The Montana body slam, what's more alarming???

[Reasonable]

View attachment 129285

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

Defending violence because someone from his party was the guilty one.
It doesn't get much more reprehensible than that.
This incident is the result of the orange clown's attack on the 1

Too rich - so far almost all of the vandalism against Jewish cemeteries has been proven to be perpetrated by leftists trying to keep "Trump supporters" look bad



And Trump is not the one assaulting the 1st amendment, our friends on the left own that distinction

View attachment 129285

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

Defending violence because someone from his party was the guilty one.
It doesn't get much more reprehensible than that.
This incident is the result of the orange clown's attack on the 1st amendment.
Lots of negative things trickling down due to his destructive policies and inflammatory rhetoric.

Says the guy that posts a fallacious meme about Trump's America

Too rich - so far almost all of the vandalism against Jewish cemeteries has been proven to be perpetrated by leftists trying to keep "Trump supporters" look bad

Plus, I made it clear that the physical altercation was inappropriate

And Trump is not the one assaulting the 1st amendment, our friends on the left own that distinction

Free speech does not give the press an absolute right to harrass

Liar.
link that's its " leftists" vandalizing cemeteries.
And Breitbart nor Infowars count.

Yeah locking out certain news stations from press conferences and calling them the enemy isn't anti first amendment.
You're a bonified idiot.
You're a Tramp supporter.
Same thing.

 

[Reasonable]

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

The reporter did the right thing.
First and foremost... he's on the job. If he gets involved with a fist fight he can lose his job.
2nd by not returning the violence made it clear who was at fault.
I hope the fuctard gets what's coming to hm.

 

[Nosmo King]

It's as if we climbed into the Wayback Machine with Mr. Peabody and Sherman, set the dials for 1875. We arrive in an America deeply divided, wracked with destruction and an administration plagued by scandal.

Elections we not held by secret ballot. Rather a voter would ask for a Republican ballot or a Democrat ballot. The ballots were color coded. The voter would then put the ballot in the box under the watchful eyes of partisan thugs. They just bought your vote at O'Drunkard's down the block.

And politics by fist was used. The districts got in line and the thugs were excused at best, accepted as political business at worst.

Are we Americans excusing or accepting of today's politics by fist?

 

[Coyote]

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

 

[OKTexas]

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

A. What evidence is there that the reporter was "overly aggressive", the statement by the Fox Reporter says differently. You were not there, she was!

B. The Reporter was battered, and that is a crime. He was sucker punched by a coward, the sucker punch is the way of a cowardly thug.

This may become the new normal, as the DA / Prosecutor did not do his job and allege the conduct was an aggravated assault i.e. a felony. As it stands the complaint is a low grade misdemeanor. The thug could spend up to 6 months in the County Jail.

I bet he won't serve a day - imagine if the roles were reversed and the Reporter sucker punched the thug - the reporter would probably go to prison. The bright side of this event is the civil judgment may be a larger penalty than the slap on the wrist for the criminal act - of course the thug will probably have a civil judgment against him, but that will be paid for by another neo fascist.

The reporter became a trespasser when the candidate told him they would talk about it later and didn't leave. From what I understand the candidate was preparing for an on camera interview when the reporter entered uninvited and started asking questions and didn't leave when asked.

.

 

[Reasonable]

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

A. What evidence is there that the reporter was "overly aggressive", the statement by the Fox Reporter says differently. You were not there, she was!

B. The Reporter was battered, and that is a crime. He was sucker punched by a coward, the sucker punch is the way of a cowardly thug.

This may become the new normal, as the DA / Prosecutor did not do his job and allege the conduct was an aggravated assault i.e. a felony. As it stands the complaint is a low grade misdemeanor. The thug could spend up to 6 months in the County Jail.

I bet he won't serve a day - imagine if the roles were reversed and the Reporter sucker punched the thug - the reporter would probably go to prison. The bright side of this event is the civil judgment may be a larger penalty than the slap on the wrist for the criminal act - of course the thug will probably have a civil judgment against him, but that will be paid for by another neo fascist.

The reporter became a trespasser when the candidate told him they would talk about it later and didn't leave. From what I understand the candidate was preparing for an on camera interview when the reporter entered uninvited and started asking questions and didn't leave when asked.

.

So that's a reason for assault?
You're fucking crazy and the way you excuse all types of deplorable behavior of anyone with a R in front of their names says what anyone needs to know about you.

 

[Coyote]

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

A. What evidence is there that the reporter was "overly aggressive", the statement by the Fox Reporter says differently. You were not there, she was!

B. The Reporter was battered, and that is a crime. He was sucker punched by a coward, the sucker punch is the way of a cowardly thug.

This may become the new normal, as the DA / Prosecutor did not do his job and allege the conduct was an aggravated assault i.e. a felony. As it stands the complaint is a low grade misdemeanor. The thug could spend up to 6 months in the County Jail.

I bet he won't serve a day - imagine if the roles were reversed and the Reporter sucker punched the thug - the reporter would probably go to prison. The bright side of this event is the civil judgment may be a larger penalty than the slap on the wrist for the criminal act - of course the thug will probably have a civil judgment against him, but that will be paid for by another neo fascist.

The reporter became a trespasser when the candidate told him they would talk about it later and didn't leave. From what I understand the candidate was preparing for an on camera interview when the reporter entered uninvited and started asking questions and didn't leave when asked.

.

He wasn't told to leave and even if he was - that is absolutely no excuse. None.

Greg Gianforte: Fox News team witnesses GOP House candidate 'body slam' reporter

 

[Reasonable]

Yet another example of the Tramp's infamous comment that he could shoot someone in broad daylight on 5th Ave and still not lose any followers.

He knew who he could con and he played you stiffs like a Stradivarius. .

 

[OKTexas]

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

A. What evidence is there that the reporter was "overly aggressive", the statement by the Fox Reporter says differently. You were not there, she was!

B. The Reporter was battered, and that is a crime. He was sucker punched by a coward, the sucker punch is the way of a cowardly thug.

This may become the new normal, as the DA / Prosecutor did not do his job and allege the conduct was an aggravated assault i.e. a felony. As it stands the complaint is a low grade misdemeanor. The thug could spend up to 6 months in the County Jail.

I bet he won't serve a day - imagine if the roles were reversed and the Reporter sucker punched the thug - the reporter would probably go to prison. The bright side of this event is the civil judgment may be a larger penalty than the slap on the wrist for the criminal act - of course the thug will probably have a civil judgment against him, but that will be paid for by another neo fascist.

The reporter became a trespasser when the candidate told him they would talk about it later and didn't leave. From what I understand the candidate was preparing for an on camera interview when the reporter entered uninvited and started asking questions and didn't leave when asked.

.

So that's a reason for assault?
You're fucking crazy and the way you excuse all types of deplorable behavior of anyone with a R in front of their names says what anyone needs to know about you.

No, it's reason to eject his ass by any means necessary. Evidently the guy has a similar problem with others for the same publication. Having a press pass isn't a license to do what ever you want on private property without consequences.

.

 

[dcbl]

link that's its " leftists" vandalizing cemeteries.

you don't wanna play this game with me

I am better at it than you

from France - ANTIFA LINKED STUDENT(S) BEHIND VANDALISM OF 300 JEWISH GRAVES AT SARRE-UNION FRANCE…….

from St Louis - Former journalist arrested, charged with threats against Jewish facilities

I can do this all day - the second link is hilarious because the man that did it was a former leftist reporter that got fired for, wait for it, fake news

The story from France is about cemeteries vandalized bu ANTIFA thugs

"anti-fascists" vandalizing a Jewish cemetery...

you can't make this shit up...

 

[dcbl]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

 

[Coyote]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

It's no different when leftists protest - in fact, you can say it's "understandable" - but when they cross the line into violent behavior - assaulting people it is NOT undertandable. It is NOT excusable with a "but"...if the journalist had assaulted him first, I'd totally be on his side but he did not and it's a stretch to make it the journalist's fault which is what you are doing.

 

[dcbl]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

It's no different when leftists protest - in fact, you can say it's "understandable" - but when they cross the line into violent behavior - assaulting people it is NOT undertandable. It is NOT excusable with a "but"...if the journalist had assaulted him first, I'd totally be on his side but he did not and it's a stretch to make it the journalist's fault which is what you are doing.

Yes, I am saying that the reporter was misbehaving & has some culpability here

But not once did I say that I approved of the physical violence

You don't seem to think the reporter did anything wrong

I disagree

That's OK.

I can live with that, but your calling me a liar was way off base

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

What's worse? This poster knows better but is just trolling for the sake of flaming, or,

he really believes what he's posting?

 

[NYcarbineer]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

It's no different when leftists protest - in fact, you can say it's "understandable" - but when they cross the line into violent behavior - assaulting people it is NOT undertandable. It is NOT excusable with a "but"...if the journalist had assaulted him first, I'd totally be on his side but he did not and it's a stretch to make it the journalist's fault which is what you are doing.

Yes, I am saying that the reporter was misbehaving & has some culpability here

But not once did I say that I approved of the physical violence

You don't seem to think the reporter did anything wrong

I disagree

That's OK.

I can live with that, but your calling ng me a liar was way off base

You wholeheartedly approved of violence. Now you're trying to weasel out of it? That makes you the coward.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A) an American politician getting physical with an overly aggressive reporter

B) seeing a grown man get battered and crying about it instead of defending himself?

For rational people, the answer is "B" and it's not even close

Unfortunately, the way society is going, this may well become the norm in my lifetime

Thoughts?

A. What evidence is there that the reporter was "overly aggressive", the statement by the Fox Reporter says differently. You were not there, she was!

B. The Reporter was battered, and that is a crime. He was sucker punched by a coward, the sucker punch is the way of a cowardly thug.

This may become the new normal, as the DA / Prosecutor did not do his job and allege the conduct was an aggravated assault i.e. a felony. As it stands the complaint is a low grade misdemeanor. The thug could spend up to 6 months in the County Jail.

I bet he won't serve a day - imagine if the roles were reversed and the Reporter sucker punched the thug - the reporter would probably go to prison. The bright side of this event is the civil judgment may be a larger penalty than the slap on the wrist for the criminal act - of course the thug will probably have a civil judgment against him, but that will be paid for by another neo fascist.

The reporter became a trespasser when the candidate told him they would talk about it later and didn't leave. From what I understand the candidate was preparing for an on camera interview when the reporter entered uninvited and started asking questions and didn't leave when asked.

.

A Birther brings us the facts! lol

 

[Coyote]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

It's no different when leftists protest - in fact, you can say it's "understandable" - but when they cross the line into violent behavior - assaulting people it is NOT undertandable. It is NOT excusable with a "but"...if the journalist had assaulted him first, I'd totally be on his side but he did not and it's a stretch to make it the journalist's fault which is what you are doing.

Yes, I am saying that the reporter was misbehaving & has some culpability here

But not once did I say that I approved of the physical violence

You don't seem to think the reporter did anything wrong

I disagree

That's OK.

I can live with that, but your calling me a liar was way off base

You know what - you're right. I apologize for that, it was uncalled for. Don't know why but I'm in short temper tonight.

My view is this - reporters are pushy. They have to be to do their job. If you're a political figure you have to be able deal with them - it's part of the job. The reporter was doing nothing wrong beyond being pushy - he was trying to get an answer to his question. That in no way opens him up for assault.

To me it's ironic that people will condemn leftwingers for demonstrations that break out into violence (over policies they object to) but offer an excuse for this guy. IMO - there is no excuse for violence, property destruction or assault unless you are threatened and defending yourself or someone.

 

[dcbl]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

It's no different when leftists protest - in fact, you can say it's "understandable" - but when they cross the line into violent behavior - assaulting people it is NOT undertandable. It is NOT excusable with a "but"...if the journalist had assaulted him first, I'd totally be on his side but he did not and it's a stretch to make it the journalist's fault which is what you are doing.

Yes, I am saying that the reporter was misbehaving & has some culpability here

But not once did I say that I approved of the physical violence

You don't seem to think the reporter did anything wrong

I disagree

That's OK.

I can live with that, but your calling ng me a liar was way off base

You wholeheartedly approved of violence. Now you're trying to weasel out of it? That makes you the coward.

Stick a microphone in my face a 3rd time after I have asked you nicely on 2 occasions to back off and I may well do the same thing

 

[Coyote]

What's alarming is the lying and excusing. What's wrong with you people? Fuck. You went on and on about leftwing violent demonstrations and here you are applauding an assault?

I am not applauding an assault, I said clearly that the assault was inappropriate

But that I understand the sentiment

The leftwing violence that I have denounced has been different & more brutal - no bike locks used here; it was a man that got fed up because he was being unduly harassed & over-reacted

Again, I do not approve of the physical altercation, but I do not feel sorry for the reporter

I listened to the tape. The reporter asked a perfectly reasonable question in a friendly tone of voice - he wasn't yelling, being overly aggressive or anything and then WAM - he gets assaulted He certainly didn't seem to be crying - seemed about taken aback.

he was asked twice to back off, plus, my understanding is that there was history here between these two

when he was told to take it to the press secretary, after the 2nd time, it is OK to report that the question was asked & that he refused to answer

sticking a microphone in his face was absolutely inappropriate & could be viewed as assault in and of itself - being a reporter does not give one the right to be rude or to violate personal space

But hey - keep on lying. And excusing an assault you should be condemning. As you say that certainly seems to be the way society is going when we condone, support and applaud that shit.

I have not lied about anything

the words "crying" and "whining" are interchangeable here and that is my opinion

is that the hill you want to die on? semantics?

from what I have heard on the tape, the reporter was out of line, at some point, you have to back off

and again, I have said numerous times that Gianforte was n the wrong to assault the guy

free speech means you can say or write what you want without fear of reprisal from the government, not that you can hound someone to the end of the earth

lastly, when leftists thugs coordinate an attack on a peaceful rally with the intent of shutting it down, that is a whole different ballgame than seeing a guy snap because he's had enough

It's no different when leftists protest - in fact, you can say it's "understandable" - but when they cross the line into violent behavior - assaulting people it is NOT undertandable. It is NOT excusable with a "but"...if the journalist had assaulted him first, I'd totally be on his side but he did not and it's a stretch to make it the journalist's fault which is what you are doing.

Yes, I am saying that the reporter was misbehaving & has some culpability here

But not once did I say that I approved of the physical violence

You don't seem to think the reporter did anything wrong

I disagree

That's OK.

I can live with that, but your calling ng me a liar was way off base

You wholeheartedly approved of violence. Now you're trying to weasel out of it? That makes you the coward.

Stick a microphone in my face a 3rd time after I have asked you nicely on 2 occasions to back off and I may well do the same thing

Yet thousands of politicians don't.

 

[dcbl]

To me it's ironic that people will condemn leftwingers for demonstrations that break out into violence (over policies they object to) but offer an excuse for this guy. IMO - there is no excuse for violence, property destruction or assault unless you are threatened and defending yourself or someone.

I understand your sentiment and it is hard to disagree

I do think there is a difference between what happened in MT (a guy snapped and used really bad judgement) and what we see with protests that turn into riots as one side attempts to intimidate the other into silence, but I can see where you can make a valid argument for hypocrisy

I apologize for offending you

I will tone down my rhetoric