Quote:
Originally Posted by ogallalabob
Does it matter who shut Milo down? It is clear he was shut down due to violence and illegal means.
No one was hurt.
Quote:
The peaceful protesters would not have been able to shut him down.
And that's why you like 'peaceful protesters', isn't it?
Quote:
Milo was invited, he had every right to speak...
No, he hadn't. Because his own website, Breitbart, had billed him as planning to incite direct personal hostility against named individual students who have done nothing wrong. And that is not the legitimate exercise of free speech. And people can protest against that kind of thing all they like.
Quote:
Further, it is clear that Warren was attacking Sessions character. Just because it is an old letter and from MLK's wife really is besides the point. Warren agreed with the attacks and indicated they would go on if allowed to speak. Now maybe the Senate should get rid of the rule and let the Senators make such attacks. It would make for a more interesting Senate but that is not the rules.
No, Rule XIX did not apply because Coretta Scott King, via Warren, was not referring to Sessions' conduct as a United States Senator (since he was not a senator at the time), nor did the debate have to do with his fitness to serve as a United States Senator but his fitness to serve as Attorney General.
But you just despise Martin Luther King, and Coretta Scott King, and Elizabeth Warren, and Democrats and ******-lovers generally, and you just want to 'keep 'em down', don't you?