In the rage of Trump. His lawyers are trying to thwart the proceeding of a case brought by anti-Trump demonstrators at his rally who were physically removed w force from his rally.These demonstrators were removed by the rally staff, and were struck and otherwise bullied by members of the audience. Trump claims that his right of free speech permits removal of the demonstrators.
The demonstrators of course claim the same right. After some consideration I have an opinion.
I think both sides have valid claim to a certain to that right. I also think that each has exceeded their expression of that right. I think each has, by this element in the constitution, to freedom of expression. I believe, however, that by his hosting of the venue and the event, Mr Trump has a certain right to control expression. This does not, however, include the right to physically control the demonstrators.
I wrote these paragraphs weeks ago. I've thought to publish them over and over as more and more-shameful events have been performed. But I always feared that, coming from me, these expressions would lose their meaning or their force. But I've convinced myself that they need to be said anyway; that to hold them close is, perhaps, cowardly.
This is what I have thought and describe:
"I have been wondering why he's so angry; why everything sets him off; why ... ! And I think I've figured it out. He's assembled a cabinet of people who he must know, individually and in combination, are totally unfair to govern a country; not together and certainly, not alone. He has been for most of his life a showman with money. This is an unusual and a heady combination. Many men burdened with this combination of birthrights are circus masters, are pirate captains, are clan leaders.
I've spent two days writing about things I love about this country in response to the horrible things proposed by Trump and Pruitt until I got physically sick. Then a friend mentioned I was waxing philosophical. I realized that I needn't be for this statement. Direct was OK. I apologize to Friends.
A few days ago I said I'd not preach here. Think of this more as a screech.
To Trumpians:
I've made myself sick trying to think of a kinder gentler way to say this but it's not a worthy statement. I want all of you out of here.
None of you are anything I want to represent me or my country. You are like the roaches it was impossible to drive from the last tenement in an abandoned building. You're on everything we touch, you become part of everything we are, you are everything we do. We have learned our lesson. We won't make this mistake again. We're cleaning up. But I want you out now. Now. Now.
That man, with his henchmen and his bosses, is on a campaign of colossal proportions and fantastic flare and hyperbole. His goal, the first of such scale, is to destroy the United States of America, dream, state, and legacy. He thinks he can do it and end as conquerer, but that is of little consequence. When he first imagined the power of his anger and his hatred, he began to conceive the possibility of its scope. He would perform the destruction and forego the gain. We are now on that trek with him. We must halt the process.
It's been too long since my last posting, but I've been on Facebook and a little on my banner-blog, arealpresident.com. Today I suffered through a 77-minute Lie fest of the President and couldn't escape it's stench without the scouring of reading and writing SOMETHING. I dumped a little on FB and I'll prolly go back to that before I get to bed. But as I was browsing the web for information and background, I found an article that was as chilling as any I've read lately. And are, except for the fact that some of its predictions are a little off and, perhaps, in our favor, depressing.
The President-elect is conducting a campaign to diminish the influence of the press as a tool of democracy. We have seen it in the campaign, but in his first post-election news conference, he has made it clear. He will use any excuse to perform as an outraged, mistreated individual who is entitled to refuse engagement with the public press. He is not so entitled.
If he is mistreated, as a public individual,"them's the breaks".
He is trying, by his behavior in contact with agents of news services, to disparage or to invalidate their continued attendance. In absence of actual disruption by the agent, I expect that the President-elect may answer "yea", or "nay", or narrative, or not answer.
Page 6 of 13