Bruddah IZ
DA
Is this aligned with the New Green Deal? Or is AOC going to kill another 25,000 jobs like she did in New York with Amazon?
Today in Fascism
- Thread starter Hüsker Dü
- Start date
Maybe -- https://seekingalpha.com/article/4297502-gms-bolt-experience-shaping-new-electric-vehicle-strategy
The supposed 25,000 jobs didn't disappear (if they were ever going to appear at all) - they will just go somewhere else.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Too bad for NY. The greenest city in the nation.
Nothing wrong with " Unions "...it's how YOU and YOUR Political ilk
misuse Unions and the funds to manipulate workers thru fear and intimidation if
they don't toe the Party line dictated to them .....
In other words you are scum....
President Donald Trump claimed earlier this month that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told him that his phone call with the Ukrainian president was “the most innocent phone call that I’ve ever read.”
But McConnell said Tuesday he’s never had a conversation about the phone call with the president.
This guy Trump lies the same way you fans do on this blog!
But McConnell said Tuesday he’s never had a conversation about the phone call with the president.
This guy Trump lies the same way you fans do on this blog!
QUOTE="Dominic, post: 294878, member: 1"
“All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here — a lynching.
But we will WIN!”
This guy doesn't stop, and you guys condone this statement.
No he doesn't, and I would NOT either if being attacked like he is daily....
All of these accusations are FALSE and you know it !
It's absolutely disgusting what the Democrats are doing.......!
So I'm to take it that YOU endorse " Guilty until proven innocent "
is THAT the message you want to convey on this Forum as the moderator...!
I don't think so.....
There's nothing to condone or condemn ....he is standing up for himself...
Something I have NOT witnessed from leaders of this Country in quite awhile...
I have read the phone transcript multiple times and you'd have to live in fantasy land to
decipher the accusations Adam Schiff has gotten out of the call.....
Kinda funny how he is NOW the top LIAR in Congress and the secret Whistleblower
seeking protection all at once....Eric Camerillo is NOT the Whistleblower.
/QUOTE
What's wrong with what he said.....
He used the word in a pejorative sense....
pe·jo·ra·tive
/pəˈjôrədiv/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
adjective: pejorative
expressing contempt or disapproval.
“All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here — a lynching.
But we will WIN!”
This guy doesn't stop, and you guys condone this statement.
No he doesn't, and I would NOT either if being attacked like he is daily....
All of these accusations are FALSE and you know it !
It's absolutely disgusting what the Democrats are doing.......!
So I'm to take it that YOU endorse " Guilty until proven innocent "
is THAT the message you want to convey on this Forum as the moderator...!
I don't think so.....
There's nothing to condone or condemn ....he is standing up for himself...
Something I have NOT witnessed from leaders of this Country in quite awhile...
I have read the phone transcript multiple times and you'd have to live in fantasy land to
decipher the accusations Adam Schiff has gotten out of the call.....
Kinda funny how he is NOW the top LIAR in Congress and the secret Whistleblower
seeking protection all at once....Eric Camerillo is NOT the Whistleblower.
/QUOTE
What's wrong with what he said.....
He used the word in a pejorative sense....
pe·jo·ra·tive
/pəˈjôrədiv/
Learn to pronounce
adjective
adjective: pejorative
expressing contempt or disapproval.
Hüsker Dü
DA
Apparently it's just what you were told to believe and have no true rationale to support that.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Too politically incorrect.
Bruddah IZ
DA
awwww you’re jealous
Sheriff Joe
DA
Hey bomb thrower, do you know what party is responsible for real lynching?
Have you heard all the libs saying the Clinton impeachment was a lynching?
Including Joe Biden?
You are no Republican, you sound more like McCain.
Just keep reading my stuff and you can turn it around.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Ben is a pretty smart guy,
The 'Lynching' Controversy and the Death of Common Language
Ben Shapiro | Oct 23, 2019 4:15 PM
Source: AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
In the Bible, the people of Babel unite in fighting God; they decide to build a massive tower to challenge God's supremacy. God, annoyed by their presumption, promptly causes them to speak a variety of tongues, dividing them and ending the foolhardy project.
The story represents a simple truth: unity relies, at least in large part, on shared language.
In the United States, we're watching our shared language disintegrate.
On Tuesday, President Donald Trump fired off one of his infamously impassioned tweets about the Democrats' impeachment inquiry. Frustrated by Democrats' lack of clarity on process with regard to that inquiry, Trump wrote: "So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights. All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here -- a lynching. But we will WIN!"
Trump's use of the word "lynching" immediately set off a firestorm. Characteristic among denunciations was one from former Vice President Joe Biden, who imperiously intoned: "Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It's despicable."
There was just one problem: Biden used the exact same language in October 1998 to describe the Clinton impeachment. "History is going to question whether or not this was just a partisan lynching," Biden said back then. Which prompted Biden -- today's Biden -- to condemn himself, stating: "That wasn't the right word to use and I'm sorry about that. Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily."
Oh.
So when Joe Biden used the word "lynching" to describe his perception of a politically motivated impeachment in 1998, that was merely poor word choice. When Trump used it in 2019, he obviously meant to liken himself to black victims of white supremacist violence.
Or, alternatively, everyone is full of it.
Politics is wildly skewing our use of basic language. And that phenomenon is one of the key factors tearing apart the country. Every word becomes a potential dog whistle. Every phrase is parsed by the politically motivated for signs of malign intent. Politically correct language policing becomes the order of the day. Misunderstanding becomes malice; clarity becomes confusion.
The deliberate confusion fostered regarding gender pronouns is yet another example of this phenomenon. It is not a sign of malice to suggest that gender pronouns refer to objective measures of sex. It is a sign of a delusional culture to suggest that third party use of gender pronouns must refer instead to subjective self-identification. Yet we are told that virtue mandates that we pretend that transgender women are women, even if that means that biological men compete with biological women in sport; we are told that virtue requires that parents call their confused 7-year-olds by their chosen pronouns, even though confused children desperately require guidance, love and advice from parents, not mere affirmation of malleable self-identification.
We cannot have conversations with one another if we refuse to define terms. But refusal to define terms is one of the most fruitful methods of impugning others. If we seek division rather than unity, we'll certainly find it. And as we cordon ourselves off into separate interpretations of language we once held in common, we're less and less likely to ever again find common ground.
Ben Shapiro, 35, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of "The Ben Shapiro Show" and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is the author of the No. 1 New York Times bestseller "The Right Side Of History." He lives with his wife and two children in Los Angeles. To find out more about Ben Shapiro and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
The 'Lynching' Controversy and the Death of Common Language
Ben Shapiro | Oct 23, 2019 4:15 PM
Source: AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
In the Bible, the people of Babel unite in fighting God; they decide to build a massive tower to challenge God's supremacy. God, annoyed by their presumption, promptly causes them to speak a variety of tongues, dividing them and ending the foolhardy project.
The story represents a simple truth: unity relies, at least in large part, on shared language.
In the United States, we're watching our shared language disintegrate.
On Tuesday, President Donald Trump fired off one of his infamously impassioned tweets about the Democrats' impeachment inquiry. Frustrated by Democrats' lack of clarity on process with regard to that inquiry, Trump wrote: "So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights. All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here -- a lynching. But we will WIN!"
Trump's use of the word "lynching" immediately set off a firestorm. Characteristic among denunciations was one from former Vice President Joe Biden, who imperiously intoned: "Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It's despicable."
There was just one problem: Biden used the exact same language in October 1998 to describe the Clinton impeachment. "History is going to question whether or not this was just a partisan lynching," Biden said back then. Which prompted Biden -- today's Biden -- to condemn himself, stating: "That wasn't the right word to use and I'm sorry about that. Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily."
Oh.
So when Joe Biden used the word "lynching" to describe his perception of a politically motivated impeachment in 1998, that was merely poor word choice. When Trump used it in 2019, he obviously meant to liken himself to black victims of white supremacist violence.
Or, alternatively, everyone is full of it.
Politics is wildly skewing our use of basic language. And that phenomenon is one of the key factors tearing apart the country. Every word becomes a potential dog whistle. Every phrase is parsed by the politically motivated for signs of malign intent. Politically correct language policing becomes the order of the day. Misunderstanding becomes malice; clarity becomes confusion.
The deliberate confusion fostered regarding gender pronouns is yet another example of this phenomenon. It is not a sign of malice to suggest that gender pronouns refer to objective measures of sex. It is a sign of a delusional culture to suggest that third party use of gender pronouns must refer instead to subjective self-identification. Yet we are told that virtue mandates that we pretend that transgender women are women, even if that means that biological men compete with biological women in sport; we are told that virtue requires that parents call their confused 7-year-olds by their chosen pronouns, even though confused children desperately require guidance, love and advice from parents, not mere affirmation of malleable self-identification.
We cannot have conversations with one another if we refuse to define terms. But refusal to define terms is one of the most fruitful methods of impugning others. If we seek division rather than unity, we'll certainly find it. And as we cordon ourselves off into separate interpretations of language we once held in common, we're less and less likely to ever again find common ground.
Ben Shapiro, 35, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of "The Ben Shapiro Show" and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is the author of the No. 1 New York Times bestseller "The Right Side Of History." He lives with his wife and two children in Los Angeles. To find out more about Ben Shapiro and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
The southern racist party. After being kicked out of the Democrat Party in the 60's and 70's they landed running at full speed in Nixon's Southern Strategy Republican Party.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Hypocrites and Liars: Democrats’ History With The Word ‘Lynching’
Derek Hunter | Oct 24, 2019 12:01 AM
Source: AP Photo/Ringo H.W. Chiu
Anyone really believe the pearl-clutching class was actually upset about President Trump comparing the secret impeachment inquiry into him to a lynching? Democrats could barely catch their breath as they expressed their outrage over the tweet, and self-promoting TV conservatives fell right in line. What some people will do to maintain contracts that allow them to avoid honest work and having marketable skills or talent.
Lost, or ignored, in all the MSNBC peacocking, CNN posturing, and House and Senate pandering was the fact that Donald Trump was absolutely correct.
Words have meanings. That everyone understands this and knows those meanings is what allows us to communicate with one another. But it’s becoming increasingly difficult to communicate with some people, partially because they are, at their cores, dishonest shameless self-promoters or partisan hacks willing to sell their soul for even the taste of power or fame. But at the root of all of that is the enthusiastic embrace of changing anything to suit their needs at any given moment.
The “lynching” example is only the latest, but hardly the only, example of this.
The word “lynch” has a meaning, as it always has. Dictionary.comdefines it as “to put to death, especially by hanging, by mob action and without legal authority.” Merriam-Webster has it, “to put to death (as by hanging) by mob action without legal approval or permission.”
Those definitions are so similar because that’s what the word means and has always meant. It has nothing to do with skin color or any other extenuating circumstance. No matter how horrible something was done in its name, the word describing it means the same thing.
Unless you’re a liberal.
The horrible offense leftists were pretending to feel over the president’s accurate metaphorical description of the actions against him was nowhere to be found when the word was casually tossed around by Democrats in the late '90s to defend Bill Clinton from impeachment for actual crimes. A conga line of Democrats expressed disgust over impeaching Clinton for committing perjury, subornation of perjury, and obstruction of justice. (Here’s just a taste, and some of them were old white guys.)
John Kerry tossed around the word without notice, so did Harry Reid. And Al Sharpton compared supporters of Justice Brett Kavanaugh to Klansmen who attended church before attending a lynching.
Even Democratic frontrunner Joe Biden said of the Clinton impeachment, “Even if the president should be impeached, history is going to question whether or not this was just a partisan lynching.”
These are but a few examples of the hypocrisy, but more importantly it’s all a lie.
Lynching was horrible, but not unique to any race, not even in the United States. Lynchings, sadly, have a long history in human existence that continues to this day.
Yet liberals do associate it with one race, for political gain.
Yes, the majority of lynchings in the US were of black people, but that only tells part of the story. The part the left doesn’t want to discuss is the fact that near, if not all, were committed by Democrats.
The Democratic Party was the party of the KKK, the party of segregation, the party of Jim Crow. The official position of the Democratic Party was to keep black people subjugated, and it still is today in places Democrats control.
Democrats made it illegal to educate black people. When that was no longer sustainable, they imposed a sub-standard education system that still doesn’t educate black children.
When Democratic policies could no longer segregate based on race, Democrats embraced a “diversity” posture that encourages separate school dances, graduations, dormitories, etc., based on race. They also instill in people identity politics that pressures people to identify only with others who look like them. Ask Condi Rice, Clarence Thomas, or Tim Scott how tolerant leftists are of people who don’t conform.
The Democratic Party’s history is steeped in the control and manipulation of black Americans, their present is as well. They preach of how Republicans are oppressors who they’ll keep at bay. Meanwhile, all the liberal policies implemented under the guise of improving life in black communities have only increased the very troubles they were promised to fix. If Republicans were truly out to “destroy the black community, there would be no more effective way to do that than to support liberal policies. They don’t.
Yet fear, the most powerful human emotion, has been deployed skillfully here to convince people to override what they see, what they know to be true, and act against reality. Fear and anger override logic every time.
That’s the Democrat Party’s game plan, not just for 2020 but for the foreseeable future (I wrote a whole book, Outrage, INC, explaining exactly how they do it on every issue).
People will still fall for it, people are always open to emotional manipulation, especially from people in positions we’re supposed to be able to trust. But it’s a lie, and the people doing it know it’s a lie. Make no mistake, the color of the skin of the people doing it does not matter, this is about power, obtaining and holding it. The lust for power has no skin tone, nor does it care about it beyond how it can be weaponized.
It’s cynical, corrupt and, if you know the actual history of the movement and the atrocities committed to advance it, it’s totally progressive.
Sheriff Joe
DA
Share| Twitter|
October 24, 2019
Joe Biden suddenly sorry for using the word 'lynching'
By Monica Showalter
It's almost as if Trump plans it.
Trump threw out a common figure of speech comparing his breakneck-speed impeachment with a 'lynching.' That triggered the customary arrow volley from the press about 'racism,' and Trump flicked it off. But then the magic moment came as the whole hullabaloo start to spear Joe Biden instead, leaving the Democratic frontrunner on the floor bleeding.
According to the Washington Post:
SCRANTON, Pa. — Joe Biden offered a rare apology on Tuesday night, saying he was sorry for using the phrase “partisan lynching” two decades ago to describe an impeachment proceeding. It came several hours after Biden had called President Trump “despicable” and “abhorrent” for saying the impeachment proceedings against him were a “lynching.”
Rare? What kind of bee ess is that?
Biden lives to apologize, he's desperate, he'll do anything to win the wokesters over, and in the case of using the word 'lynching' which he used twenty years ago during the Clinton impeachment, he's obviously shaking in his boots about losing his one electoral advantage, his popularity with black voters.
If Biden's not apologizing, he's backtracking. The Post notes that he often does half-apologies, (which befits a guy who's never truly sorry), but that's nonsense -- apologies are a way of life for him.
Here's just a small list of some past apologies from Joe.
Last July, it was this:
Joe Biden apologized Saturday for his remarks about working with segregationists during his time in the Senate but again stopped short of saying that it was wrong to work with them amid a defense of his broader civil rights record.
In June, it was this:
Earlier this month, the former vice president abandoned his decadeslong support for the Hyde Amendment, a middle-ground measure that bans federal funding for most abortions. It was a reversal that showed Biden could be pushed into a progressive corner that demands choice for women who want abortions and denies it to those who do not want to bankroll a procedure that goes against their deeply held beliefs.
In April, it was this:
Former vice president Joe Biden, in a two-minute video released Wednesday, defended past behavior of close contact with women that has come under recent scrutiny, but also said he’s able to change.
The response from Biden, who is laying the groundwork for a potential presidential run, came a day after two more women shared stories of encounters with him that they alleged were inappropriate. Their comments followed similar complaints from two other women.
In January, it was this:
As former Vice President Joe Biden mulls a potential 2020 presidential run, he's apologizing for his past stances on criminal-justice issues.
In September, it was this:
Former Vice President Joe Biden apologized to Anita Hill Friday for not stopping senators from grilling her during hearings he held on Clarence Thomas' Supreme Court confirmation, though he stopped short for saying sorry over his own actions.
That's just a mini-list, there are surely other examples.
Biden's also a reverse-apologist, a slobbering panderer. Remember how he bragged to a gay audience that President Obama kissed him after he came out for gay marriage? I wrote about that here.
What it boils down to is one sorry candidate. Trump doesn't apologize for stupid woke things. Biden does. Voters are going to notice.
Sheriff Joe
DA
October 24, 2019
Of Course President Trump Is Being Lynched
By Brian C. Joondeph
President Donald Trump once again did the unthinkable: he hit back against the media and their political party, also known as the Democrats, over their contrived efforts to impeach him for the unforgivable sin of beating their chosen 2016 presidential candidate.
Impeachment is being pushed without authorization from the full House, as in, "The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment." The Constitution gives this power not to the speaker or the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, but to "The House," meaning the entire House.
Sure, the House can change the rules. They could vote to make Joy Behar the speaker of the House, since the speaker does not have to be a member of Congress, but that would be a radical departure from precedent, just as the current impeachment process is.
How is the House pushing impeachment? Through a "secret" process rather than through a "due" process. Hearings are conveniently being held clandestinely, since, if the oxymoronic "House Intelligence" Committee holds hearings, everything can be covered under a blanket of "national security." The accusers call witnesses while the defense can only watch, unable to take notes or call their own witnesses, subpoena documents, receive transcripts of the proceedings, or anything else normally afforded the defense under the due process of American jurisprudence.
How would one describe such a circus? How about using the word "lynch"? Cambridge Dictionary describes lynching: "If a crowd of people lynch someone who they believe is guilty of a crime, they kill them without a legal trial, usually by hanging." By the way, lynching is a diverse process, applicable to anyone, regardless of skin color, sex, or any other characteristic. Supreme Court nominees Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas, while of different skin colors, were both treated to Democrat lynchings.
The hanging bit might be a bit over the top, as Democrats don't really want to hang President Trump. Or do they? Bette Midler, a good stand in for Joy Behar for the speaker job, wants to hang not only Trump, but also his family, "good and high." So does some tolerant California State University professor who believes that "Trump must hang. The sooner and the higher, the better."
The Legal Dictionary defines lynching as "[v]iolent punishment or execution, without due process, for real or alleged crimes." That certainly describes the House approach — no due process and only alleged crimes.
The president understands this better than anyone, as he is the one being led to the gallows. As he is prone to do, he took to Twitter with this response: "All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here — a lynching. But we will WIN!"
As predictable as sunrise and sunset, the media's collective heads exploded in unison over Trump's use of the word "lynching." The Left has hijacked the term to serve its pandering civil rights agenda, and for Trump to use it is an unacceptable affront to Democrats.
The Guardian ran this headline: "Fury as Trump compares impeachment inquiry to lynching." In lockstep, the New York Timesreplied, "The term lynching invokes the decades-long racist history of white mob murders of black people beginning in the late 1800s and through the late 1960s."
Wow — the N.Y. Times is throwing Democrats under the bus by saying black lynching was done mostly at the hands of the KKK, the militant arm of the Democratic Party. Remember that Bull Connor, George Wallace, and KKK grand kleagle and former U.S. senator Robert Byrd were all Democrats.
Where did the term "lynching" come from? The Online Etymology Dictionary provides an answer. Lynching "[w]as likely named after William Lynch (1742–1820) of Pittsylvania, Virginia, who c. 1780 led a vigilance committee to keep order there during the Revolution." Alternatively, "[o]ther sources trace the name to Charles Lynch (1736–1796) a Virginia magistrate who fined and imprisoned Tories in his district."
It seems that original lynchings, long before the KKK existed, were reserved for political opponents, just as President Trump described in his tweet.
Regardless of origin, the goal of lynching is to "nflict severe (but not deliberately fatal) bodily punishment (on someone) without legal sanction." Removing a duly elected president is certainly "severe," and the Schiff/Pelosi secret tribunal falls under "without legal sanction."
There is no mention of race, blacks, slavery, or the KKK in the definition of lynching. This reminds me of another word co-opted by the left, "gay," which in 1934 described a dancing divorcée, with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers singing and dancing in a very heterosexual manner. But now the word has only one meaning, as does "lynching." Don we now our gay apparel as we go a-lynching, fa-la-la-la-la.
The "largest lynching in U.S. history" was in New Orleans in 1891 and was directed at Italians, not blacks. Then there was the Chinese massacre of 1871, "one of the largest lynchings in U.S. history." These were racially motivated, but not in the way Democrats have defined lynching.
Democrats, before they became woke in the Age of Trump, frequently used the term "lynching" to describe unfair judicial proceedings, including the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Twitchy compiled a collection, taking a walk down lynching lane, which inconveniently supports Trump's use of the term today.
Democrat Rep. Jim McDermott in 1998 said, "We're taking a step down the road to becoming a political Lynch Mob[.] ... We are going to find a rope, find a tree, and ask a bunch of questions later."
At the same time, Democrat Rep. Jerry Nadler said, "I wish we could get this over with quickly. ... In pushing the process, in pushing the arguments of fairness and due process the Republicans so far have been running a lynch mob."
Democrat Sen. Harry Reid on the Senate floor told his audience, "The lynch mob, though, Mr. President, now has a new leader."
Don't leave out Democrat Sen. John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, exclaiming, "It's a verbal political lynching on the floor of the Senate."
Even Democrat primary frontrunner Sen. Joe Biden told Wolf Blitzer in 1998, "Even if the president should be impeached, history is going to question whether or not this was just a partisan lynching."
Aside from the blatant hypocrisy pushed by the media, President Trump is exactly right in describing not only the current impeachment push, but also three years of resistance to his entire presidency, as a lynching — severe punishment without due process for alleged misdeeds.
Of Course President Trump Is Being Lynched
By Brian C. Joondeph
President Donald Trump once again did the unthinkable: he hit back against the media and their political party, also known as the Democrats, over their contrived efforts to impeach him for the unforgivable sin of beating their chosen 2016 presidential candidate.
Impeachment is being pushed without authorization from the full House, as in, "The House of Representatives ... shall have the sole Power of Impeachment." The Constitution gives this power not to the speaker or the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, but to "The House," meaning the entire House.
Sure, the House can change the rules. They could vote to make Joy Behar the speaker of the House, since the speaker does not have to be a member of Congress, but that would be a radical departure from precedent, just as the current impeachment process is.
How is the House pushing impeachment? Through a "secret" process rather than through a "due" process. Hearings are conveniently being held clandestinely, since, if the oxymoronic "House Intelligence" Committee holds hearings, everything can be covered under a blanket of "national security." The accusers call witnesses while the defense can only watch, unable to take notes or call their own witnesses, subpoena documents, receive transcripts of the proceedings, or anything else normally afforded the defense under the due process of American jurisprudence.
How would one describe such a circus? How about using the word "lynch"? Cambridge Dictionary describes lynching: "If a crowd of people lynch someone who they believe is guilty of a crime, they kill them without a legal trial, usually by hanging." By the way, lynching is a diverse process, applicable to anyone, regardless of skin color, sex, or any other characteristic. Supreme Court nominees Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas, while of different skin colors, were both treated to Democrat lynchings.
The hanging bit might be a bit over the top, as Democrats don't really want to hang President Trump. Or do they? Bette Midler, a good stand in for Joy Behar for the speaker job, wants to hang not only Trump, but also his family, "good and high." So does some tolerant California State University professor who believes that "Trump must hang. The sooner and the higher, the better."
The Legal Dictionary defines lynching as "[v]iolent punishment or execution, without due process, for real or alleged crimes." That certainly describes the House approach — no due process and only alleged crimes.
The president understands this better than anyone, as he is the one being led to the gallows. As he is prone to do, he took to Twitter with this response: "All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here — a lynching. But we will WIN!"
As predictable as sunrise and sunset, the media's collective heads exploded in unison over Trump's use of the word "lynching." The Left has hijacked the term to serve its pandering civil rights agenda, and for Trump to use it is an unacceptable affront to Democrats.
The Guardian ran this headline: "Fury as Trump compares impeachment inquiry to lynching." In lockstep, the New York Timesreplied, "The term lynching invokes the decades-long racist history of white mob murders of black people beginning in the late 1800s and through the late 1960s."
Wow — the N.Y. Times is throwing Democrats under the bus by saying black lynching was done mostly at the hands of the KKK, the militant arm of the Democratic Party. Remember that Bull Connor, George Wallace, and KKK grand kleagle and former U.S. senator Robert Byrd were all Democrats.
Where did the term "lynching" come from? The Online Etymology Dictionary provides an answer. Lynching "[w]as likely named after William Lynch (1742–1820) of Pittsylvania, Virginia, who c. 1780 led a vigilance committee to keep order there during the Revolution." Alternatively, "[o]ther sources trace the name to Charles Lynch (1736–1796) a Virginia magistrate who fined and imprisoned Tories in his district."
It seems that original lynchings, long before the KKK existed, were reserved for political opponents, just as President Trump described in his tweet.
Regardless of origin, the goal of lynching is to "nflict severe (but not deliberately fatal) bodily punishment (on someone) without legal sanction." Removing a duly elected president is certainly "severe," and the Schiff/Pelosi secret tribunal falls under "without legal sanction."
There is no mention of race, blacks, slavery, or the KKK in the definition of lynching. This reminds me of another word co-opted by the left, "gay," which in 1934 described a dancing divorcée, with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers singing and dancing in a very heterosexual manner. But now the word has only one meaning, as does "lynching." Don we now our gay apparel as we go a-lynching, fa-la-la-la-la.
The "largest lynching in U.S. history" was in New Orleans in 1891 and was directed at Italians, not blacks. Then there was the Chinese massacre of 1871, "one of the largest lynchings in U.S. history." These were racially motivated, but not in the way Democrats have defined lynching.
Democrats, before they became woke in the Age of Trump, frequently used the term "lynching" to describe unfair judicial proceedings, including the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Twitchy compiled a collection, taking a walk down lynching lane, which inconveniently supports Trump's use of the term today.
Democrat Rep. Jim McDermott in 1998 said, "We're taking a step down the road to becoming a political Lynch Mob[.] ... We are going to find a rope, find a tree, and ask a bunch of questions later."
At the same time, Democrat Rep. Jerry Nadler said, "I wish we could get this over with quickly. ... In pushing the process, in pushing the arguments of fairness and due process the Republicans so far have been running a lynch mob."
Democrat Sen. Harry Reid on the Senate floor told his audience, "The lynch mob, though, Mr. President, now has a new leader."
Don't leave out Democrat Sen. John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, exclaiming, "It's a verbal political lynching on the floor of the Senate."
Even Democrat primary frontrunner Sen. Joe Biden told Wolf Blitzer in 1998, "Even if the president should be impeached, history is going to question whether or not this was just a partisan lynching."
Aside from the blatant hypocrisy pushed by the media, President Trump is exactly right in describing not only the current impeachment push, but also three years of resistance to his entire presidency, as a lynching — severe punishment without due process for alleged misdeeds.
Hüsker Dü
DA
No party was responsible for lynchings, people were . . . and same people who were dems in the South are now trumpies, like you.