So Trump attacks Berkeley [and it's not Berkeley in any real sense but truth poliving trump is too much work] for protesting alt right neofaschist internet troll? Like Trump's free speech priority is Milo? I don't remember Obama threatening people for freezing out the black panthers.

Also, trump mentions freezing funding for UCB...which has a national lab..run by the dept of energy...which is heavily involved in r and d around...nukes.

Berkeley isn't an ivy league school for upper class kids to get liberal arts degrees. It's more focused on science, engineering, and computers/programming.

Also don't forget there is a conflict of interest here. Milo is an editor at large at Breitbart--the same Breitbart that Steve Bannon was CEO of before his roles as White House Chief Strategist and now on the NSC.

http://www.salon.com/2016/09/14/trum...ght-by-police/

While definitely a conflict, it's like number 72 in the Trump conflictapalooza.

Black Protester Is Sucker-Punched by White Donald Trump Supporter at Rally
https://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...lly-protester/

The greatest trick milo ever pulled was all those headshots that make him look like an actor rather than a mix of Lindsay Lohan and Steve Bannon.

Let's check back into before those protests to see what Shoe thought about them at the time:
Huh.

You know a question that might be worth bandying about the whole thinkosphere is how come Young Republican clubs keep on inviting a racist and sexist speaker whose entire bit is that he's outrageously racist and sexist?

Any sort of like, counterproductivity there? Like about the message it sends to minorities? No? Huh. Kind of telling that when you apply the lessons of antifascist direction action against dip**** racists your concern is "that could be ME getting punched and having video of that punch set to the drum fill from In the Air Tonight!"

I'm AOK with Trump mocking the prayer breakfast; that's just a bull**** sop to the far right that no one should take seriously.

Nah. The greatest trick that troll did was to allow the right to pretend it isn't trying to silence its opposition even though their Führer and Minister Bannon are doing the best they can to do just that.

I was all for protesting the speaker last night, the violence ruined it.

The violence of a radical communist/anarchist group (not students). Guess what? That **** happens when the President has inflamed violence himself.

Corporations silence the left. When's the last time you saw Noam Chomsky on commercial media? Even NPR? He goes on media a lot, but almost only totally listener funded networks have him on. Bill Maher had him on once and said he was the most requested guest.

There are lots of other far left people in the country, but no farther left than Milo is right, but you've never heard of them.

100 percent this

honestly don't have any idea what the links you posted are supposed to prove?

And the Fuhrer (your term, previous post) inflamed the 'crowd' to violence precisely how? By winning the election on the square?

Never read the story about the Boy Who Cried Wolf as a kid, I guess..... There really needs to be a Chicken Little thread here.....

I know you have no ability to comprehend reality from the fictitious world which you choose to live in. Trump in no uncertain terms advocated violence at his rallies.

I'm not crying wolf. When you try to silence the press and opposition like Trump you have made it clear what your intent is. You're an enemy to freedom.

The current occupant of the Oval Office isn't pretending to be a democratically elected government. He IS the democratically elected government according to the long established laws of this particular country.

You fellas are going to have to get over it at sometime. The laws are what they are in the USA and they can be changed. The US Constitution has been amended 27 times I believe.

Until then.... welcome to our Orange Overloard.

How did he try to silence the press? Did Brown Shirts invade the print room at the Washington Post?

I strongly believe you know the answer to this. You are trolling. Ban?

Like I implied before. You are divorced from reality.

What do you do when you call your representative? Is the person who answers the one you talk to about the issues you are worried about and how you want that person to vote?

What? You think the best argument in support of shutting down someone from speaking is that, if you dont, someone might listen to them? I mean yeah its a "good argument" I guess. Can you think of any situation where it wouldn't apply though? Anyone who has a view different from mine seems like a ripe victim for this "good argument."