MEANWHILE: In Wisconsin, anti-Trump disorder rages on:
Six protesters were arrested and could face trespassing, disorderly conduct and obstructing an officer charges after dozens initially entered the Holiday Inn Express on Monday evening as part of an anti-Donald Trump protest.Trump is speaking at the hotel at 4 p.m. today, and the protesters attempted to occupy the place at 6:30 p.m. last night. It seems as though part of the "professional" tactic is to intimidate any private business that might want to rent a venue to the Trump campaign.
Janesville Police Sgt. Mike Blaser said police gave the protesters several opportunities to move out of the building without being arrested but they refused. “I think tonight is just an indication in a smaller scale of what we might see tomorrow,” Blaser said. “We've been planning for several days and we will have assets on the ground to help us manage whatever size crowd we do get here tomorrow.”...
The six protesters arrested would not identify themselves to police before booking, Blaser said. They had joined hands inside of PVC piping and may have also been handcuffed inside the piping, he said.
The protesters used “professional” tactics, including having their own medic on scene, he said. They were members of the Showing Up for Racial Justice and Groundwork Madison groups. The protesters entered the building at 6:30 p.m. Rock County sheriff's deputies were helping Janesville police separate them at about 9:30 p.m.
Melissa Sargent, a Democratic representative to the state Assembly from the Madison area, was among those inside. “We're here to call on the Holiday Inn to take a stand against hate,” Sargent said....All the violence is on the other side. The protesters cite death threats they've received and predict some Hitler-like future, so strong tactics are justified.
Kristen Brock-Petroshius of Madison, a member of Standing Up for Racial Justice, said the group has been working with the local organizers of the anti-Trump demonstration, set for Tuesday outside the Janesville Conference Center, a part of the hotel. Brock-Petroshius said local organizers have received death threats, and Monday's protest was an effort to avoid any bloodshed that might be caused by Trump supporters....
“A lot of us think, … if this was the beginning of Hitler's rise to power in Germany, how many of us would sit by the sidelines and do nothing?” Brock-Petroshius said. 'If we can prevent the violence he is inciting from taking hold and become stronger in these coming months, then we've done our job.”
The owners of the Holiday Inn Express and Janesville Conference Center do not plan to cancel Trump's appearance Tuesday, as some protesters have called for.There's no
Love will win / no room for hate -> proud to stand against Trump in #WIsconsin pic.twitter.com/ENEWJXSpND— Rep. Melissa Sargent (@RepSargent) March 29, 2016
Posts
330 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 330 of 330eric wrote:
By the way, mea culpa. I was wrong. This is what Michelle Fields wrote
Campaign managers aren’t supposed to try to forcefully throw reporters to the ground, no matter the circumstance.
So, this is where the "thrown to the ground" line is coming from. From Michelle Fields herself.
the problem with this is you are fixating on the characterization of "throwing to the ground" she may have said it that way because she was dragged dowward and she almost lost her footing. her witness described him as throwing her.
You can't literally THROW someone unless can throw a hundred + pound person. Most people cant do that. But dont get hung up on the word THROW. She is describing an altercation using a word you simply wouldn't use to describe that altercation. I'd say he dragged her, pulled her, yanked her, as opposed to throwing her. But words are used differently by different people. If I was yanked, it might appear that I was thrown.
Doesn't it seem clear now that she did indeed touch Trump? Twice? You can even see in the still picture he posted of him pulling his arm away.
The goalposts, they're are a-movin', movin', movin' in the wind.
Wow. This thread lit up fast and high!
Try reading the threads over at Insty. It's sheer insanity, as our own AprilApple can attest - his/her comments are reported all of the time.
If it had been a man whose arm was grabbed, would anyone care?
If you watch Tcoms video you'll see that the entirety recorded is 8 seconds, and then its looped over and over. at at the end of the tape all sides are off the camera. How does that prove that a conversation never took place? This is stupid and disingenous as hell.
That Trump is a misogynist, there is no doubt. The really scary part is that he doesn't realize it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/14/the-trump-campaigns-victim-shaming-response-to-the-michelle-fields-incident-is-eerily-familiar/
Chuck: "STOP DOING THAT! Don't make me a Hillary supporter. Don't do that. I want to beat the Democrats in the fall. Trump is not that guy. I've never had a kind word for a Democratic candidate. Trump hatred does not equal support for Democrats. Get that through your poorly-educated skull. Even though He loves you, the poorly-educated."
LOL
Chuck makes public declaration that he will not attack Hillary while Trump is in the race.
Others note that Chuck will not attack Hillary.
I point that out.
Chuck turns it into something quite different.
As well as attacking non-Trump supporters as Trump supporters AND calling republicans who do support Trump "poorly educated".
Yep.
"lifelong republican".
Chuck are there other public pledges you have made that you would now like to slink away from?
And precisely what is it about your own public pledges that causes you to think others are "poorly educated"?
Tcom: "When you crowd in on a man under SS protection, you might get pulled away. Golly gee, who gives a damn?"
Obviously, Fields gave a damn and Corey lied about it, so maybe he did too. The SS did not touch her. No apparent threat? So what was Corey doing? Regardless, it was a battery.
Trumpists should stop arguing that what is,isnt, and move on. They are convincing people that they are as ignorant and paranoid as the media claim they are.
@jr565
I believe the audio was presented as if it occurred immediately following the incident. Obviously, the audio happpened. But when? I think it does point to a possible ginning up of what actually happened, as does her boyfriend's hyping of the alleged battery immediately. These two things, along with her description of being almost thrown to the ground, are problematic to me, among other statements made by her since then.
I just have formed the belief, based on everything I've seen and read, that it's been overblown. Way overblown, and that the reporter has an agenda, which is to make herself the story. I think that is bad form for a reporter given the very minimal contact. But this election is definitely the crazy season.
No question that Trump has what seems like a huge mob of whacko supporters willing to overlook every flaw. This doesn't cause me to look away from what I've determined to be an alleged crime lacking persuasive evidence.
jr565, come on! Why oh why do you guys keep putting me on the side of defending Trump?! I am not happy to be there.
"Altercation" is a terrible characterization. That's especially so in the context of explaining the bad characterization embodied by the word thrown! Your sentence says "dragged down." I watched the overhead .gif and the side-angle video. "Down" is not accurate, that's the problem, and she wasn't really yanked/jerked forcefully in any direction except possibly back (everyone is moving forward so the relative motion is difficult to map exactly--at full speed it looks like he holds/grabs her arm and pulls backwards arresting her forward motion as he himself keeps going forward/past her).
There certainly wasn't an altercation. "He yanked my arm." Ok. "He grabbed my arm and pulled me backwards, slightly off balance." Sure, that's probably true from the video.
"There was an altercation and he tried to throw me to the ground." No! That's not what the video shows at all!
Now, I will say AGAIN, none of that matters much in the sense that a simple grab is enough to be charged with battery. Just stick with the facts and what you can support!
"The Trump guy grabbed her arm. He denied it, but we can all see it. He's charged with battery and based on the available evidence he's guilty. He shouldn't have denied grabbing her arm--it was probably not done with intent to harm and he may not have ever realized he'd done it, but by categorically denying it happened he's shown he's not trustworthy (and neither is the Trump campaign organization)."
How difficult is that?!
Here's the Florida statute. Lewandowski and Trump might have a problem:
The 2015 Florida Statutes
Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 784
ASSAULT; BATTERY; CULPABLE NEGLIGENCE
View Entire Chapter
784.03 Battery; felony battery.—
(1)(a) The offense of battery occurs when a person:
1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
2. Intentionally causes bodily harm to another person.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person who commits battery commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2) A person who has one prior conviction for battery, aggravated battery, or felony battery and who commits any second or subsequent battery commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. For purposes of this subsection, “conviction” means a determination of guilt that is the result of a plea or a trial, regardless of whether adjudication is withheld or a plea of nolo contendere is entered.
History.—s. 5, Feb. 10, 1832; RS 2401; s. 1, ch. 5135, 1903; GS 3227; RGS 5060; CGL 7162; s. 2, ch. 70-88; s. 730, ch. 71-136; s. 19, ch. 74-383; s. 9, ch. 75-298; s. 172, ch. 91-224; s. 5, ch. 96-392; s. 4, ch. 2001-50.
If he wants to be a real ass (and there's every indication he does) the next time some reporter bumps into Trump he ought to press charges.
Let's just light this lawfare shit up. I know it never works for the Right (only against the Right and non-Left parties), but if that's the way things are going let's just get there already.
This issue is getting more airtime than the massacre of Christians on Easter in Pakistan.
Just a friendly reminder. Not all of us listen to the news as a vacuum. We understand there is only so many things that can be reported, and so WHAT you choose to report in lieu of other news tells us exactly what we need to know.
The emperor has no clothes.
Charging state atty is a member of HRC's local campaign team.
Fields and her salivating male enablers are insurance fraudsters who slam the brakes in front of luxury cars, but with a little extra moxie+savvy.
Anyone who wants to keep their credibility+integrity will stay far away from this poison pill.
"Mary Beth said...
If it had been a man whose arm was grabbed, would anyone care?"
Let's see who cares about this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jDlQ4H0Kdg8
Meade said...Actually and intentionally touches
Right, we know that. That's the law and whatever else you can say about it this guy almost certainly touched this gal intentionally. That's all you need! Leave it there, go to court, let's go.
Film the next set of protests you go to, Meade. Make a tape of every time anyone touches anyone else. File some charges!
I'm not kidding. This is where we are. People shut down events and all-but-riot in the streets with relative impunity. No; no more of that.
The smart rightwing billionaire would have bought some media companies and made movies and magazines for the last few decades, spreading influence throughout the culture. None of 'em did as far as I can tell. Fine. The smart rightwing billionaire now should put together some massive legal funds and keep a few hundred lawyers on hand, suing & pressing charges against anyone and everyone who commits any offense.
We're goin' there, let's go.
The "oh my god did he just" audio (supposed to be an authentic on-the-scene take, but really just sounds like terrible acting) is obviously not recorded in the seconds after the incident. It was recorded later in cold blood (perhaps even over audio already recorded at the scene).
"If you keep your eyes open and look, you can avoid an awful lot of physical contact in crowds.
Plus, it's like driving -- if you have good eyes, you can find the less crowded lanes and avoid contact and crowding...'
You dont have eyes in the back of your head. Corey came up behind her while she was talking and yanked her by the arm. And sure you can avoid a lot of physical convtact, but even more so if someone doesnt intentionally grab you and yank you out of the way. Which was clearly done.
Curious George, do kids really talk that way (dunno, maybe wiggers do)? Looks totally staged+fake. Whose camera and why was it recording w/ audio?
Jonathan Geaehl wrote:
The "oh my god did he just" audio (supposed to be an authentic on-the-scene take, but really just sounds like terrible acting) is obviously not recorded in the seconds after the incident. It was recorded later in cold blood (perhaps even over audio already recorded at the scene).
PROVE IT.
Jonathan Graehl said...
Charging state atty is a member of HRC's local campaign team.
Ahh who f*ckin' cares, Jonathan? Of course the prosecutors are all Dems, the lawyers are all Dems, the officials are all Dems. They always are. So? They got him--this dude touched that lady and bruised her arm. He's going to get arrested and probably found guilty. That's justice--send his ass to jail, give him a criminal record for the rest of his life.
What are we going to do, complain that it's unfair? Of course it's unfair. Screw fairness. Fairness isn't an issue anymore. It's about results. The results are all that matter, and using the law + Media exposure is just another way to get results.
Ok, precedent set. Press charges! Always and everywhere, press charges. I know the Media's largely pro-Dem to a massive degree (even if this reporter isn't) so I know it's not like they'll file charges against Dems, but that's your problem to solve--either get out there and get bumped and file 'em yourself, or sign up as a reporter and go to some Dem events. Let's go!
jr565 said...And sure you can avoid a lot of physical convtact, but even more so if someone doesnt intentionally grab you and yank you out of the way. Which was clearly done.
I agree, he grabbed her arm from behind. Send his ass to jail! That seems reasonable to everyone, so let's get it over with. Grab someone's arm, go to fucking jail. Easy rule, done. Intentionally touch someone w/o their permission, that's battery and your ass is getting charged. Fine, let's do it, every time. Every fucking time, that's the rule.
The Trumpbots are starting to sound like Truthers now. First she was a liar, then there was no video. then the video didnt prove it, then the video did prove it but now shes a crybaby. Then she and another reported concocted an entire conversation after the fact. Then a new video comes forth that supposedly shows they coudnt possibly have the conversation, even though clearly it shows no such thing.
You guys just REALLY dont want to believe that he might have just dragged her by the arm and didnt want to apologize for it, do you.
Here is why current Dem+Rep politics only covers 50% of possible political positions :
https://technomedium.wordpress.com/7-government-policies-must-adapt-and-quickly/
This is also Chapter 7 of the 'ATOM' whitepaper.
Even worse, this is detracting from the fact that various protesters are trying to occupy space to prevent from Trump from talking. The two incidents are not mutually exclusive. Yes, Corey could have grabbed Michelle by the arm, possibly unintentionally. And yes, the protesters can also be in the wrong trying to block Trump from speaking
More votes swing to Trump after stupid tricks like this.
I was looking forward to a discussion on the other thread about reason and emotion and how the mind works, I really was. Nothing. It's all about Trump vs. anti-Trump.
Even in this post no one's much interested in the protest tactics of the Left in yet another attempt to exercise a heckler's veto--what that means if it works, what it says about the nation and our Media that it's seen as acceptable in this context...nothing.
It's downright dispiriting.
Police provide new video showing him grabbing her.
and another:
Update, if no one has seen it yet: Yes, he grabbed her.
still another:
The video (or really just a photo burst) released today is more damning than the earlier videos.
The film is extremely jumpy and does not seem to be a frame by frame rendering. What I saw in the video does not show anyone “grabbing” the reporter. What I see in the video is the reporter impeding Trump’s progress out of the hall and Lewandowski pushing her out of the way. Standard exit security protocol. This incident does not merit charges being brought. It will go nowhere.
This arrest plays right into Trump's hand.
I want to agree but this kerfuffle is so insignificant that I do not believe it will make any difference one way or another. It’s a wash.
I don’t see how they would make up this story literally the second after it happened.
Naivete.
Y'all would have punched his lights out if this was done to your sister or mother.
I would have to see something more than what I’ve seen in order to get angry. Trying to confront someone in a crowded hall and being jostled out of the way as a speaker is trying to leave an auditorium simply does not rise to that level. On the other hand – if I’m desperately looking for something to be outraged about it might be just the ticket.
And neither is acceptable for a campaign manager to do.
That fool Lewandowski! Doesn’t he know his place? How dare he step outside the role we have dictated for him! Such hubris!
What really makes us Trump supporters happier than a climate alarmist driving a Prius is the demonstrators. Let us hope against hope that they try to shut down every Trump rally. Trump couldn’t ask for better publicity.
Being charged with a crime is not a "minor thing." Not to me, anyway.
"You forced me to file charges because you refused to apologize or admit that you did anything wrong at all--you called me a liar" is enough for most people, I guess.
It seems a little childish to me, and to escalate things to a degree not necessary, but I'm just a guy. Possibly the threat to one's credibility is more of a danger/harm when one's a reporter, I dunno.
Anyway the guy grabbed her arm, he's guilty of battery because he grabbed her arm, that's a crime. Fine.
It hurts Trump, it helps Trump, I don't know. It establishes a precedent for sure, and we take another step away from being a nation of adults who can govern ourselves w/o recourse to the coercive power of the State (through the Law). Fine.
Hoodlum doodlum wrote:
I was looking forward to a discussion on the other thread about reason and emotion and how the mind works, I really was. Nothing. It's all about Trump vs. anti-Trump.
Even in this post no one's much interested in the protest tactics of the Left in yet another attempt to exercise a heckler's veto--what that means if it works, what it says about the nation and our Media that it's seen as acceptable in this context...nothing.
I agree. this kerfuffle is ultimately a very minor thing. EXCEPT that Trump and his Trumpbots refuse to simply acknowledge a mistake was made and dig on on the personal destruction. So they themselves get us off the issue you think is more relevant and we're all talking about Corey. Its not hard. Just have Corey say "I didn't realize. I didn't notice I hurt her arm. If I did, I apologize".
Trump and his campaign seem like they have no concept of how to run a campaign. This is damage control 101.
The prosecutor in this case is Dave Aronberg. Part of the Clinton campaign. You cannot make this stuff up.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2016/03/fla_prosecutor_in_trump_campaign_manager_case_is_clinton_backer
Everyone get what I mean when I say the emperor has no clothes? The elephant in the room is that the rule of law is mostly dead, especially when it comes to politics. All that matters is what side you are on.
Trump will stand by a good man who is attacked for being loyal in Trump's service.
That is why people trust him and wear silly red caps in public.
Tcom wrote:
All that matters is what side you are on.
As evidenced by YOU excusing anything because its Trump.
Headline should be "Hillary supporting prosecutor files trumped up charges against Trump campaign manager."
Where is the outrage at this gross abuse of power? I hope that this Corey guy sues the "reporter" and the cops and the prosecutor for all they got.
I think this all falls into the, 'Yes, but how does this all play out politically? category.
Can't apologize now, he's criminally charged. He'll be found guilty, so that's a happy ending all around. Hooray!
rump and his campaign seem like they have no concept of how to run a campaign.
Sure, but he's got all those delegates and all those people who do have a concept of how to run a campaign have dropped out, but other than that I agree 100%.
Maybe it's just that the pro-Trump and anti-Trump people deserve each other, and we as a country deserve to be ruled by (yes, RULED BY) Hillary Clinton and her Supreme Court appointees.
That feels about right. Adult behavior, personal responsibility, naaah, those are passe. It's all about who can complain the loudest, who can get their grievance airtime, who can tie their complaint to the most sympathetic group, and who can use the power of the State to crush their opponents. I get it. It will be hard, at first, to claim to be deeply emotionally traumatized by some innocuous thing my political opponents do, but I have that that I'll find a way to credibly claim it. If I get lucky someone will touch me, and that's a criminal charge right there.
I understand the new rules. One day soon I, too, hope to love Big Brother.
"Trump will stand by a good man who is attacked for being loyal in Trump's service."
then a better way to handle that would be to have Corey apologize for any perceived wrong doing and then have Trump come out and say "I don't think he intended any harm. Therefore, I'm not going to throw him to the wolves simply because someone was unintentionally hurt"
It all comes back to Trump and his staff simply acknowledging that it did occur. If corey did do so, but made his mea culpa I wouldn't suggest he be fired, let alone charged with anything. And I really doubt Michelle would have persisted in making it into an issue. this is like when Clinton got caught shtupping monica (that was way worse by the way) but instead of simplying coming out and ackowledging the fact they started to characterize Lewinsky as a crazy bimbo.
The difference here, is that Corey may have bruised her arm, but ultimately did nothing that bad. The character assassination is the bad part. Just own up to the mistakes and you don't then have to create the smear.
Trump just spoke about the Lewandowski situation a few minutes ago, funny that he didn't mention any "SS guys warning Fields twice not to touch him". If it would've happened Trump would've been put that out there immediatly. Or is lying about the SS an offense of some kind?
jr565 said...She said Corey grabbed her forcibly by the arm, AND HE DID. End of story.
No; middle of story. The denouement is filing criminal charges. The finale is him being found guilty.
The post script? My guess is dozens of charges being filed for incidents like this in the future.
Hammond's been here only a year or two, but seems to him the place has degenerated some.
Used to be more cogent and insightful comments, often from sources with particular knowledge of the subject at hand. Lately, a lot of flame-throwing going on.
Maybe it's the times - election year and such.
Jeeze, people! Make your point and set back. Nobody wins a shouting match.
"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
jr565 said...this is like when Clinton got caught shtupping monica (that was way worse by the way) but instead of simplying coming out and ackowledging the fact they started to characterize Lewinsky as a crazy bimbo.
1.) Clinton was re-elected and is currently massively popular according to most polls. Not sure what that comparison says about Trump or his campaign worker.
2.) Clinton and his team slandered all sorts of women in all sorts of ways, and the Media to this day doesn't have a problem w/that. Again I'm not sure the comparison works in the way you'd like it to.
3.) Clinton lied about his relations w/Lewinsky under oath (what I'm pretty sure used to be called perjury). Is perjury (by a President) worse than battery? I don't know.
"f you hate "the GOPe," get out and go get yourself a new party."
See, you don't belong to the club.
You don't love omnibus spending bills.
You don't love rank hypocrisy from the party you've voted for and fought for, year in and year out.
You don't want to not repeal Obamacare
You don't want to reduce regulations
You don't enjoy the status quo of an in-power-but-feckless opposition.
You don't relish the never-ending imposter status.
Sorry, Hammond.
Florida Assault & Battery Statutes
This "reporter" has 13 minutes left.
Hoodlum doodlum wrote:
1.) Clinton was re-elected and is currently massively popular according to most polls. Not sure what that comparison says about Trump or his campaign worker.
The coverup was worse than the crime. if he had simply said it was true he wouldn't have had to deal with him then being proven to be a liar. And in this case, the Trumpbots are as impervious to truth as the media was when Clinton was lying.
2.) Clinton and his team slandered all sorts of women in all sorts of ways, and the Media to this day doesn't have a problem w/that. Again I'm not sure the comparison works in the way you'd like it to.
Some in the media carried his water. Not all. And republicans certainly didnt' carry his water.
3.) Clinton lied about his relations w/Lewinsky under oath (what I'm pretty sure used to be called perjury). Is perjury (by a President) worse than battery? I don't know.
It depends on the battery. In this case, the perjury is worse. I'm simply saying the problem, any problem really, is made worse by not simply acknowledging the problem and apologizing for it, if its possible.
I actually watched Michelle Fields when she appeared on Cashin' In with Erick bolling on Saturdays. And she was actually one of the better guests, who always had a conservative perspective. So, to have "conservatives" now turn on her and describe her like she's some left wing anti republican reporter just shows you have no idea who you are talking about. Id be willing to bet dollars that until this incident occurred she might have been leaning towards Trump.
Way to lose a voter Trump.
Hoodlum wrote:
1.) Clinton was re-elected and is currently massively popular according to most polls. Not sure what that comparison says about Trump or his campaign worker.
ALso, didn't the Lewinsky scandal occur during his 2nd term? So he wasnt' reelected after the Lewinsky scandal came to light.
Meade said...
Here's the Florida statute. Lewandowski and Trump might have a problem:
1. Actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other; or
Kinda running the gamut here, aren't we?
Who the hell wrote this law?
Under the assumption that no one likes to be touched..
Ever been to a farmer's market, grocery store, bar, movie theatre, been on an airplane, bus, or an elevator?
What am I missing here?
Intentionally touching someone is felony battery? The same as beating someone within an inch of their life?
Look, he's been charged, he'll be found guilty, everyone can be happy. Justice will be served, he'll have a record, she's vindicated, huzzah.
I'll tell you it's been fun to read journalists twitter feeds lately. They may not give 2 shits about violence perpetrated against any number of groups the Left/Media don't care about, but when someone grabs the arm of one of their own it is ON. Oh, so a win for the Media, too, that's always good to see.
"Donald, Donald, but what about your baaaattery?" Coming soon...
You're not missing anything Browdog. It's the law. It's the law pretty much everywhere and it's been the law for a long time.
You've never pressed charges when someone intentionally touches you against your will in public? Next time you should. That's the precedent we're all cheering about. Get on board, buddy.
"It depends on the battery. In this case, the perjury is worse. I'm simply saying the problem, any problem really, is made worse by not simply acknowledging the problem and apologizing for it, if its possible"
Except with a liberal media panting for their "gotcha" moments you can't possibly win. So screw 'em. Trump understands this. Incredibly every other Republican still hasn't internalized this simple fact. So again, screw them. When have you ever heard Obama or Hillary apologize for anything?
"Intentionally touching someone is felony battery?"
That's for Florida to decide, right? But I would think "against the will of the other" is analogous to "without consent" wouldn't you?
Besides common courtesy, this is one reason to apologize when you accidentally make physical contact with another person at a farmer's market, grocery store, bar, movie theatre, on an airplane, bus, an elevator... or anywhere really. I mean, if you stepped on someone's foot in an elevator and the person brought it to your attention, wouldn't you apologize and want to be sure the person's foot is okay? Apparently not Trump and Trump's managers. They'd rather just call the person with the stepped on foot a liar.
I watch the video. I read the thread.
I watch the video again.
I reread the thread.
After many viewings, and re-readings of comments (nonplussed arguments aside) I still cannot see any sort of assault.
That such a non incidence has even surfaced goes a long way toward explaining why angry people are voting for Trump and Sanders.
wouldn't you apologize and want to be sure the person's foot is okay?
So, if you apologize for your crime, the criminal code is moot?
Trump will benefit for not throwing away a good man. Both now and many times in the future. He has done a Rosie O'Donnel escape move from a trap again.
And Cruz has again made an underhanded false attack that makes honest men want to vomit.
"Intentionally touching someone is felony battery?"
That's for Florida to decide, right?
If the law supposes that, the law is a ass.
You should always apologize for any inadvertent contact you make with anyone else to help ensure they don't press charges against you (for battery). Good rule, good rule.
Hey, nothing in the law mentions apologies, though. I mean, if you apologize and they decide to press charges anyway, you know, you're kinda screwed, right?
"So, if you apologize for your crime, the criminal code is moot?"
No. I'm obviously not a lawyer but I think it comes under the category of civil, not criminal. So it would be a possible tort.
But yes, saying, at least, "please excuse me, is there anything I can do to help you" — not necessarily a full apology — might go a long way toward avoiding a tort suit. Immediately calling the person a liar? Eh — not recommended.
I've been working on a settlement agreement this afternoon, so I need to catch up on this wonderful thread (which, thankfully, remains focused squarely on the criminal charge against Corey Lewandowski)...
Tcom - You make it sound like I am all fired up about convicting Corey Lewandowski. But I never was. This story is all about Trump, and Trump statements, and Trump personnel management, and Trump campaigning and Trump style. The story, in a word, is about Trump's reaction.
Drago - When was I duty-bound to attack Hillary Clinton? She's not running for the Republican nomination. In case you haven't gotten it by now, my primary interest is in the Republican nomination and making sure the Trump is not the nominee.
Meade - Laurence, you cited the Florida felony battery statute. I haven't read the whole charging document; I think that Lewandowski was charged under a misdemeanor. The language might be different. He might even have been charged under a misdemeanor ordinance for the City of Jupiter. The thing about misdemeanor charges is that while they carry far less punishment/penalty significance, they are also harder to plead down, and often their terms are so simple, and so clear in their elements, that there is nowhere for a defendant to go. And nowhere for a prosecutor to go. It's not like a felony charge that can be negotiated down to a misdemeanor and every goes away happy with a fine, court costs and probation. It's already down to that level.
Everybody, and especially Tcom - You really ought to understand (many of you do) that Secret Service officers can do a lot of things under cover of law that a candidate's campaign manager cannot. When this story first broke on the 10th, I wondered in writing on these very pages if it had been the Secret Service agent who touched Michelle. And I speculated that it would be an entirely different matter if that were the case. That's not the case. And Corey Lewandowski did not get deputized as a Secret Service agent.
Best of all in all of this is that none of the gnashing of teeth over a Corey Lewandowski conviction does anything for Trump. He will remain mired in a controversy caused by his own belligerent attitude and intermperate remarks (wow!) in the whole matter. And dogged by the story for the immediate future, which seems to be a critical time in Trump's trying to get to 1237.
I'm with Darcy.
I'm no Trump fan and I'm happy to believe Lewandowski is an ass.
But Michelle Fields should be embarrassed to have made a big deal about that, and people who went hard taking her side must be feel a little foolish.
browndog,
I don't think that Corey ultimately was intending to do her harm. And so, those saying he didn't in fact commit assault or battery are right in the sense that this SHOULDN"T be a big deal. The reason its going this far though is because Trump in his stupidity turned the issue of whether Michelle was or was not grabbed by Corey into a she's lying type scenario. So now she has to defend her charge.
Technically it is a battery. Its a misdemeanor though, so my guess is its not going to be a big deal ultimately. But AGAIN, this Trumps doing.
If you apologize right away, it makes it sound like an accident and not intentional. If you say someone who grabbed your arm tried to throw you to the floor, it makes it sound like you grew up in a bubble.
You all know this is the same woman who accused Allen West of "groping" her and the NYPD of "abusing" her, right?
Technically it is a battery. Its a misdemeanor though, so my guess is its not going to be a big deal ultimately. But AGAIN, this Trumps doing.
true.
But if she didn't *want* it to be a big story, she could have let it go. She could have said it was a misunderstanding. She was obviously looking to make it a lasting controversy.
"Not a big deal" is incompatible with "charged with a crime." In my mind, anyway.
She's a drama queen, no doubt.
No, they don't. Honestly, I've stayed away from Althouse for awhile because of all the whiny Anti-Trumpites, but this takes the cake. Seriously, this used to be an intelligent bunch, here in this comment section. Aside from loons like Amanda, I took most of y'all seriously even when I didn't agree. Not all, but most. Now . . . . I just dunno.
My take? The reporter was a whiny brat who saw an opportunity to make hay of something, and of course the WaPo cohort was eager to help and magnify the incident. Nothing more. She wasn't harmed. There is no look of pain on her face. If you expect me to believe that reports aren't jostled, grabbed, and occasionally even pushed at events like these - without pressing charges - you're loony. If you're siding with the reporter, please let me know so we can start a GoFundMe and send you reams of bubble wrap so you can create a safe space for yourself and your family.
The Vololkh Conspiracy had a great article about the legality of heckling to the point of shutting down an event:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/03/14/is-it-a-crime-to-heckle-at-a-campaign-rally/
amielalune said...
You all know this is the same woman who accused Allen West of "groping" her and the NYPD of "abusing" her, right?
In the case of Allen West, her complaint was purely private, and she did not press charges. She was criticized in that case (personally, I believe her, but I wasn't there) and perhaps she learned something about standing up for herself.
In the New York City "Occupy" case, the video shows New York cops pushing her to the ground while she's got a microphone in her hand.
I am so in love with the way the left declares their brand of anger "love", and people who disagree with them to be haters. They have a knack for making themselves into the angels.
Meade said...No. I'm obviously not a lawyer but I think it comes under the category of civil, not criminal.
You posted a section of the criminal code, Meade. I don't understand what you're saying now.
Unintentional touching is a crime, the crime of battery. It may also be a tort (subject to civil action), but it's a crime.
The point the other poster was making was that apologizing doesn't change the fact that it's a crime. Your original point, I think was that apologizing makes it less likely that the person harmed (or "harmed") would press charges, and that's true. But it's also true that if they did decide to press charges the apology wouldn't change the nature of the offense (although it might influence the prosecutor's willingness to try the case, etc).
I was at work today nd have a grand daughter softball game to go to but I was just astonished at Chjuck's comment.
I don't care about Corey Lewandowski; I care about denying Trump the nomination.
Just amazing. You are egging on a crybully in hopes she can conduct enough "lawfare" to hurt a candidate you don't like.
You should up for Lawyer of the Year award.
It's hard to believe but lawyers are sure like that. Jeezus!
Hello Mod'ration my old friend
Publishing comments delayed again
Because some posters they are deletin'
While the rest of us keep bleatin'
And we click to post but the last comment's old refrains
Still remain
And that's the price...of moderation
instead they decided "hey, let's just say this woman is a delusional liar because of course we know for certain Corey never touched her, yes let's go with that!" and Trump even personally getting involved in the smear.
Exactly.
But this is like explaining physics to a monkey. The Trump supporters think this is the "power establishment" out to get their guy and you must stand up to them and be tough and never ever admit error.
This is why they never criticize him. Because to criticize him is to give support to the "power establishment" which must be destroyed. So, whatever he does or says, however he acts, however ignorant he is on issues doesn't matter.
Just defeat the "establishment." At any cost.
These are not conservatives or liberals; they are radical fanatics.
Chuck: "Drago - When was I duty-bound to attack Hillary Clinton?"
LOL
No one said you were. You, on your volition and without prompting, decided to announce publicly on this site that you would not criticize Hillary as long as Trump was in the race.
How is it anyone else has to answer for what you yourself declared? You seem easily confused.....by your own pronouncements.
Chuck: "She's not running for the Republican nomination."
Well then, she should certainly be off-limits for any criticism by all "lifelong republicans". After all, if Hillary is not running for the republican nomination, how oould any non-"poorly educated" individual dare to offer criticism of her for any reason.
Well argued indeed chucky.
chuck: "In case you haven't gotten it by now, my primary interest is in the Republican nomination and making sure the Trump is not the nominee."
Well gee, if one has a "primary interest" how can one be expected to comment on any other matters?
Case closed per Chucky.
Now back to your regularly scheduled program of "lifelong republicans" finding reasons to not criticize Hillary! (for any reason).
Since that might detract from one's "primary interest".
Dear Mr. Lewandowski
Campaign managers are supposed to manage campaigns. Security personnel are supposed to provide security. In the future, if anyone is dumb enough to hire you for the former position ever again instead of the latter, please point to the offending journalist and ask the security person to take care of the situation. If you're any good at managing campaigns you should have succeeded in hired security people who can move people without leaving bruises.
Don't thank me, I'd do the same for any Republican.
Big Mike
Why doesn't Trump just rope off the reporters like Hillary?
That practice comes pre-approved by Amanda and Chuck.
mcullough wrote:
If you apologize right away, it makes it sound like an accident and not intentional. If you say someone who grabbed your arm tried to throw you to the floor, it makes it sound like you grew up in a bubble.
If Corey said he wasn't intending to throw her to the ground and didnt realize the degree to which he hurt her, how is that not a valid defense. It was crowded, I was trying to get to my candidate. This person was in the way, i gently moved her out of the way, because it was crowded and i couldn't get through the crowd. I had no intention of pushing her to the ground. ANd I'm sorry she was hurt, if she was. It wasnt my intention. Michelle, would you like to have another crack at interviewing Trump.
Boom. Problem solved.
How is that not better than "Michelle is a liar. YOu know she's lied before. or "there is no possible way this happened and no filmed evidence of it" or "And even if it did happen, she's just a drama queen,and/or a crybaby SJW just out to get Trump".
For the life of me, I dont get why Trump went down this road considering it would be so easy to get out of the problem by simply acting the way all other campaigns would KNOW how to act.
It shoudln't be this hard to get the guy who dragged the reporter out of the way off the hook. If the intent was to make Corey look like a thug who manhandles reporters you coudln't plan it better.
We keep hearing from all these people how at some point Trump is going to pivot to the center, or that he has these moderate views he's telling people behind the scenes and at some point he will start articulating those, or he will actually get more nuanced over time. This COULD have been a perfect example of one of those times. But they basically made sure that Corey what's his face looks like either a boorish troglydyte or an incompetent unprofessional campaign manager who woudl rather be a security guard than a campaign manager.
I just dont get it. Well I do. The campaign is amateurish beyond belief. But rationally, I don't get it. They SHOULD know better.
jr565: "If Corey said he wasn't intending to throw her to the ground..."
Did Corey throw her to the ground?
If not, how did you establish that he was attempting to do just that?
jr565: "It shoudln't be this hard to get the guy who dragged the reporter out of the way off the hook."
Wait, now Corey was dragging the reporter?
Was that before or after he "intended" to throw her to the ground?
She should have pressed charges against the NYPD that hit her to the ground with a baton, and then when she got back up, hit her down again.
There are two aspects of this that I find interesting. First, and foremost, it looks like Trump and his people overreacted. Once it was clear that this wasn't a Bernie, or even a Hillary, supporter, I think that they should have apologized. Esp. after they discovered she was a somewhat sympathetic (to them) journalist. Just bulling through, and ignoring that, just doesn't sell well.
That said, I suspect that the left is going to get more and more aggressive against Trump, or Cruz if he gets the nomination. This is something that they are likely to duplicate, since it worked so well (though I don't think that the victim here expected her arm to be grabbed). The laws here are in favor of the party that is disrupting campaign events, esp. if they carefully place themselves where they have to be moved. About the only ones who are immune from this are the Secret Service, who can beat the heck out of protesters with something close to impunity. But, anyone else, including Trump's security (as long as they are not sworn LEOs) are not legally entitled to touch protesters, regardless how much they are at fault, and no matter how blatant they are. And, yes, I think that it should be possible to beat the heck out of demonstrators, esp. if they are supporting another candidate. But, that isn't the way that the law works. Unfortunately. This is a vulnerability to the Trump campaign, and they need to figure out, quickly, how to safely and legally address it.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4584445/michelle-fields-occupy-wall-street
Not to mention made her weep.
Trump needs an advance group that goes in and writes "Trump 2016" in chalk on sidewalks. That should make the snowflakes melt.
Trumps running for President. He needs protection. A lot more of it than normal.
I watched the video quite a few times. If I had been the reporter I would have been emotional hurt but not physically hurt. I can pick twigs off the lawn and get a cut that is worse then her hurt.
A reasonable person would watch this video and see a staff member trying to protect Trump. He night not even have thought that much about it with all the people he has to look out for.
So, i did a little detective work and I thought I'd share it with the Trumpbots. THey brought up the ridiculous notion that Michelle made up the conversation after the fact, and there is video out there that supposedly shows they (Michelle fields, and her witness Terris) couln't possibly have the conversation at the time.
So here is the audio of the conversation:
https://www.ijreview.com/2016/03/557732-audio-here-is-the-altercation-between-trumps-campaign-manager-and-michelle-fields/
Note that she is asking Trump the question about affirmative action then you hear Corey say "Excuse me, thank you" That is when he yanks her back. That occurs precisely at :32 seconds into the tape. You then here about ten seconds of crowd noise. Michelle then says "Oh sh*t" at :42 seconds into the tape. And then the conversation starts.
Now lets look at the video that includes when she gets yanked as well as the video that supposedly shows she fabricated the conversation (because she could't possibly have it in the short time she is being filmed).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGz5DPqU-p0&feature=youtu.be
So, the incident takes place at 21:57:46 and all the participants are out of camera view by 21:57: 52. so roughly 5 seconds.
If you go back to the tape and match it to the time of the video, she wouldnt say "Oh sh*t' till 21:57:57. And she's not on tape at that point.
So your stupid tape does not prove that the conversation was fabricated, since it would have taken place when everyone involved was no longer being filmed.
Conspiracy theorists = FAIL.
Naah, people have a right to disrupt Trump events. People have a right to press charges for unwanted touching. Respect people's rights!
Anyway, we have established the rules.
Press press press those charges
Make those charges stick
Go go go to jail now
Elect Hillary quick!
Hands off, don't grab!
Hands off, don't yank!
Let's burn this bitch down
"Suck on this one, eric. Just more video of Trump lying. That's the thing. I expect that Corey will take it to trial, and that a trial date won't happen until after the Convention."
Chuck reminds me of the plaintiff lawyer in the one malpractice case against me that made it to court.
Not only did I win that case but I was awarded $25,000 in costs by the court. Too bad you weren't there, Chuck.
"So your stupid tape does not prove that the conversation was fabricated, since it would have taken place when everyone involved was no longer being filmed.
Conspiracy theorists = FAIL."
And her case will be thrown out.
And your heart will break.
Sniff. Sniff.
Michael K said...
"Suck on this one, eric. Just more video of Trump lying. That's the thing. I expect that Corey will take it to trial, and that a trial date won't happen until after the Convention."
Chuck reminds me of the plaintiff lawyer in the one malpractice case against me that made it to court.
Not only did I win that case but I was awarded $25,000 in costs by the court. Too bad you weren't there, Chuck.
3/29/16, 8:40 PM
lol. I've been defending doctors and hospitals in malpractice cases for 30 years. And I too got sanctions and trial costs awarded against a plaintiff in an outrageous claim that I no-caused. And she had to declare bankruptcy.
You've got me mixed up with the wrong guy, Michael. You think a plaintiffs' lawyer would be a Republican? Srsly?
"You think a plaintiffs' lawyer would be a Republican? Srsly?"
Are you ? I thought you were voting for Hillary.
Trumps campaign manager is a dick. Shock, horror. It's a feature, not a bug. What makes you repugs so amusing is that you argue over what is obvious. The dude was a little rough with her and she is getting her 15-minutes of fame out of the deal. You guys are feminized gossips at a coffee klatch.
Trump campaign mired in "But he/she did it first!"
Presidential.
This is completely absurd.
It's effing skittles and hoodies all over again. With the same level of comment idiocy.
"What makes you repugs so amusing is that you argue over what is obvious."
Remedial reading , Howard.
See if you can recognize yourself.
Chuck lost me as anything but a lefty troll when he bashed Sarah Palin.
Any news on when Fields will be out of the hospital? I hope that she has police protection and that she has been checked for polonium-210 poisoning. You all know how much Trump admires Putin.
tim in Vermont: "Chuck lost me as anything but a lefty troll when he bashed Sarah Palin"
It's worse than that. Chuck is supposed to be some kind of "lifetime republican" LAWYER but was seemingly blissfully unaware of the lawfare used by the left in attempt to bankrupt Palin and her family to the quirks (since corrected) in Alaska law.
All the while declaring Hillary off-limits for criticism.
But hey, "lifetime republican".
Howard: "You guys are feminized gossips at a coffee klatch."
The party of "safe spaces" and "pajama-boy" wishes to make a point about guys being feminized gossips.
Do go on Howard.
I new that Dr Mike "Brentwood" K and Drago the Bus-Driver would take the bait. I considered calling you two out in my post, but thought the better of it, knowing you would call yourselves out.
Thanks for the homework, doc:DRT-derivitive You still seem to wallow in the circular firing squad, what up wid dat? Still feel the need to swat away shyster lawyers embodied by Chuck the pendantic ninny?
Reading your essential Rorschach responses is quite humorous as the science is settle on the OP: Corey's a douche, Michelle is a working girl. Booooooooooooooring
April: 'Trump campaign mired in "But he/she did it first!" Presidential.'
One of the symptoms of narcissism: avoiding accountability.Trump is the new Obama.
He's also a shill for Hillary. Here's how it plays out. Trump gets the nomination and embarrassed, disgusted conservatives, Christians and Tea Partiers stay home. Trump doesn't get it and angry Trumpists stay home. Hillary wins either way.
If Hillary is indicted, Bernie/Fauxcahontas ticket wins.
beautiful.
Trump, loyal to his friend and employee, a good man [Anderson Cooper town hall].
jr, i agree that the audio fields recorded could conceivably have been contemporaneous.
however, it's obviously hammed up for the recording she's making. she's laughing. that's what made me suspect it could have been dubbed later. recall that the audio wasn't released at first; just a transcript (probably because the audio damages its own credibility)
these things just keep happening to her
hoodlum, great tack. who's going to touch your violent agreement?
Howard is masculinized.
Blogger Meade said...
"Intentionally touching someone is felony battery?"
That's for Florida to decide, right? But I would think "against the will of the other" is analogous to "without consent" wouldn't you?
Besides common courtesy, this is one reason to apologize when you accidentally make physical contact with another person at a farmer's market, grocery store, bar, movie theatre, on an airplane, bus, an elevator... or anywhere really. I mean, if you stepped on someone's foot in an elevator and the person brought it to your attention, wouldn't you apologize and want to be sure the person's foot is okay? Apparently not Trump and Trump's managers. They'd rather just call the person with the stepped on foot a liar.
And if they don't apologize, they should be thrown in jail!
Disney World, being in Florida, is filled with criminals, bumping into each other, stepping on feet, and brushing past one another.
The whole wretched place ought to be shut down.
Howard: "I new that Dr Mike "Brentwood" K and Drago the Bus-Driver would take the bait."
I don't believe "Bus-Driver" actually requires a hyphen.
Howard: "I considered calling you two out in my post, but thought the better of it,..."
It's an honor just to be nominated.
I will cut Howard some slack. It's late and given the hour it's entirely understandable he's a few sheets to the wind.
Drago, you lying asshole; when did I "declare Hillary off-limits for criticism"? Quote me. Link to the comment of mine wherein I wrote such a thing. Put up or shut up.
Let's review:
1. fell down in front of cops @ occupy NY 'police brutality!'
2. accused allan west of groping her breast, then withdrew accusation (not necessarily a lie)
3. claimed bruises from being bounced away from Trump, whose entourage she impudently penetrated (interview rape!) (bruises not necessarily a lie - some bruise easy, it shows more after a few hours even tho it was 11am the next day she tweeted her arm)
4. accused Charles Johnson of hacking her computer/icloud then withdrew accusation
5. most damning: hammed it up (phony sounding) in audio she recorded, changed her story after footage revealed she was barely touched
1-5 are too many. Trouble follows her. Object lesson in how thirsty men empower pretty little liars.
Jonathan Graehl:
1. You are lying to the readers of the Althouse blog, when you wrote that Michelle Fields "fell down in front of cops" aat the New York Occupy event. Here is the video link:
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4584445/michelle-fields-occupy-wall-street
2. and 4. Michelle Fields did report (not "accuse") former Congressman Allen West of groping her. And this is where it gets interesting. The guy who reported that indeed West is a serial philanderer and groper, who has been accused by other women of sexual harassment and assault, was Charles Johnson. He seems to have thought that Michelle Fields was probably right about her reporting of West (who's been fired from most of his media jobs now). Michelle Fields did tell some people that she thought Johnson had hacked her computer. Her last word on the subject was that "it was being investigated." I'm okay if Johnson denies it; Michelle is not making any allegations about it now.
3. So, uh, you don't know. Thanks.
5. Rank bullshit. The recording is Fields' own handheld recorder she was using to ask Trump a question; the other voice is Ben Terris of the Washington Post. She didn't change any stories. But she'll be there for a trial, along with Terris. And everybody can get cross-examined.
Speaking of cross-examinations, I am looking forward to the seeing Corey Lewandowski on the stand, if he'll waive his Fifth Amendment privilege and testify. He can answer for this Tweet:
Corey LewandowskiVerified account
@CLewandowski_
@MichelleFields you are totally delusional. I never touched you. As a matter of fact, I have never even met you
What we now know is that Lewandowski's Tweet was a lie from the get-go. Lewandowski called Michelle's editor at Bretibart News to "explain" that he (Lewandowski) grabbed her at a time when he didn't realize that she was with (the pro-Trump) Breitbart, and Lewandowski thought he could smooth things over. Lewandowski admitted in the conversation that he grabbed Michelle. I believe that the statement will be admitted into evidence as an admission against interest. But of course the fact of Lewandowski's unlawful touching isn't in much doubt. I just think his public, false denial is useful to the prosecution in helping to prove a criminal mind, and to blunt any sympathy that Lewandowski might get from a Palm Beach County jury.
And Chuck the one-string banjo plinks on.
I understand a lot of you Trump supporters feel that the "establishment" (i.e., conservatives and liberals who oppose Trump, whether they are donors, politicos, pundits or just regular citizens) is out to get him at any cost. If so, then isn't some part of you at least a little frustrated with Trump for making it so easy to mock and ridicule him?
And before you point out that "he's winning" keep in mind that a solid majority of this country actually prefers Hillary Clinton in a head to head matchup. One of the all-time worst candidates the Democrats ever put up, in a year that the GOP had a better chance to get the White House back after a decade--and she's trouncing this guy. (I know, Reagan in early 1980, but this isn't 1980 and Trump isn't Reagan).
I know if I were a Trump backer I'd be wondering why he keeps sticking his foot in it over every stupid little slight, making enemies of the very people that should be on the natural side of a GOP candidate--Fox News personalities, Breitbart reporters, his primary opponents, their WIVES, for god's sake--what part of any of that makes you think this guy is brilliant? How does your mind process this? I'm sometimes more fascinated by that way of thinking than repulsed by it.
It's about the spectacle now. We are of course fucked no matter what. The lumpenprole Republicans have spoken.
But Michelle Fields should be embarrassed to have made a big deal about that, and people who went hard taking her side must be feel a little foolish.
Maybee, if the campaign manager of a nomination frontrunner and the frontrunner themselves call you a liar for something that actually happened, wouldn't you be a bit irked?
Trump and Good Ole Corey escalated this far beyond the realm of the rational. Instead of resolving the conflict with a reporter of the most supportive major news site of your candidate, they attacked her as lying. It would've taken almost nothing to de-fuse the situation and, instead, they poured gas on it.
Makes one wonder how he can make any deals if this is his reaction to a nothing story.
Hate to break it to all of you ---- Breitbart News ISN'T the "establishment". They are as infatuated with Trump as the MSM is with Hillary. They will side with him for everything, as will most of their writers. This was an idiotic move by the Trump campaign whose only real claim to legitimacy is that he can make a good deal. I'm not seeing it when you decide to turn a marginal supporter into a vocal opponent by simply not knowing when to shut the hell up.
"It's about the spectacle now. We are of course fucked no matter what."
I strongly advise you to start drinking heavily and continuously for the next four years.
"This was an idiotic move by the Trump campaign whose only real claim to legitimacy is that he can make a good deal. I'm not seeing it when you decide to turn a marginal supporter into a vocal opponent by simply not knowing when to shut the hell up."
Exactly. Trump's most famous line is "you're fired!" and he claims he'll fix government by putting in "the best people." Yet here his campaign manager took what should have been a minor nothing of an incident, dialed it up to eleven by smearing the reporter (forcing her to either let her accept a reputation as "delusional" and as making things up, which is career death for a reporter), and instead of firing the guy (not for possibly accidentally grabbing a reporter too roughly, but for lying and smearing someone unnecessarily and taking the campaign off message) he doubles down with this nonsense about the secret service finding her a threat.
This is all just so stupid, and just so typical of the Trump campaign. Does any of this help win in November? Does any of this help the campaign's message? Does any of this scream "competence"?
"Hate to break it to all of you ---- Breitbart News ISN'T the "establishment"."
We're living in Trump World, where Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio--both Tea Party insurgents who upended their party's preferred Senate choices--are called "establishment" while a "billionaire" (I'm going to use quotes around that until Trump actually proves he's worth over a billion dollars, at this point anything he says isn't worth the grain of salt you would take it with) who donated to Hillary Clinton several times, brags that he owns politicians and with a simple phone call can get any news outlet to give him coverage whenever he wants it is the "true outsider".
Remember, in Trump World we don't need logic or facts. We have Trump. He'll make everything better because he says so.
Lesson taught here: A loyal man who serves Donald Trump in a battlefield situation is not thrown into the trash can on a whim. That is what makes a man like Trump so dangerous. He is a great leader.
Look, he's been charged, he'll be found guilty, everyone can be happy.
I wouldn’t be too sure of that.
I see a lot of “Lewandowski lied” comments. You know, Lewandowski has been part of Trump’s entourage from the beginning and as such has probably touched a myriad of individuals when clearing the way as Trump exits a gathering. Something so common, so ordinary and so innocuous – I’m thinking Lewandowski could easily not remember it.
The reporter was trying to get Trump to stop and answer her question as Trump and his group was trying to exit a crowded hall. She herself grabbed Trump during the incident. I have seen these scenes after a Trump gathering and Trump is more or less mobbed by the crowd for autographs, handshakes and a word with the candidate.
We have seen a man rushing the podium as Trump was speaking. In that incident Trump’s personal employees were on the podium very quickly to shield Trump, quicker than the Secret Service agents who are tasked with protecting Trump, BTW. I think that Trump is ripe for an assassination attempt, probably gets threats every day and I am not very confident in Trump’s Secret Service detail. I remember when George Wallace was shot. Here’s Wiki on the subject:
For the next four months, Wallace's campaign proceeded extremely well. However, it came to an abrupt halt on May 15, 1972, when he was shot five times by Arthur Bremer while campaigning at the Laurel Shopping Center in Laurel, Maryland, at a time when he was receiving high ratings in national opinion polls.
http://tinyurl.com/hfcmcyu
Wallace was an outsider candidate. The MSM of that day and the establishment politicians ginned up a lot of hate against Wallace, just as they have with Trump, openly portraying Trump as a Nazi and a fascist. Wallace was doing well in the polls, beating his establishment opposition and Wallace was shot in a crowd while campaigning. The parallels are troubling.
Given this example and Trump’s situation I believe Lewandowski was entirely justified in preventing the reporter from causing Trump to stop when Trump was trying to get out. We’ll see what a jury thinks. I’m thinking Lewandowski will have excellent legal representation.
Not long ago I believed this kerfuffle was insignificant and not advantageous to either side. I am thinking now that it might work out to Trump’s advantage, especially when Trump’s opposition labels this banal incident as “violence.” The public will see the video and will see that there is no “violence” at all. And best of all the public will see the crazy demonstrators at the Trump rallies. Better publicity couldn’t be bought. The MSM and the #neverTrumpers can always be counted on to overreach when it comes to Trump.
Maybee, if the campaign manager of a nomination frontrunner and the frontrunner themselves call you a liar for something that actually happened, wouldn't you be a bit irked?
Well, sure, but she was making a big deal about it before they even had a chance to call her a liar. And she exaggerated about the incident, so saying 'it actually happened' is a stretch. She was grabbed, I'm sure she was embarrassed and mad, but she made the choice to make a big fat deal about it, and then they made the stupid choice to deny, and it's been a vortex of overreaction and stupidity ever since.
"Well, sure, but she was making a big deal about it before they even had a chance to call her a liar. And she exaggerated about the incident, so saying 'it actually happened' is a stretch. She was grabbed, I'm sure she was embarrassed and mad, but she made the choice to make a big fat deal about it, and then they made the stupid choice to deny, and it's been a vortex of overreaction and stupidity ever since."
I don't know what every commenter on this thread said about the incident, but the impression I get is that there are three general takes on this:
1) Fields was roughly manhandled, severely enough to cause bruising, and was entirely reasonable in filing a police report against her assailant.
2) Fields was roughly manhandled, perhaps by accident, and when she complained publicly the Trump camp decided instead of apologizing, explaining or (perish the thought) saying nothing for once, they lied and smeared her, calling her a delusional fabulist. As this is not just humiliating but career damaging (her employer taking Trump's side caused her to quit), she had no choice but to escalate and prove she wasn't lying. The police report was overboard, but at no point did the Trump campaign do the intelligent and reasonable thing and just say "sorry, we didn't mean to hurt you, we were just trying to keep people back from the candidate". Had they done that, and Fields continued to escalate, yes she would have been the villain here and Trump's team would have looked unfairly picked on. But no, that's not how the "never apologize, never wrong" Trump team operates.
3) Then we have the pro-Trump take on this, which is that Fields is a crazy dishonest liar, that the video shows something you can't actually see, and Trump's shifting stories (first they never touched her, second they had to move her because she was a secret service threat and Corey had to do the SS's job for them apparently) were perfectly sensible rebuttals to this attention-whore woman, and Trump is a good man for sticking by his campaign manager who lied and smeared a reporter from a friendly media outlet even though this takes them off message and makes the campaign look out of control. Because everyone else is out to get Trump so it's time to circle the wagons.
I'm in camp 2.
Brando- I'm camping with you.
Camp 2.
I think I'll camp with Kasich.
There’s an interesting article in The Federalist by a conservative who is pro-Trump. It starts out with this …
Since I consider myself a traditional conservative, many friends of mine, on both the Right and the Left, are puzzled by my unwavering support for Donald Trump.
http://tinyurl.com/hjh64pl
Any true Scotsmen out there?
Also, I appreciate that Chuck, although totally opposed to Trump and one of Trump’s leading detractors that are commenting here, has stated that he will vote for Trump should Trump be the nominee. And I will do the same if Trump loses the nomination. No suicide 3rd party, no staying home on voting day out of spite. Chuck and I will do the right thing – one of us will swallow hard and pull the sensible, realistic lever in the voting booth in November.
We have to think about what will happen to America if the Democrats seat some more Lefties on the SCOTUS. I smile when I see stuff about the GOP “politicizing” the nomination process. Has there been a time in this century and the last when the SCOTUS was NOT a political entity?
Grackle; no, Lewandowski lied and there is no explaining it and no excusing it. He Tweeted to the world, barel more than a day after this incident, that it didn't happen and Michelle was not credible. He wrote that he didn't touch her and never met her. He's either lying or grievously mistaken.
In either event, he owes a public apology.
(I was replying, just above, to Grackle's earlier post about Lewandowski's particulars and not about general election votes.
I accept what he said about the latter.)
Not rereading all the posts above, so pardon if someone else pointed this out. But the prosecutor who charged the Trump aid with battery is apparently a Hillary contributor and supporter. And, that, of course, makes sense, since the reporter very likely would not have made a formal complaint resulting in this arrest otherwise. Why not? Because right now, she is persona non grata with the Trump campaign and probably suspect with the other Republican campaigns. In short, unable to do her job, unless she wants to follow Hillary (whose campaign is highly scripted, and she is meticulously protected from the press) or maybe Sanders. And, yes, this is exactly the type of campaign tricks that she is known for.
Wrong, Bruce. You have been credulously and uncritically consuming the wrong media.
The charging document in question was not produced by the Palm Beach County State's Attorney. It was produced by Jupiter police officers, as essentially what a lot of states call a "warrant and information." It simply sets forth the terms of what will be a probable cause hearing. Which is what is going to happen with Lewandowski, on May 4.
So your presumption that this is a politically-motivated charge based in your characterization of the prosecutor is simply and wholly without merit.
Post a Comment