Is the traditional D卐M☭CRAT monopoly on political violence about to be brought to a screeching halt?
Democrats Are Catching On That Political Violence Can Go Both Ways
Political violence isn’t a one-way street. It has taken Democrats too long to figure that out, and now it’s too late.
The accomplice media evidently got a new set of instructions from Joe Biden’s people that they need to start hyping up the possibility of violence coming from Republicans ahead of the election.
Democrats may finally have gotten the message that the threat of force isn’t a political tool that only they get to use, which is great news. Now that they’ve realized it, though, they’re trying to convince voters that it’s only a real problem when their opponents do it, namely (of course) Trump voters.
The advantage Democrats have had in recent years is that, unlike independent and Republican voters, they know their activists put politics above everything else. For them, only one thing matters: getting their way. If that means destroying public property and private businesses, so be it. If a few people are hospitalized or die for it, that’s a price they’re willing to pay.
Intimidation and harassment are their default strategies. It’s their voters who screamed in the faces of perfect strangers for not wearing face coverings. It’s their voters who torched and trashed inner cities in the name of “racial justice.” It’s their voters who showed up to menace Supreme Court justices at their private residences. It’s their voters ginning up a second Holocaust over a religious conflict between two nations 6,000 miles away.
True, the other side showed on that one fateful day that it’s capable of taking things to the streets when things aren’t going so smoothly. But rather than Democrats saying to themselves, “Hmm, maybe we should all settle down some,” they proceeded to censor, prosecute, and disenfranchise their opponents.
If there has been any increase in violent threats from the right, Democrats have themselves to thank for it. They might do themselves a favor this time and knock it off before any of those threats are made good.
They chose to drive down this road. Now they understand it’s a two-way street.
Well good, and not a moment too soon either. This would be the perfect time to run the D卐M☭CRAT clown-car off the road and into the ditch, drag them from the smoking wreck, and thump the living shit out of their worthless carcasses while they’re still dazed—a golden opportunity that should NOT be passed up, lest it never come along again.
Update! So many targets of opportunity it’s hard to know where to start. But unless I’m much mistaken, a couple of likely prospects just reared their butt-ugly heads.
CNN started to cover Trump’s speech, but Jake Tapper curiously cut away from the feed after Trump started talking about Joe Biden’s border crisis.
“We’re going to seal up the border because right now we have an invasion,” Trump began. “We have an invasion of millions and millions of people that are coming into our country. I can’t imagine why they think that’s a good—“
And that’s when Tapper started talking over him. “Donald Trump, declaring victory with a historically strong showing in the Iowa caucuses if these numbers hold. The biggest victory for a non-incumbent president in the modern era for this contest. A relatively subdued speech as these things go so far, although here he is, right now, under my voice. You can hear him repeating his anti-immigrant rhetoric.”
As if that wasn’t bad enough, MSNBC just refused to air it at all. Rachel Maddow couldn’t even say his name.
“At this point in the evening, the projected winner of the Iowa caucuses has just started giving his victory speech,” Maddow said. “We will keep an eye on that as it happens. We will let you know if there is any news made in that speech, if there is anything noteworthy, something substantive and important.”
Maddow went on to explain why MSNBC and other like-minded outlets have been censoring Trump. “The reason I’m saying this is, of course, there is a reason that we and other news organizations have generally stopped giving an unfiltered, live platform to remarks by former President Trump. It is not out of spite; it is not a decision that we relish; it is a decision that we regularly revisit. And, honestly, earnestly, it is not an easy decision,” she claimed.
“But there is a cost to us, as a news organization, of knowingly broadcasting untrue things. That is a fundamental truth of our business and who we are,” she continued.
Bold mine, and utterly, utterly hilarious. My GOD, the balls on this Madcow bint! Props to her, though, for somehow managing to spout such patently risible codswallop with a straight (if somewhat horse-like) face.