The end of freedom of assembly

[_ajax18]

For those who aren't aware, Moveon.org effectively stopped the Trump campaign from holding their rally this evening. Of course the mainstream media is trying to spin this as Trump's fault for having the courage to take on unpopular issues like illegal immigration and radical Islamic terrorism. There's a blatant double standard in this. You'll never see the media ask Bernie Sanders to call off his dogs at Moveon.org or condemn the violence they tried to instigate tonight.

We live in an uncivil society where political enemies don't respect the law anymore. It carries over onto this board as well. Most of us post anonymously because of the real life consequences of someone in power knowing your politics. It's a lot easier to go through life as a leftist. Being a conservative is not very popular and the laws are tilted against us in an obvious double standard. But for those unwilling to fight and bear the battle, you will continue to see your rights eroded away just as they were stripped from every Trump supporter tonight. Will the American people ever stand up and assert their Constitutional rights again? They sure didn't tonight.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism ... vewire-10/

[_EAllusion]

For those who aren't aware, Moveon.org effectively stopped the Trump campaign from holding their rally this evening. Of course the mainstream media is trying to spin this as Trump's fault for having the courage to take on unpopular issues like illegal immigration and radical Islamic terrorism.

By advocating war crimes, unconstitutional religious discrimination, and nurturing a culture of dehumanizing violence and authoritarianism that is routinely manifesting itself among his supporters and staff? Yeah, why would anyone protest that? I mean, when has that ever gone wrong?

Here's the media pinning this on Trump:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/11/politics/ ... -protests/

Notice what is talked about his how Trump actively encourages his audiences to engage in violence against protesters while simultaneously pandering to and drumming up bigotry.

Trump flat lies in response to this, claiming he's only advocated violence against protesters were were being violent. Of course, Trump's shtick is based on brazenly lying and never backing down.

There's a blatant double standard in this. You'll never see the media ask Bernie Sanders to call off his dogs at Moveon.org or condemn the violence they tried to instigate tonight.

Probably because they didn't try to instigate violence by organizing a protest or being a preferred candidate of people participating in that protest? You are aware and have cheered on Trump for implying that he wants to see violence from his supporters against dissidents, then watched on as it happened. Then you have the chutzpah to accuse Bernie Sanders of trying to instigate violence in a situation like this?

t's a lot easier to go through life as a leftist. Being a conservative is not very popular and the laws are tilted against us in an obvious double standard.

You being a half-step removed from being a neo-Nazi (not hyperbole) is an insult to the term "conservative" and doesn't make anyone who condemns you for it a leftist. This is quite the pity-party for a white supremacist not being well-liked by others.

We live in an uncivil society where political enemies don't respect the law anymore.

This lament would make more sense if it wasn't in defense of a figure whose persona is based on being crass and is advocating widespread use of torture. Protesters overwhelm a rally and all of a sudden you're a genteel Southerner getting the vapors all this uncivil behavior. Can't the black folk let Trump talk about torturing people with those who are receptive to that message in peace? What happened to manners?

[_Some Schmo]

There are only two possibilities for you, ajax:

- moron
- troll

This last post has both.

Self pity for persecution because you can't openly be a bigot... you're a moron troll.

[_ajax18]

Like I said, the protesters usurped the right to freedom of assembly. Don't tell me we live in a country governed by the Constitution.

I don't need your sympathy. Just remember this incident now that we've set the precedent.

I was a little disappointed in Trump's response. We don't want a peacemaker. We want someone who is going to lead the struggle to get back the rights we've lost to these people.

[_Some Schmo]

We don't want a peacemaker.

No, you don't want a peacemaker. Sane people do.

You're the kind of person that gives Americans the reputation that we're complete assholes.

[_canpakes]

We want someone who is going to lead the struggle to get back the rights we've lost to these people.

Which rights, to which people? You need to to be much more specific than to point to one instance of dueling assemblies, especially given that Trump has led dozens of raucous assemblies to date, wherein dissenters were physically and sometimes violently removed from the premises.

That being the case, why did you wait until this particular event to complain?

[_Some Schmo]

It's incredibly ignorant/dishonest to blame protesters for the violence at Trump Drumpf rallies when it's been clear event after event that Trump Drumpf supporters are the aggressors, with Trump Drumpf himself encouraging the behavior.

Seriously, it must be brain damage due to the lack of oxygen from having your head up your ass so long.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Are Drumpf supporters showing up at Bernie or HC rallies and shouting down the candidates?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

We want someone who is going to lead the struggle to get back the rights we've lost to these people.

Which rights, to which people? You need to to be much more specific than to point to one instance of dueling assemblies, especially given that Trump has led dozens of raucous assemblies to date, wherein dissenters were physically and sometimes violently removed from the premises.

That being the case, why did you wait until this particular event to complain?

What's driving this is confusion over what the right to assembly is. It's the right of people to come together, either physically or through correspondence, to collectively promote, pursue, or defend their ideas. The right is a freedom from government interference when pursuing this end.

There are restrictions on freedom of assembly driven by practical concerns involving time, manner, and place. In theory, those restrictions are simply meant to prevent people using assembly to interfere with the freedoms of others. Under certain circumstances, the government can limit where, when, and how people assemble. For example, it is reasonable for the government to not allow me and a 100,000 of my friends to stage a year long naked sit-in on the Senate floor.

What happened at the Trump rally doesn't really have anything to do with this. The government didn't shut down a public gathering to stop people from gathering to promote their ideas. If it was a public gathering, the protesters would have just as much right to assemble as the Trump supporters. What happened is that a rally was set up as a quasi-public event that actually is officially private. That's the only reason protesters can even be picked out and removed. Because it is hypothetically open to the public and relies on government resources to manage logistics, it seems otherwise. It is a gray area. If the protesters did anything wrong, it was in crashing a private event they weren't welcome to. That's sketchy given the public/private boundaries at work here, but the government isn't driving this. The protesters aren't the government violating the Constitution.

So, Ajax might say, this violates the principle of freedom of assembly if not the legal version of it. His mispoke when he tried to invoke the Constitution. We as private citizens should let people peaceably exchange ideas where they please so long as it doesn't interfere with the rights of others. That's a good idea. But if that's the case, the same principle applies to protesters. No one's assembly is any more important than any others'. The hostile atmosphere that made Trump organizers want to shut down the rally was very much a two-way street and, in this case, started by Trump's rhetoric.

Finally, Ajax talks about Trump being too much of a peacemaker and wanting to fight back more. But Trump has used extremely harsh language in reference to protesters. His "peacemaking" is pretty much just distancing himself from violence and walking back any encouraging of it he may have done. What Ajax is really saying is he'd like to see more "fighting back" in the form of violence. Perhaps, like this platonic example of a Trump rally attendant, he would like to start seeing dissidents killed. Because freedom.

[_ajax18]

We Warned You: Chicago Trump Shutdown Is Just the Beginning

For the astute readers of Breitbart News, last night’s battle in Chicago may come as a shock, but it should come as no surprise.

No other news organization has documented the rise and origins of the groups behind Friday night’s madhouse as thoroughly as the team at Breitbart News. From its origins being exposed in the film Occupy Unmasked before the election cycle to covering and exposing every aspect of the new Black Lives Matter incarnation, we’ve given readers the intellectual ammunition to understand the dangerous rise of the new American left in the Obama era.

Just this week, we published two 2,500 word exposés that laid bare not just the history of deception and media collusion that made last night’s rout of Donald Trump’s rally in the Windy City possible, but we also examined the 50 years of progressive hatred that caused such an outpouring of bile on social media after the death of former first lady Nancy Reagan.

We believe that those who don’t know history are condemned to repeat it, and as we pointed out in January in a definitive piece, we both illuminated the past and predicted the future.:

Should either Cruz or Trump be the nominee, expect Black Lives Matter’s army to take to the streets and try to shut them down at every opportunity.

For that reason, the current political season is set to be even more divisive than either of the last two election cycles, which had already set a very high bar for vitriol.

We also pointed out that Donald Trump would be the main focus of this ire, but that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) or any other GOP nominee would be next on the radicals’ hit list.

This is one of the reasons that Donald Trump, more than any other political candidate on the scene right now, has incurred so much of the wrath and anger of Black Lives Matter. They are keenly aware that he simply will not play their game. The other current frontrunner for the Republican nomination is Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who has already demonstrated that he is no cupcake either.

Unfortunately, last night showed weakness on the part of both GOP frontrunners, as Trump showed that he could be out-gamed and Ted Cruz went full cupcake.

This is not a game that’s going to be won by either brute force or blame-the-victim capitulation. The enemy here is the organized institutional left, and every single GOP candidate and surrogate needs to start educating the voters on who they are.

This is going to get worse. As I predicted in January:


As the newest incarnation of the activist Left, Black Lives Matter will not back down or rest until it is either stopped by someone gutsy enough to call them out or until it gets what it wants: a bloody revolution leading to a socialist/anarchist America.

The one thing the left has not counted on, however, is a dogged, active conservative media culture that can bring real information straight to the American people without being filtered by Black Lives Matter’s journalism school comrades. We’re not about to let Black Lives Matter or any leftist revolutionary movement destroy America without making sure they’re fully revealed for what they are.

There’s a battle for the soul of our nation. Our founder Andrew Breitbart made that clear through his work. The team here at Breitbart is in the trenches every day, bringing you the truth that the mainstream media simply will not. That’s our #WAR, and we have no plans to surrender.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-president ... beginning/


At least Breitbart is not backing down.