Tag: violence

Pelosi: Democrats “Won’t Be Responsible” For Years Of Violent Rhetoric Against Trump

For the past decade, Democrats at the highest levels have screamed that President Trump – and every single person they disagree with – is a “fascist,” “racist,” or “Nazi.”

The conditioning is clear and deeply alarming. Fueled by woke indoctrination in schools, 24/7 propaganda from globalist corporate media, Hollywood, NGOs, and the nonstop toxic rhetoric from much of the Democratic Party, this revolutionary drumbeat of inciting violence eventually culminated in the political assassination of Charlie Kirk. 

Democrats have become the party of chaos, and their far-left, billionaire-funded NGO networks serve as the revolutionary arm the Trump administration is preparing to confront (read here). 

Keep reading

Leftist Physically Assaults, Threatens to Kill South Dakota Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Over His Support For Charlie Kirk

More left-wing political violence.

Pro-Trump South Dakota Republican gubernatorial candidate and Aberdeen businessman, Toby Doeden, was physically assaulted and threatened on Saturday evening over his support for Charlie Kirk.

Toby Doeden expressed his support for Charlie Kirk this week after a gunman assassinated the TPUSA founder.

And he was attacked for supporting Charlie Kirk and his wife Erika.

Toby Doeden was attending the Northern State University football game on Saturday evening when an angry leftist physically assaulted him and threatened to kill him.

The leftist was immediately arrested.

Per political consultant Matt Hurley:

Earlier this evening, while attending the Northern State University football game, South Dakota Republican gubernatorial candidate Toby Doeden was approached by an agitated individual.

The individual proceeded to physically assault Mr. Doeden while making multiple threats on his life and repeatedly referencing his support for the late Charlie Kirk.

The individual was immediately detained and subsequently arrested.

We are grateful for the swift response of both the Northern State University Campus Police and the Aberdeen Police Department.

Keep reading

Holding Politicians Accountable: Using Civil Litigation To Combat Incitement To Violence

In an era of heightened political polarization, inflammatory rhetoric from public figures has increasingly been linked to real-world acts of violence.  While freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy, there are legal boundaries where words cross into incitement.  This article explores how civil lawsuits can serve as a mechanism to hold politicians accountable for fomenting violence, regardless of party affiliation.  By examining the legal framework, historical precedents, and potential impacts, we can understand how the courts might act as a bulwark against dangerous discourse—focusing on truth-seeking principles rather than partisan blame.  The horrendous assassination of Youth Leader and Turning Point Founder Charlie Kirk brings this discussion to the forefront of our world culture.

The Legal Foundation for Civil Suits Against Politicians

Under U.S. law, politicians are not immune from accountability for their words if they directly contribute to harm.  The primary vehicle for such claims is 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal statute that allows individuals to sue state officials (including governors, mayors, and lawmakers) for violations of constitutional rights while acting “under color of state law.” If a politician’s statements or actions are alleged to incite violence that results in death, injury, or deprivation of rights—such as the right to life or due process—victims or their families could pursue damages.

However, the bar is high.  The First Amendment protects speech unless it meets the strict criteria established in *Brandenburg v. Ohio* (1969): it must be directed at producing “imminent lawless action” and be likely to produce such action.  Mere hyperbolic or critical language, even if divisive, typically doesn’t qualify.  Additionally, officials often benefit from qualified immunity, which shields them unless their conduct violates a “clearly established” right.  Sovereign immunity may also apply to actions taken in an official capacity, although personal-capacity suits can bypass this immunity.

Keep reading

Trashy Rep. Jasmine Crockett Says She’s Not ‘Necessarily’ Encouraging Her Supporters to Hurt Republicans in Wake of Charlie Kirk Assassination, White House Responds

Trashy Democrat Rep. Jasmine Crockett is doubling down on her inflammatory rhetoric against President Donald Trump, claiming that calling him a “wannabe Hitler” doesn’t “necessarily” mean she wants her supporters to go out and hurt Republicans.

This outrageous statement came during a discussion on Friday’s episode of “The Breakfast Club” regarding the assassination of conservative powerhouse Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, who was gunned down on Wednesday during an event at Utah Valley University.

Crockett dismissed any notion that far-left demonization of conservatives, like her own repeated Hitler comparisons, played a role in Kirk’s murder.

Instead, she shamelessly accused Trump of promoting a “culture of violence” with past comments like saying he could “shoot somebody in the middle of the street” and still win elections, or allegedly telling rally-goers to “beat them up.”

“Even if it came from someone on our side of the aisle, let’s assume the worst, OK, so let’s talk about it,” Crockett said. “Let’s talk about what ‘radicalized’ him.”

The Texas politician continued, “So, we’ve got to talk about like what it means when you’re running for president, or you’re running for one of these higher offices, and you go out there and you talk about beating people up, you go out there and you say things like, ‘I could shoot somebody in the middle of the street in New York and I could still win.’”

“We got to talk about, like that, that is next level,” she stated. “Me disagreeing with you, me calling you, you know, ‘wannabe Hitler,’ all those things are like, not necessarily saying, ‘Go out and hurt somebody.’ But when you’re literally telling people at rallies, ‘Yeah, beat them up’ and that kind of stuff, you are promoting a culture of violence.”

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson responded to the alarming comments in a statement to the New York Post.

Keep reading

Pima County Sheriff’s Deputy Accused of Posting Threats, Calls for Violence

A Pima County Sheriff’s Deputy, identified as Ramon Hernández, is facing calls for immediate suspension and investigation after a series of public social media posts surfaced containing violent threats, anti-government rhetoric, and explicit calls for assassination of public officials and U.S. allies.

Screenshots of Hernández’s Facebook posts, compiled into a formal report, document repeated calls for the death of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the President of the United States, and derogatory remarks directed at federal agencies including ICE, FBI, and DHS. Several posts explicitly advocate revolution and violent insurrection.

Given Hernández’s role as a sworn deputy with arrest powers and access to law enforcement resources, these public statements raise grave concerns about public safety, potential bias in law enforcement actions, and possible insider-threat risks.

Public Safety & Legal Implications

These statements may violate federal law, including 18 U.S.C. § 871 (threats against officials) and 18 U.S.C. § 2339A/B (incitement or material support for terrorism), as well as Arizona statutes criminalizing threats against public officials. The report calls on the FBI, DHS, and Pima County Sheriff’s Department Internal Affairs to take immediate action.

Keep reading

WOW: Evil Pelosi Defends Democrats’ Violent Rhetoric After Assassin Murders Charlie Kirk

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended Democrats’ violent rhetoric after a left-wing assassin murdered TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk at a Utah Valley University campus this week.

Conservative political activist Charlie Kirk was gunned down by a leftist who hated him this week.

Tyler Robinson, 22, was taken into custody on Friday morning after his father turned him in to authorities. Friends and family said Robinson had become more political in recent years. The 22-year-old became radicalized by the left, and instead of debating Charlie Kirk on the open mic, he killed him from a rooftop 200 yards away.

Charlie Kirk was assassinated after Democrats and their media stenographers had glorified violence against Trump supporters for years.

After calling Trump supporters a threat to democracy for years, it finally happened.

Just one year after President Trump was shot in the ear at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, Charlie Kirk, one of the most influential conservative voices, was murdered in broad daylight.

Rather than condemn the violent rhetoric coming from vile Democrats, Pelosi defended it and took zero accountability.

“People don’t have any intention of saying something that leads to something dangerous. We cannot take responsibility for the minds,” evil Democrat Pelosi said.

Keep reading

House Republican Group Wants Probe into ‘Force’ Behind Left-Wing Violence

A group of Republican lawmakers are calling for a select committee to investigate “the money, influence, and power behind the radical left’s assault on America and the rule of law” in response to the assassination of conservative advocate Charlie Kirk.

The group of 23 members, led by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), made the request Thursday in a letter addressed to Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chair James Comer (R-KY), and House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH).

The letter argued:

In the wake of numerous attacks on our way of life, the destruction of the rule of law, and the murder of innocent Americans, prominent and unknown alike, we must take every step to follow the money and uncover the force behind the NGOs, donors, media, public officials, and all entities driving this coordinated attack.

Keep reading

Threat to ‘Kill All Charlie Kirks’ Spray-Painted on Seattle College Campus

A threat to “KILL ALL CHARLIE KIRKS” has been spray-painted on the sign of a Seattle, Washington college within a day of the Turning Point USA founder’s public assassination on a Utah college campus.

Seattle-based reporter Jonathan Choe shared a photo on social media showing the alarming message scrawled across the bricks in front of Seattle Central College.

“This is obviously a threat,” Choe wrote. “But what the far-left doesn’t realize is that this madness is actually catalyzing reasonable Americans to now say, ‘WE ARE ALL CHARLIE KIRK.’”

“Courage is contagious and the movement will continue,” he added.

Another disgusting message was spotted on a sign carried by a radical in downtown Seattle, reading “Charlie Kirk shot hell yes!!”

Keep reading

Leftist Media Dehumanize Us as Fascists Knowing it Will Lead to Violence and Assassination

If you watch CNN or MSNBC or the Sunday current affairs shows on all the regime media outlets… If you read the New York Times, Atlantic, Axios, Washington Post, the Nation, HuffPo, Jezebel, or all the rest… Here’s what you know…

These outlets are devoted to the 24/7 — and in the case of MSNBC and CNN, it’s literally around-the-clock — dehumanization of people like you and me and Charlie Kirk, everyday people, Normal People who dare to disagree with them. But it’s more than that, it’s worse than that… Much worse.

In a single sentence, my friend and former colleague Kurt Schlichter perfectly crystallized just how the media deliberately call for our literal assassination: “They call us Nazis – what do you think they want to happen to us?”

Exactly.

What moral choice do you have but to gun down a Nazi? You have no other choice. You must kill the Nazi. What could be more heroic than to gun down a Nazi? Nothing. If you want to be a hero, gun down the Nazi. That’s what heroes do.

Remove “Nazi,” and replace it with the countless dehumanizing words and phrases the media relentlessly firehose against us:

  • They call us fascists – what do you think they want to happen to us?
  • They call us rapists – what do you think they want to happen to us?
  • They call us racists – what do you think they want to happen to us?
  • They call us threats to democracy – what do you think they want to happen to us?
  • They call us white nationalists – what do you think they want to happen to us?

They want us dead, and we all know who “they” are — corporate media that has lost two of three major elections and knows it’s losing the argument, not to mention losing their influence over public opinion.

Charlie Kirk had to die, you see. They wanted him dead. Just hours before his assassination, Van Jones was on CNN smearing Kirk for trafficking in “pure race mongering, hate mongering.”

To paraphrase Kurt Schlichter, What do you think he wanted to happen to Charlie Kirk?

What was Charlie Kirk’s sin? What did he do to be accused of “pure race mongering, hate mongering” on a national cable news outlet during primetime? He spoke the truth:

A white Ukrainian refugee was murdered just because she was white. Everybody knows that, obviously. If a random white person simply walked up to and stabbed a nice law-abiding black person for no reason, it would be an apocalyptically huge national story used to impose national, sweeping political changes on the whole country. Instead, Meghan Basham, no one seems to care when a white woman gets stabbed to death.

Where’s the lie? There is no lie. And that was Kirk’s sin. He didn’t lie. He didn’t sugarcoat. He was not a house-trained Republican. So…

A racial hate monger must be taken out, no? Assassinating a racial hate monger is heroic, no?

That language, when it has no basis in fact, is how the media target us for literal destruction by the left’s Antifa types that do the Party’s wet work.

Keep reading

Survey Finds ONE IN THREE College Students Think Some Level of Violence is Acceptable to Stop Campus Speech They Don’t Like

One point that has been made repeatedly over the last 48 hours is that Charlie Kirk was assassinated while exercising one of our most basic rights, the right to free speech.

When Kirk visited college campuses, he was not protesting, he was engaging in peaceful, intellectual discussions, question and answer sessions and/or debate with students who participated freely.

So how would anyone think of killing him for doing this? Well, a survey which was released just a day before Kirk was murdered, shows that an astonishing number of college students believe that violence is an acceptable way to stop campus speech they don’t like.

The College Fix reported:

1 in 3 students say some level of violence acceptable to stop campus speech

One in three students believe some level of violence is acceptable to stop a campus speech, according to the results of a large-scale survey released Tuesday by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.

The survey, which questioned more than 68,000 students at 257 colleges and universities nationwide on a variety of free speech topics, asked: “How acceptable would you say it is for students to engage in the following actions to protest a campus speaker? Using violence to stop a campus speech.”

Two percent said “always acceptable,” 13 percent said “sometimes acceptable,” and 19 percent said “rarely acceptable,” or about one-third of those surveyed.

When broken down by political beliefs, 7 percent of students who identified as liberal said it’s “always acceptable” to use violence to shut down speech — while 8 percent of students who identified as conservative did.

“More students than ever think violence and chaos are acceptable alternatives to peaceful protest,” FIRE Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens said in a news release. “This finding cuts across partisan lines. It is not a liberal or conservative problem — it’s an American problem.”

“Students see speech that they oppose as threatening, and their overblown response contributes to a volatile political climate.”

A majority of students surveyed — 54 percent — also responded it was acceptable to block other students from attending a campus speech: 3 percent said “always acceptable,” 19 percent said “sometimes acceptable,” and 32 percent said “rarely acceptable.”

This is an indictment of our entire system of education. Schools are failing to educate our students about our most basic God-given rights and the respect that they deserve, especially in an education setting.

Keep reading