gabrion was convicted of the 1997 murder of a young woman in Michigan.
Clemency Action: In December 2024, President Biden commuted Gabrion's federal death sentence to life imprisonment without parole.
Len Davis
Conviction: Davis, a former New Orleans police officer, was convicted in a 1994 murder-for-hire case, orchestrating the killing of a woman who filed a brutality complaint against him.
Clemency Action: In December 2024, President Biden commuted Davis's death sentence to life imprisonment without parole.
Reddit
Some interesting stats ---
Obama granted:
1,927 total clemency actions, including:
1,715 commutations
212 pardons
President Donald Trump (2017–2021)
Total Clemency Actions: 237
Pardons: 143
Commutations: 94
President Joe Biden (2021–2025)
Total Clemency Actions: 4,245
Pardons: 65
Commutations: 4,161 YIKES!Are all of Trump's current pardons to those free of terrible violence and corruption?
I've got no problem saying that both of them have made absolutely indefensible pardon decisions.
Trump has brought in a new dimension to pardons though with his crypto scheme... Pay to play pardons. May as well make some money from them? I think we can all agree that and ethics investigation should be launched.
THIS is what happens when members of the left supports antisemitism on college campuses. THIS is what happens when members of the left encourage protests around the country against Israel and Jewish people.
My question to those on the left, is this enough? Do you not comprehend what your actions cause? Why do you support such hate?
Chanting from the river to the sea Palestine will be free, etc. it's got to stop.
"Suspect in Boulder terror attack determined to be Egyptian man in US illegally: FBI
Boulder police, FBI respond to chaotic scene at 'Run for Their Lives' walk
"Today, in Boulder, Colorado, Jewish people marched with a moral and humane demand: to return the hostages," Danon wrote in a statement. "In response, the Jewish protesters were brutally attacked, with an attacker throwing a Molotov cocktails at them. Make no mistake – this is not a political protest, this is terrorism. The time for statements is over. It is time for concrete action to be taken against the instigators wherever they may be."
An Egyptian national who came into the country two years ago and overstayed his visa has been charged in the gruesome terror attack that left eight people injured in Boulder, Colorado, Sunday, authorities said.
Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, was arrested at the scene, after he allegedly set his victims on fire as they peacefully rallied on behalf of Israeli hostages still being held by Hamas in Gaza. Soliman was heard yelling "Free Palestine" and other anti-Israel slogans during the attack on victims ranging in age from 52 to 88.
Online records show Soliman has been booked into the Boulder County Jail on multiple felony charges, including one count of explosives or incendiary devices used during a felony and two counts of first-degree murder. The circumstances surrounding the murder charges are unclear since authorities have not announced whether any of the victims have succumbed to their injuries. Soliman is being held on a $10 million bond.
The shocking violence unfolded at 1:26 p.m. local time, when Boulder police were called to the county courthouse on Pearl Street for reports of a man who had a weapon and was setting people on fire, according to Boulder Police Chief Steve Redfearn.
The attack took place near an event put on by "Run for Their Lives," a grassroots group that organizes run and walk events calling for the release of Israeli hostages held since Oct. 7, 2023, according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
"Run for Their Lives is an apolitical global organization with the sole mission of walking peacefully to raise awareness for the 58 hostages still held in captivity by Hamas in Gaza," the group said in a statement to Fox News Digital.
Run for Their Lives said it has been holding events every week since Oct. 15, 2023 "without any violent incidents until today." It called the plight of the remaining hostages an "international humanitarian crisis" and said there is a "collective responsibility to release them all."
"We call on world leaders to do everything they can to ensure the swift return home of each of the 58 hostages. Run for Their Lives remains committed to our mission until ALL the HOSTAGES are returned back home!" the organization said.
The suspect was heard yelling, "How many children you killed?" and "We have to end Zionists, they are killers," according to an analysis of video of the scene by the ADL Center on Extremism.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/fbi-investig … patel-saysRep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) distinguished herself, saying that “exploding” antisemitism must be treated as a nonpartisan issue and rebuking her fellow Democrats for implying that their multiple hearings on the crisis were a “false obsession.” She demanded they ask why a yarmulke-clad Jewish student was attacked on campus despite never having visited Israel, and she even had the temerity to point out that while anti-Zionism might not be antisemitism at some theoretical level, “We haven’t yet really seen that exist.”
She is, of course, objectively correct. When a Jewish student ends up needing surgery after a violent antisemitic attack, only someone as gleefully mendacious as Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) would assert that the hearing on campus antisemitism was targeting “protected speech.”
Omar, though, was not alone. Her colleague, Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), likewise claimed that students were being deported “for writing op-eds … advocating for peace.” He also referenced “killing and starvation in Gaza,” but failed to note that the only emaciated people in Gaza are the Jewish hostages who are being deliberately starved by Hamas. For that matter, he failed to mention that there are Jewish hostages in Gaza at all."Her colleague, Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), likewise claimed that students were being deported “for writing op-eds … advocating for peace.” He also referenced “killing and starvation in Gaza,” but failed to note that the only emaciated people in Gaza are the Jewish hostages
But a student WAS arrested and detained for authoring, along with other students, and opinion piece in her student newspaper.... The piece in no way advocated for violence...That's a fact.
The only emaciated people in Gaza are Jewish hostages? Are you serious?
There are numerous photo essays documenting emaciated and starving people in Gaza.Deflection will not change the mountains of evidence of the extreme antisemitism and violence of the left.
Violence changes nothing and only makes it worse.
Why does the left support antisemitism and violence?That was not deflection, that was a response directly to the erroneous content of your post....
I’m not sure this photo captures the full shock of what happened on October 7 — over a thousand Jewish people were killed in their homes and on the streets. There were beheadings, babies burned alive, women beaten and raped, and a parade through Gaza where people were beaten and spat on. Does one horrific crime justify another?
Have you found it upsetting over the many years as Palestinians carried out suicide bombings inside Israel? This conflict has been ongoing for more than 75 years. Palestinians are a people at war, and no country in the Middle East is willing to accept them permanently. Do you wonder why?
I’m sure no one wants to see suffering, and that goes for both sides. But one side is largely non-warring civilians, while the other has a long history of conflict.
The only good that can come from this is that this long, decades-old war will finally come to an end. The Palestinians chose a path that cost them their place in the Middle East. They risk becoming a people without a homeland, essentially nomads, with no land from which to continue their prolonged conflict.
The rise of antisemitism in America is not only deeply troubling, it's dangerous. What’s even more alarming is how much of this hatred is being normalized and even encouraged by elements of the political left. We’re seeing Democratic members of Congress, college faculty, and student organizations openly support or justify groups like Hamas, a U.S.-designated terror organization that has a history of murdering innocent civilians, including women and children. This isn’t just about differing views on foreign policy; this is about enabling violent rhetoric and actions against Jewish people under the guise of “resistance.”
On our college campuses, Jewish students are being harassed, threatened, and isolated. Streets in American cities are seeing protests that don’t just call for peace, they call for the eradication of Israel and cheer for terrorists. The same people who claim to stand against hate seem to turn a blind eye, or worse, actively participate, when the hate is directed at Jews. This double standard is not only morally bankrupt; it's emboldening those who seek to spread violence and division.
It’s time to call this what it is: antisemitism, plain and simple. And no matter what political party it comes from, it must be condemned without hesitation. If we can’t stand up for the Jewish community now, after everything we’ve seen, then we have truly lost our moral compass.
Does anyone have any examples of a member of congress, college faculty or student organization openly supporting hamas? I do not mean the Palestinian people either. I mean specific, direct support of hamas.
Do these incidents show direct support for Hamas? That could certainly be questioned. However, in my view, they represent seeds that have sown antisemitism, intentionally or not, by enabling rhetoric and actions that legitimize hate and division. They’ve played a dangerous game, and the result has been a surge in violent antisemitism across the country.
"NEW YORK — Nearly 500 pro-Palestinian protesters, some carrying noisemakers, some banging drumsticks on buckets, walked out of class and marched across Harvard University on October 26. On the same day, in California, UCLA students gathered in Bruin Square, chanting, “Resistance is justified when people are occupied.”
Rashida Tlaib "From the river to the sea"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91YBR21MgJM
Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY)
Comments on Hamas Attacks: In November 2023, Bowman referred to reports of rapes and child murders by Hamas during the October 7 attacks as "propaganda" and a "lie."
Rep. Cori Bush (D-MO)
Statements on U.S. Aid to Israel: Following the October 7 attacks, Bush called for an end to U.S. military aid to Israel. Critics argued that such statements, made in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack, could be seen as lacking support for Israel's right to self-defense.This isn't calling for violence though? For me, "resistance" has always meant non-violent means... Civil disobedience, boycotts...
I can only speak from my own perspective on this, but I believe the examples I shared have contributed to the spread of an ideology that has fueled a particularly virulent form of violent antisemitism. That’s how they struck me, and that’s the lens through which I view them. Hence, my first sentence, "Do these incidents show direct support for Hamas? That could certainly be questioned. However, in my view, "
I feel individuals perceive things differently. Dog whistles can be very dangerous. They can end up being heard as permission to become violent.
What does it say about the democrat party that such a horrible terrorist organization such as hamas wanted their candidate to become president? Very bad things would have happened to these hostages in harris had been elected president.
"Hamas wanted Kamala Harris to be president, says freed Israeli hostage
Omer Shem Tov says his treatment in captivity significantly improved after Donald Trump won the election
A freed Israeli hostage revealed his Hamas tormentors “immediately” treated him better when President Trump was elected — and claimed the group of terrorists wanted Kamala Harris to win the 2024 election.
Omer Shem Tov, 22, provided insight into Hamas’ political calculations as he detailed the hellish conditions he endured for more than 500 days after he was kidnapped during the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel.
“As soon as Donald Trump was elected, they understood that he wants to bring the hostages back home,” he told CNN in a new interview published Wednesday.
“So immediately the way they treated me changed … when Trump became president the way they treated us changed for me personally.”
His captors provided him with more food while they stopped cursing at and spitting on him, Shem Tov told CNN’s Bianna Golodryga.
He credited Trump for getting the hostages released as part of a cease-fire deal between Israel and Hamas earlier this year.
“Before we felt like nothing is happening, and I remember ever since he came into the role, they were very scared of him,” Shem Tov said of Trump.
“They wanted Kamala to be chosen,” he said of the former vice president, citing talks he had with his captors.
Shem Tov was released with five others on Feb. 22, more than a year after he was taken to Gaza when Hamas stormed the Nova music festival.
He said during the CNN interview that he dropped 50 pounds, relying on biscuits and salty water to survive.
“I was being starved,” he said. “There’s no question about it.”
Shem Tov said Hamas captors told him “we’re gonna shoot you” if they heard Israeli forces nearby, but his biggest fear was dying from Israel’s military campaign in the Palestinian enclave.
“I believe every soldier is a hero, I really do believe it, and I think the army, they’re doing an amazing job, but for us, it’s the scariest moments, it’s the bombing, you feel like your life can be taken in every moment,” he said.
Shem Tov has spent his time since his release advocating for the release of the other hostages still languishing in captivity. He and other former hostages met with Trump in March.
https://nypost.com/2025/05/28/world-new … trump-won/Absolutely, this says a lot about the kind of leadership Hamas was hoping for. If a terrorist group like that wanted Kamala Harris to become president, it's a clear warning sign. They saw her as someone they could manipulate or wouldn’t fear. That’s dangerous not just for Israel, but for the world.
It’s no coincidence that once Trump won the election, their treatment of hostages improved. They knew he was serious and unpredictable, someone who wouldn’t hesitate to act decisively. That fear alone made them shift their behavior, which could have saved lives. Under Harris, things could have gone very differently, and not for the better.
Once again the violence of the left it put on display.
Why doesn't the left like law and order? Why are criminal illegal aliens something they are willing to riot over?
The left's violence will NOT get them what they want with illegal alien criminals.
"President Trump sends National Guard as violent anti-ICE riots erupt in Los Angeles
The National Guard was deployed to Los Angeles County as anti-ICE protests continued to escalate Saturday afternoon and into the evening. The unrest is centered in the city of Paramount, California, where protesters clashed with federal authorities, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers who were allegedly trying to conduct a raid at a local business.
A leftist mayor take on things. Leftist LA Mayor Karen Bass is just plain stupid. It again begs the question of why democrats love illegal aliens and criminal. Illegal alien criminals are something they feel is worth rioting over.
"Social media, Trump admin erupts over LA mayor's reaction to ICE raids: 'You're a criminal too'
Several Trump administration officials criticized Bass over her comments
Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass faced backlash on social media Friday, including from members of the Trump administration, for pushing back on Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids targeting illegal immigrants in her city.
"This morning, we received reports of federal immigration enforcement actions in multiple locations in Los Angeles," Bass said in a statement on Friday.
"As Mayor of a proud city of immigrants, who contribute to our city in so many ways, I am deeply angered by what has taken place. These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city. My Office is in close coordination with immigrant rights community organizations. We will not stand for this."
You have no say in this at all," White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller posted on X. "Federal law is supreme and federal law will be enforced."
"It’s amazing the number of elected officials who don’t grasp the basics of federalism, or federal sovereignty over immigration issues, or the First Amendment," Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice Harmeet Dhillon posted on X.
"They’re Illegals," Deputy Assistant to the President Sebastian Gorka posted on X. "Not ‘immigrants.’ One just tried to burn Americans alive in Boulder. If you’re aiding and abetting them you’re a criminal too. Are you ready to be treated as a criminal? Because we are ready to treat you as one if you commit a crime."
"Can’t get permits for people to rebuild their homes after a wildfire, but focused like a laser beam on stopping immigration enforcement," Red State writer Bonchie posted on X.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/social … iminal-too
THESE are the people the democrat leftists are worth rioting for
Immigration authorities highlight criminal history of multiple migrants arrested in Los Angeles
Federal sources highlighted some of last week's arrests in the Los Angeles area, which included violent and drug offenders
Rolando Veneracion-Enriquez, 55, of the Philippines, has a criminal history that includes a burglary in Ontario, California, for which he was sentenced to four years in prison, and sexual penetration with a foreign object with force and assault with intent to commit rape in the city of Pomona, for which he was sentenced to 37 years in prison. He was arrested on Saturday and served a notice to appear.
Jose Gregorio Medranda Ortiz, 42, of Ecuador, was arrested Friday and served administrative deportation. His criminal history includes being sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine while on board a vessel in Tampa, Florida.
Armando Ordaz, 44, of Mexico, was arrested on Friday. He is an alleged active gang member of Bratz 13 who has a criminal history that includes sexual battery in Los Angeles, landing him a sentence of 135 days in jail and five years probation. He was also sentenced to 90 days in jail and three years probation for receiving known or stolen property in Norwalk and sentenced to 365 days in jail and four years probation for petty theft in Los Angeles.
Victor Mendoza-Aguilar, 32, of Mexico, was arrested on Friday and has a criminal history in Pasadena that includes being sentenced to 112 days in jail for possessing unlawful paraphernalia, being sentenced to 16 months in jail for possessing controlled substances, being sentenced to four years behind bars for assault with a deadly weapon and being sentenced to 364 days in jail for obstructing a public officer. He is an alleged active member of the Villa Boys gang and was previously removed from the U.S. in 2017.
Delfino Aguilar-Martinez, 51, of Mexico, was arrested on Friday and served a notice to appear. His criminal history includes assault with a deadly weapon with great bodily injury in Los Angeles, and he was sentenced to a year in jail.
Jesus Alan Hernandez-Morales, 26, of Mexico, was removed from the U.S. on Saturday. His criminal history includes being sentenced in Las Cruces, New Mexico, to 239 days in jail for conspiracy to transport an illegal migrant.
Lionel Sanchez-Laguna, 55, of Mexico, was arrested on Tuesday. He has a criminal history in the city of Orange that includes being sentenced to 365 days in jail for discharging a firearm at an inhabited dwelling and vehicle, being sentenced to four years probation for battery on a spouse or cohabitant, being sentenced to four years probation for willful cruelty to a child, being sentenced to 10 days in jail for driving under the influence, being sentenced to three years behind bars for assault with a semi-automatic firearm and being sentenced to three years behind bars for personal use of a firearm.Thank you for taking the time to lay this all out with such detail. Facts matter, and it’s rare these days to see someone take the time to present them so common sense can actually rise above the noise. What you’ve highlighted is the heartbreaking truth: we’re at a point where the law is selectively enforced, and far too many in leadership positions seem more concerned with defending criminal behavior than protecting innocent citizens. It’s frustrating to witness violent protests erupt, not in defense of justice, but in opposition to the enforcement of existing immigration laws that are meant to protect Americans.
The sad reality is that many of these violent offenders should never have been here to begin with. They weren’t just "undocumented," they were repeat, serious criminals. And when cities treat ICE like the enemy, and federal enforcement like an act of aggression, it sends a message to both American citizens and migrants: the law is optional. That’s not compassion, that’s negligence.
There’s a difference between helping those in need and harboring those who do harm. The people rioting in defense of violent felons aren’t standing up for immigrants; they’re standing against order, against accountability, and against the basic rights of American citizens to feel safe in their own communities. Again, thank you for calling it like it is. More of us need to. More need to take a good, long look at what is going on, and seek common sense.
Poor Nancy...her part in denying the Guard's presence and her efforts to make that fiasco occur are so under appreciated.
Claims suggesting the Speaker of the House controls the National Guard or the security of the Capitol have been repeatedly debunked.
I correct myself- Speaker Nancy Pelosi had administrative authority over the U.S. Capitol, along with the Senate Majority Leader, and could influence security decisions through her role in congressional leadership, but did not command authority over the National Guard.
That is not true. You're saying that Nancy Pelosi has more power than the president of the United States LOL? Can you cite where you have gotten this information?
This didn't age well...
"If Joe Biden federalizes the National Guard, that would be a direct attack on states' rights.
Over the last several years, we've seen Democrats try to take away our Freedoms of religion, assembly, and speech. We can't let them take away our right to defend ourselves, too.
South Dakota defends the Constitution."
My take away? : If Trump can override California’s governor, he can override yours too.
This is a trial run…
https://x.com/KristiNoem/status/1755003058507903249Of course President Donald Trump can override any governor in the United States. He is the president.
"It’s amazing the number of elected officials who don’t grasp the basics of federalism, or federal sovereignty over immigration issues, or the First Amendment," Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice Harmeet Dhillon"
President Donald Trump is a leader and did what true leaders do, he acted to protect people and property against violent individuals on the left. Something all too necessary these days.
I have to ask myself what is it with the left that makes them love violence so much? Could it be because they don't have the intellect to persuade people to believe in their ideas? Maybe they just have bad ideas most of the country rejects.
George Floyd riots costing billions of dollars in property damage and death of police officers. Antisemitic riots and attacks on college campuses all over the country. Now, we have riots because federal immigration officers want to capture and deport illegal alien criminals.
It stuns me when the left does this and is confused as to why they are so extremely unpopular in the country.
Maybe they should trying siding with legal American citizens instead of illegal criminals, respecting the rule of law and valuing victims of crime over criminals.The President does not have the power to deploy the National Guard, only the Governor. Trump or the Pentagon would have to request Title 10 and place Guardsmen on those orders to have any control or access over the Guard....
Did he do this?
Folks are in favor of federalizing the guard? YIKES
Deploying the National Guard against protesters in Los Angeles isn’t leadership—it’s escalation. He's agitating...
It's a great opportunity to distract from the big Bill falling apart and Trump's name being on the Epstein list..."The President does not have the power to deploy the National Guard, only the Governor."
You REALLY need to read up on this. Specifically US Code of Armed Services titled 10 U.S.C. 12406.
The president has the authority to call out the National Guard of any state if the US "is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation"; "there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the government; or "the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States".
The National Guard of every state is part of the US Military. That means the president is their Commander and Chief.
I know, I trained and served side by side with National Guardsmen in many different circumstances.
President Donald Trump did the right thing. He stopped the left's violence before it had a chance to get out of hand.I’m glad to see your post because I’ve been saying the same thing repeatedly since the protests began. I’ve shared that Trump offered to have the National Guard at the Capitol on January 6th, anticipating the large crowd expected that day. Unfortunately, his offer was refused. He may have learned a lesson from the fact that the Guard was sent in late on January 6th. He used Title 10 U.S.C. § 12406 , and was within his power to do so.
The protest had already gone on for two days before he deployed the Guard. As your morning post here shared. He also claims to have spoken several times with the Governor and the Mayor over the weekend, and felt they were inept at handling the situation.
We cannot allow protesters to stop traffic, burn cars, attack law enforcement, and create chaos. Many arrests were made over the weekend. The President is responsible for keeping all Americans safe, including law enforcement officers and the general public. No protesters have the right to cause such chaos.
I’m not sure what you mean by saying it wasn’t out of control. Many people were arrested on Friday and Saturday, and numerous officers were injured by thrown projectiles. Cars were set on fire, traffic was stopped, and in my view, this kind of situation can escalate quickly, just like the chaotic leftist protests during the Summer of Love. Where has common sense gone?
Legal Basis he enacted,
Title 10 U.S.C. § 12406 empowers the President to call up National Guard units when protests or violence threaten federal law enforcement operations or facilities, without requiring state approval
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential … hatgpt.com
Trump’s military-political advisers described the unrest as a “violent insurrection” against federal ICE operations, justifying immediate federalization under this statute.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/white- … hatgpt.com
Trump did his job, and he did it quickly, and hopefully, the presence of the Guard will prevent violence, destruction, and any death. We need order in our streets, we need citizens to respect our federal officers, doing their job. Protesters do not dictate a president's agenda. No seconds on the "Summer of Love" not on Trump's time.
last two days videos look peaceful?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOXWN2A-TBo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDnSphPbaUU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mgdny2YW3Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GPqxP2ZJ3U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybAuIb9ZZUU
This is America, and this kind of violence should not be supported or in any respect tolerated.Trump offered the guard on j6? Why didn't he "offer" them to the governor of California? He could have called the guard in himself on January 6th but he chose not to. Today he has made another choice with California. What's the difference? The presence of the guard on j6 could have potentially prevented many of the officers from being badly injured at the Capitol.
Trump offered the National Guard days before the January 6th protest, anticipating possible trouble due to the size of the expected crowd, and, according to him, out of concern for his supporters’ safety. Had the mayor or Speaker Pelosi accepted his offer, the violence might have been prevented. But at that point, there was no hard evidence of an imminent threat, only Trump's judgment that unrest could happen. Without a request from local authorities, he had no legal authority under Title 10 U.S.C. § 12406 to send in the Guard. By law, it wasn’t his call to make.
Now, we’re watching violence erupt again, this time in Los Angeles, and it’s been going on since Friday night. Once again, much of the media and some Americans seem willing to turn a blind eye. My God, there are videos everywhere, raw cell phone footage showing what’s really happening. These ICE agents were doing their jobs, just like the officers at the Capitol were on January 6th. It’s pure hypocrisy to frame it any other way. Honestly, what is going on with people?But why would it only be an offer of the guard on j6? There was no offer made to the governor of California, trump forced the issue, federalized the guard and sent them in against the will of the governor? Newsom said that the Police Department there was handling it, the LAPD put out a similar statement... Why are the two situations treated differently? Sending in the guard appears to be an attempt to agitate the situation.
And actually, it is also been thoroughly debunked and there was no evidence that he offered the guard on j6... All of his responses were documented.
"Without a request from local authorities, he had no legal authority under Title 10 U.S.C. § 12406 to send in the Guard. By law, it wasn’t his call to make."
BINGO
So California is different somehow?
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2 … k-00165615He acted under Title 10 U.S.C. § 12406. I think I’ll step away from this topic for now—I just don’t like to get into anything that makes me feel like I’m speaking out of turn. Nothing against your perspective at all. But honestly, anyone who watches the footage can see this kind of violent, out-of-control protest has no place in the America I know. One video even showed graffiti in red that read “Kill Americans.” This is America, and seeing what’s happening today only reaffirms how much I respect the president and the way he’s handling these issues. To me, he’s showing good common sense and real leadership. He is making me proud, and making me feel safe in my country... I have not felt that way for a long time.
Agreed! Violent protest cannot be tolerated. But at no point did the governor feel that the state's resources were not adequate to contain or deal with this protest. LAPD is a force that is actually more equipped for this type of situation then the National guard is. At the end of the day, this was not Trump's call to make. This is, in my opinion, really egregious overreach by the federal government. Gosh if only the victims of recent natural disasters would have received this kind of quick attention.. or any attention at all actually!
"LAPD is a force that is actually more equipped for this type of situation then the National guard is."
WRONG!
Where do you come up with this stuff?
Anybody who has been in the Army National Guard or been associated with the Army National Guard knows handling civil unrest is a BIG part of their training. They are trained for just this type of situation.
At the end of the day the democrat party remains the party of law breakers, illegal aliens and the alphabet people. They have lost touch with The average US citizen and their behavior proves it time and time again.
The other problem is the democrat leadership is just plain stupid.Trump is the president, and it's his duty to protect this nation. Right now, we’re seeing our streets taken over by people who are blatantly breaking the law, and the LAPD has allowed it to spiral out of control by failing to act decisively. This is exactly when the president must step in and shut this riot down. The LAPD failed, plain and simple. All one needs to do is watch the many videos on YouTube and X to see that this was a riot from Friday to the present. The facts are there for anyone to see. Turning away will not change the facts, left media will not change the facts. But some can't face the facts.
This is America. And thank God we have a president who isn’t afraid to act. I fully expect him to send in the military and end this chaos. If he doesn’t, I’ll be deeply disappointed.
It’s time to say enough is enough. We’re done tolerating those who refuse to follow the law. These destructive, anti-social voices need to be silenced, and American values need to be upheld, without apology.Actually, things didn't escalate until the guard got there. The governor really had everything under control and did not ask for assistance.
We've got legal concerns and I believe a lawsuit is being launched this morning?
To mobilize the National Guard, Trump invoked Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code, which allows for the federalization of the National Guard in cases of an invasion or a rebellion, or if the President is unable to execute the country’s laws with “regular forces.”
Section 12406, however, also states that “Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.” Newsom confirmed that he did not request the deployment of the National Guard, making it the first time since 1965 that the National Guard has been activated to a state without a governor’s request.
Newsom’s office called the mobilization “a serious breach of state sovereignty” and requested that the Pentagon chief “immediately rescind” the order and “return the National Guard to its rightful control by the State of California, to be deployed as appropriate when necessary.” The Democratic Governors Association backed Newsom in a statement, saying: “It’s important we respect the executive authority of our country’s governors to manage their National Guards.”
Again , it's all fine and dandy for California now but it wasn't on January 6th?
"I’m not sure if Trump was fully within the law by sending in the Guard, but I think it was a good idea. The protest had already gone on for two days before he deployed the Guard.
Is there a time limit on how long citizens can protest?
BUT...
The President can deploy the National Guard into a state even if the Governor opposes it, BUT it requires invoking the Insurrection Act. The Insurrection Act grants the President the authority to use the military, including the National Guard, to suppress insurrections, riots, or other situations where the state cannot maintain order....he has not done so. This will go to court.
The denial of the left when it comes to the violence of their side is unbelievable. The left is so far detached from reality they believe the get to riot when things don't go their way. They are, of course, wrong.
'Sen. Cory Booker calls Los Angeles riots 'peaceful,' slams Trump for deploying National Guard
Rioters set cars ablaze and attacked federal agents during violent clashes over ICE deportation operations
Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., suggested the Los Angeles riots that have wreaked havoc on the city are "peaceful" on NBC’s "Meet the Press," Sunday, and accused President Donald Trump of "sowing chaos" with his nationwide crackdown on illegal immigration.
"The reality is, we see peaceful protests launching in Los Angeles," the New Jersey senator said, "A lot of these peaceful protests are being generated because the president of the United States is sowing chaos and confusion by arresting people who are showing up for their immigration hearings."
The City of Angels was plunged into chaos over the weekend after hundreds of rioters violently clashed with federal immigration authorities, attempting to impede their ability to carry out deportations.
Federal agents attempted to disperse the belligerent rioters with flash grenades and tear gas on Saturday. In Compton, rioters set a car on fire and two motorcyclists circled the flaming wreck while waving a Mexican flag. Elsewhere, anti-ICE rioters attempted to block a federal bus carrying illegal immigrants, physically pushing against the vehicle as it inched forward.
One rioter hurled rocks through the windshield of a Border Patrol pickup truck, wounding the agents inside. Images released by the Department of Homeland Security show buildings throughout LA that have been defaced with graffiti of violent messages like "Kill ICE."
"Now they know that they cannot go to anywhere in this country where our people are, and try to kidnap our workers, our people – they cannot do that without an organized and fierce resistance" a rioter told Reuters.
Trump deployed 2,000 federalized National Guard troops to the scene against the wishes of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, who the president claimed weren’t doing their jobs.
"If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can’t do their jobs, which everyone knows they can’t, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!" Trump posted on TruthSocial.'The State of California did not request support from the National Guard troops and for good reason... The state and local authorities stated that they have the capacity to maintain order. Invoking the Insurrection Act or title 10 without cause isn’t leadership, it’s authoritarian overreach. This isn’t about safety. It’s about power. Using the military against citizens certainly is a Marxist tactic.
"The State of California did not request support from the National Guard troops and for good reason... The state and local authorities stated that they have the capacity to maintain order."
The leadership of California has proven in the past they are extremely incompetent in their jobs. Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass are blithering idiots at the highest level. Karen Bass was supporting the rioters. The LAPD didn't show up until hours after the disturbance started.
The National Guard being deployed to maintain order was the right thing to do considering the low IQ California leadership. It was necessary.
The left has no substance and can only put on a show for the lapdog media. It's sad.
"Evidence suggests Los Angeles 'riots' over ICE raids could be government-funded
Ties to radical left-wing organizations, government-backed NGOs
What began as a so-called "spontaneous protest" against ICE enforcement operations in Los Angeles has now been exposed as something far more insidious: a well-funded, coordinated riot, with ties to radical left-wing organizations, government-backed NGOs, and even a billionaire known for pushing Chinese Communist propaganda.
According to a damning exposé by investigative account @DataRepublican, several nonprofit organizations and shadowy political fronts played a pivotal role in igniting the chaos that saw federal officers attacked, flags burned, and city streets blocked.
But what's more alarming: tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer money may have indirectly fueled the unrest.
Behind the curtains is Neville Singham, a socialist billionaire and known financier of Chinese propaganda efforts abroad. Singham has funneled over $20 million into radical groups, including those involved in recent campus takeovers at Columbia University.
According to @DataRepublican, Singham is linked to PSL, the ANSWER Coalition, and the People's Forum—all of which played a part in the LA riots.
https://www.wnd.com/2025/06/evidence-su … nt-funded/This is NOT cool...
500 Marines from Twentynine Palms have been placed on standby for deployment to Los Angeles as violent unrest continues to spiral.
This is no longer crowd control anymore, it’s the federal government reasserting TOTAL command.
These aren’t weekend troops. This is 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines combat-tested and mission-ready troops.
The National Guard is already in the streets. Now the United States Marine Corps is preparing to back them up.
SCARY. The LAPD had this in control, this is escalation. This is a manufactured crisis.
Vance calls the LA protests an “invasion.” 4 min later, Miller calls it an “insurrection.” 29 min later, Hegseth threatens to send in Marines.
It’s like clockwork. They’ve chomped at the bit for months for a pretext to declare martial law under pretext of insurrection/invasion.
Please, tell me more about marxism.. communism...I'm so very concerned for this country.What’s happening right now in LA is deeply disturbing and unacceptable. These riots, driven by extremist ideologies, do not represent the values or voices of the vast majority of Americans. The violence, destruction, and shocking images of American flags being burned and hateful graffiti calling to "kill Americans" are not just heartbreaking, they’re a threat to our nation’s stability.
I believe President Trump has thus far responded with the strength and resolve needed in this moment. This is not a time for blaming leadership, especially when it’s clear that much of this chaos stems from failed local leadership and radical agendas that thrive on division.
We need order restored. If that means deploying the military to protect our cities and citizens, then so be it. This isn’t about politics, it’s about preserving the foundation of law, safety, and unity in our streets. I’m sickened by what I’m seeing, and I can only hope more Americans will speak up, step off the sidelines, and stand up for the country we all love.Let's remember ..
What are National Guard troops allowed to do under the law cited in Trump’s order?
An 1878 law, the Posse Comitatus Act, generally forbids the US military, including the National Guard, from taking part in civilian law enforcement....
They were there guarding the Federal detention center ... They were not taking part of the LAPD efforts to quell the crowd.... LAPD handled this protest... Why are folks acting like they weren't out there and basically ignored it and Trump had to come in and handle it? That is not what happened.Nothing going on in Los Angeles has distracted me from the fact that trump has been accused by his BIGGEST donor, the guy he gave access to all data, of being in Epstein files
Not distracted from the fact that trump is NOT EVEN CLOSE to 90 deals in 90 days, and his tariffs are a disaster.
Not distracted from the foreign policy failures, and how Putin is playing him for a fool.Can someone make sense of this?
Trump in 2020: "We have to go by the laws. We can't move in the National Guard. I can call insurrection but there's no reason to ever do that, even in a Portland case.
We can't call in the National Guard unless we're requested by a governor."
Here's the video
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1932121748373479632You missed the part where he said "Except in democrat run cities."
These protest are by regular people but are organized and paid for by proxies of the democrat party.
"What began as a so-called "spontaneous protest" against ICE enforcement operations in Los Angeles has now been exposed as something far more insidious: a well-funded, coordinated riot, with ties to radical left-wing organizations, government-backed NGOs""We have to go by the laws. We can't move in the National Guard. I can call insurrection but there's no reason to ever do that, even in a Portland case.
We can't call in the National Guard unless we're requested by a governor."
Doesn't matter if it's a Democrat run city or state or not....Riots don't happen in red states.
If the National Guard is called out in a red state it is because there has been a natural disaster.
Blue states are the MOST violent states in the United States.The sweeping generalizations are tiresome.
Not sure what Willow is referring to, I have gone into length this morning with my posts here. Posting current, facts. It's hard to communicate when context is ignored, and diversions are entered into an ongoing conversation. Such as "The sweeping generalizations are tiresome."
I'm referring to his generalizations of Democrats...
I was amazed at the pallets of cinder block that had been prepositioned for protesters. Hope they can track down the money there.
It was done in Portland, too. We are once more seeing "professional" rioters; paid to be there, paid to do violence.
It is really unfortunate that LA, like other Democrat-run cities, cannot handle even a small riot. Instead it is let grow until too massive to stop with police and, somehow, the pro's move on without any Democrat ever finding them. Probably because the cops simply stand by and watch instead of actually doing something.Hey! Enjoy! It's Summer, and a wonderful liberal city, just doing what they find entertaining, fun, and invigorating! Do you believe what the media is doing with this leftist horror show? Mamma mia!
It seems if we want peace we must allow the Democrats full control, you know, men in women's sports, paid vacations for any and all foreigners that request 'sanctuary', increasing taxes on all the dupes dumb enough to work for a living... complete control of the government... the Presidency.
Give them that and they will stop burning cars, stealing from stores, and assaulting those that are not supportive of their cause.Yes, perfect sense Ken--- Give them what they want or be lambased with rediculous propaganda such as there is no real riot in LA, there is no DEI. there is really no problem with multiple millions of migrants in our country, and even no problem with them burning our flags. One must really laugh a bit at such a skewed mindset, while pushing them back into their places.
Yes, makes perfect sense, Ken, give them what they want, or be hammered with ridiculous propaganda like “there’s no real riot in LA,” “there’s no DEI,” “there’s no problem with millions of migrants in our country,” and even “there’s no issue with them burning our flags.” You’ve really got to laugh a little at such a skewed mindset — all while pushing back and putting them in their place.
I am sure there are lots of cops that would like to act. Why should they, when their leaders are politicians who will not back them up, and even in Congress there are people like the leader of the Dems who would Dox them?
Or they remember what happened to the cops who restrained the drug addict in Minnesota 5 years ago, using a technique he was told to use in training. That guy is in prison."I am sure there are lots of cops that would like to act. Why should they, when their leaders are politicians who will not back them up,"
You mean like pardon the people who beat them with poles and pipes, bear sprayed them? Called Patriots because they assaulted officers? Yeah...
No...no... they aren't paid protestors...
They aren't career Anarchists...
This is spontaneous and local reaction...
Does anyone need more proof that the democrat leadership is anti-American and just plain stupid than these LA riots?
I hope the democrats realize that the American public is behind President Donald Trump on this issue. Are they so stupid they don't realize they appear to be winning the battle but very much losing the war?
"CNN reveals how Americans really feel about Trump's response to LA riots
The American electorate believe that the Democrats don't have a clue on the issue of immigration,' he added, mentioning California Gov. Gavin Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass .
A poll from CBS News conducted from June 4 to June 6 found that 54 percent of Americans approve of Trump's plans to deport all of those in the country illegally, Enten continued.
Another 51 percent said they supported agents searching their respective towns for suspected illegal aliens.
Enten also produced three polls that all showed a clear preference for Republicans when it comes to trusting a party to handle immigration.
'No matter what poll you look at, no matter which way you cut it, the American public is with the Republicans, the American public is with Donald Trump,' he said.
Trump said the National Guard was necessary because Gov. Newsom and other Democrats have failed to quell recent protests targeting immigration agents."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/media/artic … riots.htmlThe Law prevails---- Los Angeles
SEIU leader charged with 'conspiracy to impede an officer' for protesting ICE raid
David Huerta faces federal charge after interfering with Trump administration's immigration enforcement operation.
California labor leader David Huerta, 58, was released from federal custody on Monday on a $50,000 bond after being charged with "conspiracy to impede an officer."
Huerta, the president of Service Employees International Union California (SEIU), was arrested during an anti-ICE protest in Los Angeles on Friday.
Huerta was photographed wearing socks and carrying shoes following his release from custody. He told reporters he did not intend to get arrested, and the only way to win change is through nonviolence.
Huerta was arrested while law enforcement officers were executing a federal search warrant at a Los Angeles business suspected of hiring illegal immigrants and falsifying employment papers, a special agent for Homeland Security Investigations, which is part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, wrote in a federal court filing obtained by the AP. (note (keyword SUSPECTED)
SEIU represents 750,000 members in 17 local unions across 58 counties, according to its website. Among the members are "nurses, healthcare workers, janitors, social workers, security officers, in-home caregivers, school and university employees, court workers, and city, county and state employees."
"This fight is ours, it's our community's, but it belongs to everyone," Huerta said in Spanish, according to the Associated Press. "We all have to fight for them."
Huerta was arrested while law enforcement officers were executing a federal search warrant at a Los Angeles business suspected of hiring illegal immigrants and falsifying employment papers, a special agent for Homeland Security Investigations, which is part of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, wrote in a federal court filing obtained by the AP. (Keyword SUSPECTED)
SEIU represents 750,000 members in 17 local unions across 58 counties, according to its website. Among the members are "nurses, healthcare workers, janitors, social workers, security officers, in-home caregivers, school and university employees, court workers, and city, county and state employees."
While SEIU International President April Verrett said on Monday that the labor union is "relieved" that Huerta is free, she added his arrest only drew attention to a larger issue.
"Thousands of workers remain unjustly detained and separated from their families. At this very moment, immigrant communities are being terrorized by heavily militarized armed forces. The Trump regime calling in the National Guard is a dangerous escalation to target people who disagree with them. It is a threat to our democracy. The federal government should never be used as a weapon against people who disagree with it," she said in a statement. ( Note--- Yes, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had legal authority to detain individuals during the immigration raids conducted over the weekend in Los Angeles. ICE's enforcement actions are grounded in federal immigration law, which grants the agency the authority to arrest and detain individuals suspected of being in the U.S. unlawfully.)
"America is a nation of immigrants. Immigrant workers are essential to our society: feeding our nation, caring for our elders, cleaning our workplaces, and building our homes," Verrett added. "Immigrants are scientists, they are teachers and professors. They are our co-workers, neighbors and family members. They deserve our respect and they need their constitutional rights respected." (Note her sentiment may be true, when a migrant is deemed a criminal, with a criminal background they are subject for removal, and can be detained and deported by order of an immigration judge,)
David Huerta has been charged, and he will have due process under our court system.
Unfortunately, some feel that our laws can be ignored, and that stepping in the way of ICE doing their job causes chaos in the streets, impeding other law-abiding citizens' right to not only feel safe but also to maneuver safely through their streets. It is those very citizens that will pick up the tab for the cost of this riot in an already broke state,I believe my comment was very clear and unbiased—note that I specifically pointed out key phrases. It seems you might be missing the context. I am always careful with my wording because I have a strong disdain for poor content. That’s why if someone points out an issue with my context, I reassess and correct it as needed.
I did not offer any opinion on this man's guilt or innocence. The only perspective I provided was my observation. Unfortunately, some people seem to think our laws can be ignored, and that interfering with ICE doing their job leads to chaos in the streets. This, in turn, impedes the rights of law-abiding citizens—not only their right to feel safe but also their ability to move freely and safely through their neighborhoods. Reread and note the fact that I pointed out words that indicated this man was only suspected of a crime. The word suspected in my view indicates he is only suspected... Does the word read differently to you?
It’s those very citizens who will bear the cost of this riot, especially in an already financially strained state. David Huerta has been charged, and he will receive due process under our court system.
Did you not notice this part? — David Huerta has been charged, and he will have due process under our court system.
So what precipitated this question? "So he's charged? Not convicted, right?"
Regarding the current riot, I am primarily focused on what is happening factually, such as arrests being made and how our legal system handles these events. I hope to see violent protests like this brought to an end through the proper use of our laws. So far, it seems to me that Trump used his legal authority to try to quell the riot by deploying the National Guard and the military. I also see that Bondi is making every effort to arrest those who committed violent acts during the riot, including the recent arrest of a union official. And yes, this union official has been charged and will have his day in court.
I hope to see American values restored and for these kinds of riots to be neither encouraged nor tolerated. Protesting is perfectly acceptable, but what we are witnessing is pure, unabated lawbreaking, and it disgusts me. It makes me ashamed that some in our society promote and support such behavior.
What I see is democracy being ignored, with illogical people disrespecting it. Trump won through democracy, and his agenda won by majority vote. We the people spoke. All Americans need to respect the voice of the majority and refrain from violence simply because their voices were quieted until the next election.
Fetterman calls out 'anarchy' in LA, noting that Dems forfeit 'moral high ground' by failing to decry violence
The maverick Democrat's post on X earned significant attention
Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., spoke out against the "anarchy and true chaos" in Los Angeles, declaring that Democrats forfeit "moral high ground" if they do not decry the violence.
"I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations, and immigration—but this is not that. This is anarchy and true chaos. My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement," Fetterman declared in a post on X.I could list statement after statement of people, with democratic affiliation, condemning violence though? No one supports protest that turns violent...
That is not what I have witnessed over the past days. I could quote a few that have openly called for push back, and many that denied a riot even took place. I am not here to do others' research. It is redundant, and it is clear some here won't or can't, for reasons unknown, see what facts regarding what has taken place over the past few days in LA. And yes, there have been some Democrats, as noted by Fetterman, who have called a spade a spade. That does not negate the ones that have not, and are, in my view, adding to a form of propaganda.
Why then does the democrat leadership in California support and encourage such violent riots?
The democrats OWN this riot. It is on THEIR leadership.They do own it, and the people of Cal will pay for it. Oh forgot they run a huge deficit
As of June 2025, California is confronting a significant budget deficit. Governor Gavin Newsom announced a $12 billion shortfall for the 2025–26 fiscal year, attributing it to factors such as escalating health care costs, particularly within the Medi-Cal program,
This budgetary strain follows a previous $68 billion deficit reported for the 2024–25 fiscal year, primarily due to a severe revenue decline in 2022–23. The state's reliance on capital gains taxes, which are sensitive to market fluctuations, has been a contributing factor to these recurring deficits.
YIKES! Maybe migrants flock to Cal because of the great support---
Medi-Cal Expansion for Undocumented Immigrants
Annual Cost: Approximately $8.5 billion from the state general fund.
calmatters.org
Budget Shortfall: The Department of Health Care Services reported a $2.7 billion shortfall due to higher-than-expected enrollment and increased prescription drug costs.
calmatters.orgPlease give examples where leadership has encouraged violence... This is absolutely an outrageous statement
If the ICE raids targeting Los Angeles are necessary, why aren't they also necessary in the red states one would assume Trump is more inclined to protect?
The assertion that ICE raids are exclusively targeting areas like Los Angeles while sparing "red states" is misleading and overlooks the comprehensive nature of ICE operations across the United States. In the first 50 days of the Trump administration, ICE conducted 32,809 enforcement arrests, surpassing the total number of at-large arrests made in the entire fiscal year 2024 under the previous administration.
dhs.gov
In May 2025 alone, ICE detained 28,797 individuals, with 23,564 arrests attributed to ICE and 5,233 to Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The states with the highest number of detainees during Fiscal Year 2025 include Texas (12,511), Louisiana (7,263), California (3,184), Georgia (2,749), and Arizona (2,468).
Notably, Georgia has emerged as a significant focal point for immigration enforcement. An Axios analysis indicates that Georgia, along with Texas and Florida, has been particularly active in immigration enforcement, with local law enforcement agencies in these states entering into numerous 287(g) agreements with ICE. Despite Georgia's prohibition of sanctuary cities since 2009, cities with Democratic leadership, such as Atlanta, have experienced heightened enforcement activity.
axios.com
These statistics underscore that ICE's enforcement actions are not confined to Democratic-run areas but are distributed across various states, including those with Republican leadership. The agency's operations are driven by enforcement priorities, available resources, and local cooperation, rather than political affiliations. Therefore, the claim that ICE selectively targets Democratic-run areas while neglecting red states is not substantiated by recent arrest data and enforcement practices.They are literally all happening in democrat-run cities...
How unfortunate—that should say something. More migrants have settled in your blue cities, where they are generally welcomed and treated better, in my opinion. Why would they choose to settle in places where they’re not welcome, like red states that voted for Trump and support deportation? Honestly, I’m not sure why you’re even bringing this up. Trump won largely on his immigration policies, and many Americans want migrants deported. What part of that don’t you understand? So yes, it makes sense that migrants would naturally head to blue states. I fully expect ICE to do their job and go wherever necessary to identify and deport migrants who are legally subject to removal.
Surely there are plenty of illegal folks on farms across this country? In meat packing plans and all the rural corners? No raids though...no arrests in red districts.
So?
democrat run cities are where criminal illegal aliens are living.
Makes sense.Really? Why isn't the guard in Mike Johnson's crime ridden district? Come on
Tell me all about the riots happening in Mike Johnson's district.
See, there is a difference between crime and massive civil unrest that results in the destruction of property and harming of people.
You REALLY need to look into this a bit more.
This is just ONE of the many stories of illegal aliens being deported from a Texas city.
Notice, no riots occurred.
"ICE Houston arrests 422 illegal aliens, deports 528 during week-long operation aimed at bolstering public safety
HOUSTON - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested 422 illegal aliens, including 296 criminal aliens, and deported 528 aliens during a seven-day operation from May 4 – May 10 focused on bolstering public safety in the Houston area.
The operation also prioritized removing aliens from the U.S. who have exhausted due process and been ordered removed from the country. To expedite the removal of these aliens, ICE Houston leveraged an initiative established under the current administration to funnel aliens to designated hubs on the southern border where they are quickly processed and removed to their country of origin within 24-72 hours of their arrest."
https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/ice-h … tion-aimedAgain, you're bringing up Houston which is a democratic area.. where are the raids in the deeply red districts that have just as many, if not more illegal folks?
Do you have any evidence (or even fake CNN numbers) that show any "deeply red districts that have just as many, if not more illegal folks"?
If the ICE raids targeting Los Angeles are necessary, why aren't they also necessary in the red states one would assume Trump is more inclined to protect?
Why are ICE agents not searching for undocumented workers on farms in Nebraska or in meat-packing plants in Indiana? Why are anti-ICE protests in red states not being met with equal federal force?
Why go to one of the bluest cities in one of the bluest states? Why doesn’t Trump simply let those Democrats deal with the alleged “migrant crime” and focus on the “real Americans” he claims to care about?No National Guard called for thousands on Jan. 6 attacking Capitol & police. All of them pardoned. But for Los Angeles, California, to protect law enforcement?? A farce.
The U.S. Capitol was under siege on January 6, no National Guard.
Now a protest unfolds in Los Angeles, and troops are sent in by presidential order, overriding the governor.
Same president. Different response.
Ask why.Some have been polite enough to respond to your view on this issue. I have left several comments addressing your comparisons between Jan 6th and the LA Summer of Love 2025... But you're now clearly trying to divert the issue at hand.
Well I believe that part of the issue is that hand is that there seem to be different criteria as far as when the guard is called in. Why in Los Angeles but not on j6? Shouldn't there be consistent criteria?
LA Mayor Karen Bass is the epidemy of a stupid leader.
Where do democrats come up with these people?
This is what she says about the riots.
"I just have to say that if you dial back time and go to Friday, if immigration raids had not happened here, we would not have the disorder that went on last night," Bass told CNN’s "Situation Room" co-host Pamela Brown. "I will tell you that it is peaceful now, but we do not know where and when the next raids will be."
Someone needs to let this stupid mayor that LA does not get to determine federal immigration policy or enforcement. That is the responsibility of the federal government. If this upright walking moron of a mayor had a clue she would work with ICE to deport the many dangerous criminals ICE has been removing from communities.
LA is NOT it's own country. It is part of the United States.
I say the immigration raids in LA should be tripled."President Donald Trump warned Tuesday that protestors at his upcoming military parade in Washington, D.C., will be met with "heavy force."
"And if there's any protester that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force," Trump said, before repeating that threat twice."
Wow.... I'm speechless
Straight out of a dictator's playbook.
The parade has drawn strong criticism from lawmakers in Congress, including some Republicans who question the event's high price tag and optics.
The parade could cost up to $45 million, according to an Army spokesperson.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said Tuesday that he is concerned about the message that the parade could send, NBC News reports.
"I wouldn't have done it," Paul said. "I'm not sure what the actual expense of it is, but ... we were always different than, you know, the images you saw in the Soviet Union and North Korea," Paul said.
"We were proud not to be that," he continued.".... Not anymore Rand, not anymoreAn interesting take by O'Reilly:
LA Protest Chaos: National Guard vs. The Radical Left
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLJ1A5O … KSURDK3YqgThere is a good argument for the LA riots to be labeled as an insurrection.
"insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt."
President Donald Trump will be well within his authority to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807.
The destruction of property, looting, and attacks on ICE agents cannot be tolerated."The destruction of property, looting, and attacks on ICE agents cannot be tolerated.
But the destruction of the capitol and attacks on Capitol police were ok? If this was an insurrection so was j6...
"insurrection, an organized and usually violent act of revolt or rebellion against an established government or governing authority of a nation-state or other political entity by a group of its citizens or subjects; also, any act of engaging in such a revolt."
J6 fits.Well then, I guess the George Floyd riots qualified as well since there was billions of dollars worth of damage.
So does j6, right? That was an insurrection and Trump pardoned insurrectionists who destroyed property and beat police...
"Los Angeles police swiftly enforced a downtown curfew Tuesday night, making arrests moments after it took effect, while deploying officers on horseback and using crowd control projectiles to break up a group of hundreds demonstrating against President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown.
Members of the National Guard stood watch behind plastic shields, but did not appear to participate in the arrests."
The guard and the Marines do not need to be there...
https://apnews.com/article/los-angeles- … 7c92ea6147By the numbers: 47% of U.S. adults disapprove of of deploying the Marines to LA, with 34% approval.
45% disapprove the National Guard deployment, while 38% said they approve.
https://www.axios.com/2025/06/10/los-an … ove-yougovHo hum,
The battle of the polls.
Here is one from yesterday showing 52% approve of President Donald Trump activating the National Guard.
FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—New polling reveals that more than half of U.S. voters support President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy the National Guard to Los Angeles.
RMG Research polling conducted among 1,000 registered voters on Monday found that 52% of respondents either “strongly” or “somewhat” approve of Trump’s decision to send National Guard troops to LA in the face of fiery street protests.
"While 42% of American voters don’t approve of the president’s action, 7% are “not sure” what they think about the use of the troops in the California city. "
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/367 … 0text%5B/b
trump lying....
“He’s doing a bad job, causing a lot of death, a lot of potential death, if we didn’t send out the National Guard, and last time we gave him a little additional help, you would have Los Angeles burning right now,”
Trump said of Newsom....no one has died."Political pundits shocked as migrant support for Trump surges"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFLPKHq8IdoThere is a widepsread and ongoing propaganda campaign by the White House to claim that everyone they're arresting are some kind of dangerous criminals.
In reality, the Trump admin is engaged in a large operation to juice arrests of people with NO criminal record... to hit quotas.
So?
If they're here illegally, they've broken the law and need to go.
If they've are convicted criminals, they REALLY need to go.
It's just that simple.
The majority of Americans support President Donald Trump's immigration policy. Even the majority of legal immigrants overwhelmingly support President Donald Trump's immigration policy.Yes, ICE has recently announced a major policy shift that expands its enforcement efforts to include anyone found to be in the U.S. illegally, not just those with serious criminal records. Under this directive, agents are now authorized to arrest undocumented immigrants regardless of whether they have a criminal history. Daily arrest targets have reportedly tripled, with ICE instructed to aim for up to 3,000 arrests per day. This approach includes broader enforcement tactics, such as arrests at workplaces like Home Depot lots, courthouses, homes, and other public spaces where agents encounter individuals lacking legal status.
Quinnipiac poll today...
On immigration — Trump’s approval rating dropped five points from April, to 43 percent...
immigration issues: 43 percent approve, 54 percent disapprove, with 3 percent not offering an opinion;
deportations: 40 percent approve, 56 percent disapprove, with 4 percent not offering an opinion;
Looks like people will be exercising their right to assemble this weekend... No matter what Trump says...
This got no attention.. go figure. Not what a lot of people want to see or hear...
https://x.com/jacobsoboroff/status/1932608693130178604And what on God's green earth did these folks think they were doing at the "insurrection"
https://x.com/askDinaDoll/status/1932332390669779232That’s why I love LA, diverse members of the human family there to support one another.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcADqxnQA_4If only they would support the law as well...
Right. If you don't like the law, ignore it. It doesn't apply to you (at least if you're a liberal).
I have a president that skirts the law all of the time, so what do we make of that?
I don't think I have ever seen a president use the laws better. Nor have I seen one more scrutinized by the law. Got an example?
I am working on getting you more than one, rest assured.
Hey, one is enough. I have no disrespect for your comment. Just wondering where you're coming from.
Be glad to explain:
The president cannot use the Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport people
The president cannot legally run for a third term
The president cannot legally punish law firms for their legal activities
The president cannot legally punish his political opponents
The president cannot legally punish private companies and public organizations for diversity programs
Conclusion
So far, the Supreme Court has made it difficult for the lower courts to enforce their orders against President Trump’s apparent overreach. Five justices have largely permitted the administration to move forward with seemingly illegal or unconstitutional actions by overturning temporary restraining orders on technical or procedural bases but have not spoken on the merits of any of the appealed cases. In doing so, the Roberts court may be staving off a direct confrontation between the judiciary and President Trump. However, judicial appeasement like this will only serve to provide a longer runway for President Trump and his administration to engage in activities that may later be deemed illegal and unconstitutional while harming Americans—and America—in the process. The courts should not shy away from this fight. The lower court judges who are on the front lines understand this. It is time for Chief Justice John Roberts and his colleagues to publicly recognize what is being done to the republic and take a stand for the rule of law.
I don’t like a situation where those in power do not play by the rules, and I will always resist such as attitude as I can’t trust them to stay within the “guardrails”. From trump, this situation has been exacerbated and unprecedented.
Here is the link to the article to fill in the blanks.
https://www.americanprogress.org/articl … wer-grabs/"The president cannot use the Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport people"
Thus far, he can use it with a reminder that all migrants must have due process.
"The president cannot use the Alien Enemies Act to summarily deport people"
He can not run or has he claimed he would try to run for a third term. Just a fact
"The president cannot legally punish law firms for their legal activities"
You offer no example, and I haven't found one.
"The president cannot legally punish his political opponents"
No example of this ever happening. Who and how has he punished an opponent?
I think the courts are handling anything that comes before them.Thus far, he can use it with a reminder that all migrants must have due process.
Trump knew or should have known this in the first place. He always seeks forgiveness instead of ask permission. I don’t like that about him.
The article clearly states that he would attempt a run for a third term:
President Trump has flirted openly with running for a third term, stating that there are “methods” for doing so. He has even released “Trump 2028” merchandise.
Here is an example of punishing legal firms also in the article, the situation with Perkins-C
These EOs appear to be unconstitutional and in violation of multiple sections of the Bill of Rights. Indeed, a federal judge just ruled that President Trump’s EO targeting the law firm Perkins Coie was “Using the powers of the federal government to target lawyers for their representation of clients and avowed progressive employment policies in an overt attempt to suppress and punish certain viewpoints … contrary to the Constitution.” That court found that the EO violated the First Amendment through retaliation and viewpoint discrimination.
Need more? I don’t, this is good enough for me…
Executive Order 14230, "Addressing Risks From Perkins Coie LLP," outlined several actions against the firm. These actions included suspending security clearances for individuals at the firm, terminating government contracts with the firm, requiring government contractors to disclose affiliations with the firm, reviewing the firm's policies, limiting access to federal buildings for employees, and barring firm members from government employment.
(What risks?)
In the Perkins Coie v. U.S. Department of Justice case, a federal judge ruled that President Trump's executive order targeting the law firm was unconstitutional. Judge Beryl Howell permanently blocked the government from enforcing the order, finding it violated Perkins Coie's First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment rights. The ruling, issued on May 2, 2025, marked the first time a federal judge permanently blocked the Trump administration from enforcing an order to punish law firms he opposes politically.
Key Points:
Unconstitutionality:
The judge found the executive order to be unconstitutional, violating Perkins Coie's rights to free speech, due process, and the right to choose counsel.
Retaliation:
The order was deemed a form of retaliation for the firm's representation of clients in political campaigns and litigation that Trump disapproved of.
Foundational Principles:
The judge argued that the order presented an unprecedented attack on foundational principles of the American judicial system, including the independence of lawyers.
Permanent Injunction:
The court permanently enjoined the government from enforcing the order, effectively striking it down.
I will address the political opponents issue on the next round.First, it’s true that all migrants, including Kilmar Abrego Garcia, are entitled to due process under U.S. law. This is a constitutional guarantee and applies regardless of the administration in charge. The controversy here largely stems from a mistaken deportation, which the Trump administration has acknowledged and is now trying to rectify by bringing Garcia back and pursuing charges. The principle of due process is foundational and has been consistently upheld by courts, including the Supreme Court’s involvement in this case.
Regarding the statement that “Trump knew or should have known this in the first place,” this is conjecture unless backed by specific evidence or documents showing intent or knowledge. While it is well documented that Trump has a management style described as “ask forgiveness, not permission,” attributing specific legal knowledge or intent without proof is speculative. If you have sources showing Trump’s direct awareness or willful neglect in this particular deportation case, please share them.
On the claim about Trump flirting with a third term and releasing “Trump 2028” merchandise, this is accurate. Trump has publicly hinted at exploring legal avenues to run for more than two terms and merchandise with “Trump 2028” has been circulating. However, the U.S. Constitution limits presidents to two terms, and any attempt to circumvent this would face significant legal and constitutional challenges. This is a political matter, and discussions about “methods” remain speculative without formal proposals or court rulings.
The section about punishing legal firms, specifically Perkins Coie, refers to a real case. President Trump issued Executive Order 14230 targeting Perkins Coie, which included measures like suspending security clearances, terminating government contracts, and restricting access to federal facilities for firm members. A federal judge, Beryl Howell, indeed ruled on May 2, 2025, that the executive order was unconstitutional, violating the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments. The ruling found the order to be retaliatory and a violation of free speech and due process rights, issuing a permanent injunction against enforcement.
This ruling underscores important constitutional protections for legal representation and political expression. The judge’s decision was based on clear legal grounds, not conjecture, emphasizing the independence of the legal profession and safeguarding against viewpoint discrimination by the government.
Thank you for adding a factual case.Well, that management style does not work in Government and is seen as provocative and arrogant, this is not Trump, Inc. and I do not like his approach to these things. I am speaking of the kind of legal knowledge that we learn in middle school. Who are we trying to fool to think that Trump and the vast arrays of advisors did not know better? He was both brazen and presumptious I can’t get into the mans deranged mind, but we all know that 2 and 2 is not 5, it is not a difficult question to ponder or resolve.
Sharlee, we all know that regarding a third term, the Constitutions guidelines are both clear and explicit, what is there not to know? There is no room for exploratory anything. This is not just about politics, it is about one man’s attempt to defy the law. Why would he even discuss such a thing in the first place?They said the same thing about funding the wall. Trump has, over and over, found legal ways to get what he wants - that you find them illegal means nothing at all.
Let him explore all he wants. Let him build a wondrous base of people wanting him to have a third term. And when he is shut down hard no one will be surprised.So, you are an atheist as you once mentioned, except for your Trump who is the deity that you worship. Going against explicit Constitution provisions can only happen if Trump scraps the Constitution and at tha point this conservation will have no meaning. Meanwhile, let us just see if he can pull a rabbit out of a hat?
"I am speaking of the kind of legal knowledge that we learn in middle school."
Middle school legal knowledge?
That explains the left's interpretation of things. Maybe a little more advanced legal knowledge is required to actually be able to understand things.Naturally, I’ve seen and heard the comments about Trump mentioning a third term. Is he serious? I have no way of knowing what’s in his head. As things stand, the law clearly prevents anyone from serving more than two terms as president. Could he try to push the issue and attempt to change that? It’s possible, who knows? If anyone would test the limits, it’s Trump.
That said, I think the Democrats need to take a hard pause, reevaluate their agenda, and seriously consider whether they’re heading down the wrong path right now. I’ll also add, and this is just my view, we’re witnessing the rise of what feels like a new political movement. Trumpism has become a strong force, and there’s a very real chance it could continue to grow, attracting more Americans and eventually becoming more powerful than any political party this nation has seen in modern times.
"The president cannot legally punish his political opponents"
I don't think this is something biden or the democrats knew during biden's term as president. Their behavior speaks to this.https://www.democracydocket.com/news-al … m-actblue/
No point in spinning it, Mike, this article speaks volumes and I never saw the equivalent of such behavior from Biden’s side.Biden tried to put President Donald Trump in jail on bogus charges beginning at the end of his first term as president. It was all absolute politically motivated. Biden did that or his staff member who operated the auto pen...choose one.
I read the article and feel its much to do about nothing.
"Trump ordered Bondi to report back to him about the result of the investigation within the next 180 days."
So, he investigates this organization and is investigating other organizations.
He is working on restoring law and order.You're spot on, in my view. The idea that Biden or his administration didn’t play a role in targeting Trump just doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. From the end of Trump’s first term, we saw a steady drip of politically motivated efforts to bury him under legal accusations—none of which had any real bite until Biden’s DOJ got involved. Whether Biden personally orchestrated it or it was handled by staff (or signed off with an auto-pen, as we've seen), it’s clear the intent was to derail Trump’s 2024 run. Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith, a known partisan with a history of aggressive prosecutions, and the timing of everything, from the Mar-a-Lago raid to the campaign-season indictments, just screams political. A smear campaign, without teeth.
As for this latest article, I agree, it’s much ado about nothing. Trump asking Bondi to look into an organization and get back to him within 180 days is literally what you'd want a president to do if he suspects corruption or mismanagement. Investigating nonprofits, foreign interests, or any group operating in the shadows isn't just fair game, it’s part of restoring law and order. And let’s not forget, the Biden administration has weaponized the DOJ against school board parents, pro-life activists, and even Catholic churches. So the idea that Trump looking into something shady is some kind of scandal is just hollow outrage.
In my view, Trump’s actions show he’s still focused on accountability and pushing for actual enforcement, something that’s been sorely lacking under Biden. This is just another overblown headline trying to make a routine inquiry look sinister, while ignoring the blatant political games happening on the other side.Smith having a history of partisan prosecutions? Nah. Not when you look over his entire history... Doesn't seem to get any more bipartisan in terms of prosecution than that guy.
https://www.wral.com/story/fact-check-g … /20969672/
Biden directing Garland? No, not when Garland goes to the trouble of appointing special prosecutors... Do you think Bondi will do the same? Absolutely not. She, on the other hand, is 100% under the direction of Trump."Biden directing Garland? No, not when Garland goes to the trouble of appointing special prosecutors... Do you think Bondi will do the same? Absolutely not. She, on the other hand, is 100% under the direction of Trump." willow
Why do you feel Biden may not have had control over Garland and possibly weaponized the DOJ?
Why do you feel Bondi is under the direction of Trump?
School Board Parents and the DOJ (2021 Memo)
In October 2021, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo instructing the FBI and U.S. Attorneys to coordinate with local officials to address threats, harassment, and intimidation against school board members. This followed a letter from the National School Boards Association that likened some parent behavior at meetings to "domestic terrorism."
Garland clarified in testimony that peaceful protest was not being criminalized, but Republicans argued that the memo could chill free speech and unfairly target concerned parents.
Whistleblower reports and congressional investigations suggested that the FBI had, in some cases, used counterterrorism tools to track parents, raising concern among lawmakers.
Pro-Life Activists and the FACE Act
The Biden DOJ has actively prosecuted individuals under the FACE Act (Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances), which criminalizes obstructing access to abortion services and similar facilities.
Notable examples include the case of Mark Houck, a Catholic activist arrested at his home by a heavily armed FBI team after a sidewalk altercation near an abortion clinic. Though charged under the FACE Act, he was acquitted by a jury.
Other FACE Act prosecutions under Biden have included elderly protestors, nonviolent demonstrators, and sidewalk counselors.
Critics argue that these prosecutions are selective, noting that while dozens of pro-life activists have been charged, very few individuals have been prosecuted for vandalism, arson, or attacks on pregnancy centers and churches following the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
FBI Memo on “Radical-Traditionalist” Catholics
In 2023, an internal FBI memo from the Richmond field office surfaced, suggesting the Bureau could assess “radical-traditionalist Catholic” groups as potential domestic terrorism threats.
The memo proposed placing informants within Catholic communities to monitor possible extremist activity.
After public outcry and criticism from lawmakers, the FBI withdrew the memo, calling it an error in judgment.
The incident prompted further congressional scrutiny, with lawmakers demanding information on any surveillance or investigations involving Catholics practicing their faith in traditional ways.
Congressional Oversight and Accusations of Political Bias
The House Judiciary Committee and its Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government have launched multiple investigations into how the DOJ and FBI have handled these issues.
Lawmakers have subpoenaed documents and testimony, arguing that federal agencies are applying justice unevenly based on political or ideological leanings.
The Biden administration maintains that DOJ actions are based on legitimate law enforcement needs and not political targeting.
School Board Parents FBI memo followed reports of threats, Garland denied targeting lawful dissent
Possible chilling of free speech
Pro-Life Activists Dozens prosecuted under FACE Act, including peaceful demonstrators Disproportionate enforcement vs. abortion clinic violence
Catholic Churches FBI memo targeted "radical-traditionalist" Catholics Religious profiling, surveillance concerns
Oversight Congress investigating potential weaponization of DOJ seeking evidence of political bias"Why do you feel Biden may not have had control over Garland and possibly weaponized the DOJ?
There's never been any actual evidence of such. And when special prosecutors are appointed, I'm not sure how claims of control are legitimate.
I would think Bondi would do well to appoint special prosecutors as to avoid even the look of impropriety.
I won't spend a lot of energy relitigating the above issues but I am very familiar with the fact that National School Boards Association wrote to Biden requesting federal assistance to address a rise in threats and violence against school board members. I'm aware of this because in my very own town, one of our school board members was harassed mercilessly and his home was vandalized repeatedly.Shar,
I think that President Donald Trump knows there is NOTHING he can say or do that the left won't twist around and become enraged.
I believe it's best to say something that gets them upset because nothing you say won't keep them from getting upset.
Nothing.
TDS is a VERY real thing.
Credence, you answer your own complaint. "So far, the Supreme Court has made it difficult for the lower courts to enforce their orders against President Trump’s apparent overreach. "
YOU may find it an overreach; the courts are not agreeing with you. Very nearly all of your complaints about Trump's legality fall into this category - YOU think it illegal but the courts do not. Yes, the lower, highly liberal, courts may...but as it climbs the ladder and gets away from activist judges the verdict changes.
He is doing little to nothing that is illegal.Surely, you are not illiterate, Wilderness. You are just being defiant, my opinion is shared by millions of others and Trump will cross the line of no return and I will be waiting around the corner with truncheon at the ready. And believe me, they are not just MY complaints….. Trump is such a stubborn fool that he will goad the courts to take action against him and I hope that he crosses the line with them.
Trump is not free to do whatever he likes without being held accountable, we, from the enlightened left, will put a stop to him, rest assured. Let him sweat the upcoming midterms where a possible future as a lame duck lies before him.
My common sense tells me to focus on what Trump is actually doing in his role as president and to evaluate any legal issues based on the official charges brought against his administration in the courts. There are countless accusations floating around in the media, but I don't know any other sensible way to weed through all of them. I truly believe that if there’s solid evidence of wrongdoing by the Trump administration, it will end up in court, where it belongs.
And — I tend to focus on the bottom line: how Trump uses the courts and how often those courts have ruled in his favor. That track record speaks for itself. As for the X statement abo “ "will met with very heavy force,” it’s being twisted beyond reason. Interpreting that as a promise to start "shooting people" is not only misleading, it borders on the absurd. Isn’t it clear how exaggerated that sounds? I fully expect citizens to be able to enjoy the parade without being disrupted or intimidated by protesters. We all have rights, and that includes the right to attend a public event in peace.
"Is Trump threatening to shoot protesters????
Trump says anybody who protests the military parade on Sunday will be met with “very heavy force”
We are gonna protest the F--- out of his Military Birthday Parade — total waste of tax payer money!": Willow shared X post...What is being twisted? He did not say violent protesters would be met with heavy force, he said protests / protesters.... His words are clear as day.... Who said anything about shooting people? I linked a video of his words that was it
You posted a link without a comment. I responded to the link, copied and pasted the comment on that link, and my response was to the X post. I did not refer to what Trump said. Only the hyperbolic, mistruth that the person left on the video.
Sharlee01 wrote:
And — I tend to focus on the bottom line: how Trump uses the courts and how often those courts have ruled in his favor. That track record speaks for itself. As for the X statement about "will be met with very heavy force,” it’s being twisted beyond reason. Interpreting that as a promise to start "shooting people" is not only misleading, it borders on the absurd. Isn’t it clear how exaggerated that sounds? I fully expect citizens to be able to enjoy the parade without being disrupted or intimidated by protesters. We all have rights, and that includes the right to attend a public event in peace.
I think my context was clear."it’s being twisted beyond reason. Interpreting that as a promise to start "shooting people" is not only misleading, it borders on the absurd. Isn’t it clear how exaggerated that sounds?
I said nothing about anyone shooting anyone else... What context am I missing?
We have a president who is threatening protestersYou shared a link to a comment but didn’t include any thoughts of your own or clarify what you felt needed to be addressed, the misinformation in the comment itself, or something Trump said? It’s hard to respond when there's no context or specific point being made. I honestly can’t imagine that Trump simply using the word protesters would spark outrage, especially when we're constantly seeing people outright lie without consequence. If that’s the standard for controversy now, it says more about the double standard in political discourse than anything else.
Oh well. I think this is clear food for thought. I addressed an outright lie and slander, yet your main concern seemed to be that Trump may have left out the word violent. That’s what disturbed you? It’s hard to take that as a balanced critique when the focus is on a missing adjective rather than the blatant falsehoods being pushed by others.""Trump may have left out the word violent. That’s what disturbed you?
Trump clearly said that protests will be met with extreme force. I'm not looking for missing words in his speech. I believe he said what he meant and do not think it's appropriate for others to interpret what he said. Are you saying that he just left out the word violent? That would be your interpretation... Clearly not what he said. I think he's reiterated those exact thoughts several times already.
What lie or slander did you address? I am really lost hereI addressed the person's link you shared on X ---
Morgan J. Freeman
@mjfree
Is Trump threatening to shoot protesters????
Trump says anybody who protests the military parade on Sunday will be met with “very heavy force”
We are gonna protest the F K out of his Military Birthday Parade —
Here is the link you posted
https://x.com/mjfree/status/1932547850459582836
As a conservative and Trump supporter, I support law and order and believe that violent protests should be met with strong enforcement, but I also believe in the Constitution. When President Trump said protesters would be “met with very big force,” I took that to mean violent agitators, not peaceful Americans exercising their First Amendment rights. Still, I think the wording could’ve been clearer. We can and should stand for both public safety and free expression, even when it challenges us. Hopefully, there is no violence at the parade, and we won’t have to test what Trump may have meant.The link was posted purely to provide a video of trump and his statement.. not for the commentary of some random person on x. Does Trump not understand that the right to assemble is in our constitution?
Next time you share a link to someone’s X comment, try pointing out what you’re hoping to highlight. I assumed you were sharing Morgan Freeman’s perspective, since he took the time to post his comment along with the Trump clip, his words, and his view
Anyway, I’ve shared my thoughts on both Morgan’s and Trump’s words. I don’t have anything more to add on the subject.Gotcha, I can see the confusion and will be more mindful of having more specificity. I do realize that everything doesn't translate as we intend. I do find the video clips on x to be convenient many times.
“I addressed an outright lie and slander, yet your main concern seemed to be that Trump may have left out the word violent.”
With Trump, it is a good possibility that he intended to leave”violent” out, have we considered that? Why assume that it is an oversight? the President of the US needs to pay better attention to the things he says.It’s entirely possible he left that word out on purpose—to stir things up, just like we’re seeing now. Some people latch onto the statement and get really upset. He has a way of constantly tweaking the other side, almost like he’s saying, “Look at them them-they’re always losing their minds over something.” He uses social media as a tool, and honestly, he’s pretty effective at it.
Think about it—he might be counting on most people to interpret his words with a bit of common sense, assuming he meant one thing and not another. At the same time, he probably knows that his critics will twist his words or add meaning that wasn’t there, like that guy claiming Trump said he’d shoot people. That, to me, sounded downright silly. And I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump actually leans into that kind of overreaction, using it to highlight how ridiculous his opponents can be.That would be quite a childish tactic for a president wouldn't it? But again, he has had every opportunity to correct his mistake or absent-mindedness... He can turn the microphone on at any second and he has chosen not to.
I call it politics, and it’s clear we’ve entered a new era in how it’s played. In my view, Trump just does it better than the Democrats. I honestly think he uses the old Muhammad Ali ploy—“rope-a-dope.” He lets his opponents wear themselves out swinging wild, then capitalizes when they overreach or embarrass themselves. Take, for instance, what happened yesterday at Governor Noem’s press conference. The senator’s stunt seemed designed to grab media attention, but it backfired. On social media, people called it a ploy and even made jokes about not recognizing him as a senator, just as Noem didn’t. That’s exactly the kind of misstep Trump tends to avoid; he knows how to read the room and control the narrative. Hey, in my view, Trump is a master at using the media and social media.
Trump’s approach comes off as casual and unscripted. In contrast, the Democrats, at least in my view, tend to look staged and overly scripted. Their media tactics often feel rehearsed, complete with forced gestures and awkwardly executed skits that seem more theatrical than authentic.
Sharlee, why would the President of the United States want to stir things up? Is this a positive example that he is setting? This is just another one of the several reasons why I dislike him. Words carry a lot of weight particularly from the President, he should not be “gaming” people as some sort of sport. It is not professional nor Presidential in my opinion. With the way he behaves, there is no reason not to believe that the omission was not the threat that he fully intended to convey.
"As for the X statement about "will be met with very heavy force,” it’s being twisted beyond reason."
Are you forgetting that "Go peacefully and talk to your legislator" was made into "Go and kill Pence, along with all others working on the election"?Dan, it's hard for me to understand how the media, and yes, some on social media, can take someone's words, twist them around, and present something that reads entirely differently. In the case of this Morgan fellow, he implied that Trump was threatening to shoot protesters. He tweeted:
"Is Trump threatening to shoot protesters????
Trump says anybody who protests the military parade on Sunday will be met with 'very heavy force'
We are gonna protest the F**K out of his Military Birthday Parade —"
This kind of misinformation spreads fast and takes on a life of its own. Now, I’ll admit Trump sometimes struggles with clarity and context, something that’s honestly not uncommon for presidents when they're answering questions off the cuff.
In my view, his statement sounded more like a warning to anyone planning to commit violence or break the law at the event, not to peaceful protesters. Maybe I’m reading into it a bit, but over the years, I’ve developed a sense of how he tends to express himself, often bluntly, sometimes carelessly, but not always with the sinister intent others try to pin on him.Trump said what he said. I don't think there's any interpretation... 'any' protesters at military parade will be 'met with heavy force'.
I'm pretty sure that means that any protest will be met with heavy force.... Are folks really saying he's at absent-minded to omit the word violent? As if he doesn't have enough people around him to remind him? Nah. He said what he meant.
And, if he absent-mindedly omitted the word violent... He certainly has had plenty of opportunity to correct his statement and he has not. He has a megaphone available to him every second of the day.
If "protestors" are violating the law, do you feel they should be left alone, asked to "pretty please stop illegal activity" or forced to stop against their will when they refuse to stop?
Which scenario fits YOUR view of what is reasonable and right?
I am still trying to figure out what Cred meant.... Yikes
That's what I got from it: if they don't like the law, riot or in some other way violate it. ONLY laws they like are to be followed.
Yeah, scary.
wilderness wrote:
If only they would support the law as well...
Cred --- They do when the law supports them…..
So they only support the laws that support their thought process?
YES! that's the spirit of LA. Got to love Randy Newman. Shame on the media for not capturing the complete picture of the protests. Shame on them for feeding partisan hate for ratings.
They did what?
https://x.com/Reuters/status/1932621094189740515
Related Discussions
- 84
Why are Men Leaving the Democrat Party?
by Readmikenow 2 days ago
Democrats set out to study young menA widely mocked project to get under the hood about why Democrats are losing young men has sobering results.The Democrats trying to understand young American men know people are roasting their plan.All that mocking just proves their point, they said: Democrats...
- 85
Why is Antisemitism so Prevalent in the Democrat Party?
by Readmikenow 16 months ago
Cheering terrorism: Democrats must deal with their far-left antisemitism problemIf we’re ever going to obtain peace in the Middle East, we’re going to have to confront the reality of rabid antisemitism, not only in the Muslim world, but also in the the Democratic Party and in the news and cultural...
- 8
A Party Unraveled: How the Modern Left Has Imploded
by Sharlee 2 weeks ago
Today's Democratic Party appears to be a shell of what it once was, a party that claimed to champion the working class, support American families, and value freedom of thought. Today, it's becoming increasingly difficult to recognize those foundational principles in its platform. What we’re seeing...
- 46
Armed and Ready to Overthrow the Government if Trump Loses in 2024
by Faye V 3 years ago
Are they serious? I don't know whether I should take this as a sensationalism or something to pay attention to? I usually expect better from Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/2021/12/31/mil … 60953.html
- 17
The Right, Conservatives, Republicans prefer Autocracy over Democracy?
by Credence2 3 weeks ago
I find this topic most disturbing as it is a reflection of the goals and aspirations of the American Right wing movement. There is no such thing as it being "fringe" as Trump, Carlson and many Republican Senators avoided direct answers or said that the Orbanz authoritarian regime in...
- 43
The Great American Divide: Gratitude vs. Bitterness
by Sharlee 9 days ago
There was once a time, not so long ago, when Americans disagreed over policy but shared a common love for country. That time has passed. Today, it feels as though we are not simply two parties or political factions, we are two different nations coexisting uneasily within the same borders. The...