Why Labeling Antifa a Terrorist Org Terrifies Me

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Wow, the lies you keep telling yourself just to bash at Trump...

First off all, Sally Yates was the United States Deputy Attorney General, and was acting as Attorney General, until January 30th, 2017, and she was/is anti-Trump...

Not to mention that even when Rod Rosestein was made U.S. Deputy Attorney General, from April 2017 until May 2019, the DOJ was continuing their anti-Trump campaign using the false claims from "The Russians" which was paid by Hillary Clinton and the DNC...

So, you are making false claims yet again about President Trump when in fact the DOJ was full of Obama's people/establishment whom have been and continue to be anti-Trump...

But go ahead and keep on lying your arse off...

originally posted by: DustDoses

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: spite


And antifa terrorism is real, so there is that too

Buckle up, what we've got here is an overdue comeuppance

LOL. There is zero evidence of "Antifa terrorism.". You're literally making things up.


Historically speaking, fascist leaders will always strawman the oppositional ideologies in an attempt to remove the rights of citizens to express their opinions freely. Because he's a fascist, Trump is comfortable labeling anyone who disagrees with him a terrorist.

While the actual known domestic terrorists are usually right wingers, Christchurch, El Paso, Tree of life, etc etc etc. That or right wing islamic.

Yeah. It's more accurate to call Antifa a criminal organization.

There's no realistic danger of them acquiring a nuclear weapon and blowing up a city. They're not going to take over a plane and fly it into a building.

(I think the atom bomb argument is the only reason people allow terrorism to be treated differently from ordinary crime.)

So some of you are claiming that Rose City Antifa is not a coordinated, financed and organized group?

Again, this cell structure is common among terror groups and criminal organizations.

Personally, I'd rather see those involved prosecuted under much easier to prove RICO statutes. Sentences are more severe and harder to appeal as well.

Oh look, Trump is now trying to claim the old man that was pushed by a Buffalo police officer is actually an "Antifa provocateur."

It's almost like my fears are becoming reality.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

He was a provocatuer. Whether its antifa or some other radical left wing group, his actions were motivated by a violent radical ideology that seeks to overturn the Republic and replace it with some liberal nightmare. By the way, only a complete idiot approachs law enforcement like that. Its a tactical formation. Do not interfere. Do not obstruct. You won't get moved if you follow those two basic steps.

Personally I think he got what he deserved. This guy is the next hoax Nathan Phillips, not buying it.

Wish Phillips' loud mouth would've got shoved down too, to be completely honest. Phillips is almost as bad as DaNang Dick Blumenthal, another left wing phony fake hoaxer.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
In December 2017 the first six defendants went to trial. They were found not guilty as the DOJ was unable to provide any evidence that these six people took part in planning a riot. The DOJ stated that they should be convicted anyway.

You do realize the DOJ at that time was still essentially the Obama DOJ, right? Hell, it is still probably 75% Obama's DOJ.