Nov. 11, 2016 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
21:33
3494 Anti-Donald Trump Protests and Riots | True News
After Hillary Clinton chastised Donald Trump and his supporters over the importance of accepting the results of a democratic election - Clinton supporters took to the streets, burned flags, smashed car windows and much more in protest of Trump being elected the next President of the United States. Portland, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Oakland and New York, saw protests and in some cases, police declared riot zones and made significant numbers of arrests.Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.freedomainradio.com/donate
Hi everybody, it's Stefan Muller from Free Domain Radio.
So, as surely as night follows day, following the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States, we see coordinated riots, politically motivated rioting, erupting in various cities across the United States.
It's been going on for days now.
And here we see the rampant and rank hypocrisy of the left.
Remember, it was just a couple of days stronger together, said Hillary.
When they go low, we go high.
Love trumps hate!
And then they don't get their way and boom!
Riots!
We're setting fire to things.
We're attacking people.
We're beating people up.
We're throwing garbage cans through windows.
I don't know who's delivering the Starbucks coffee these days.
Guys, who's keeping your mom's couch warm in the basement?
And this is the fundamental mistake that is made by conservatives again and again and again.
Now let's go back to understand what I'm talking about.
Let's go back to 2008 when one Jay McCain, John McCain, was running for presidency.
So he was at a town hall meeting in Minnesota and there was a supporter who said they were scared of the prospect of Obama being president and Who Obama would appoint to the Supreme Court?
And these are reasonable fears.
I mean, this is a leftist agenda, a very high advocacy, high interference Supreme Court.
And what McCain said to his supporter was, he said, I have to tell you, Senator Obama is a decent person and a person you don't have to be scared of as President of the United States.
Kind of reasonable rhetoric.
And there were no riots from conservatives, from Republicans, from the right.
There were no riots!
When President Obama was elected twice, there were, of course, stories in the left that there was a massive uptick in assassination threats against President Obama.
It turned out this was entirely false.
That was pretty much the same as usual.
Now, if you want to talk about an escalation of assassination threats after someone gets elected president, I think we're going to have to look at the left rather than the right, because that's what's escalating and trending all over America and other places in the world after Trump is nominated.
And so McCain was saying, oh no, he's a decent guy and so on.
And one woman said to John McCain, this is back in 2008, said that she feared Obama was in fact an Arab.
And John McCain said, no man.
He's a decent family man and citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues.
And that's what this campaign is all about.
He's not an Arab.
See?
Talking down the crowd, saying don't freak out, don't panic.
And we can see, of course, on the left what has been happening with the presidential campaign.
The basket of deplorables.
Half of Trump supporters are the racist and sexist and xenophobic and all that kind of crap.
And Trump is Hitler and Trump is a demagogue and Trump is a nativist.
I don't know what that's supposed to mean.
I think Focahontas is more of a faux nativist.
But...
This escalation of my opponent is evil is talked down by the right and escalated up and talked up by the left with the predictable results that the usual useful idiots are bust in as fake protesters in order for political advantage, which we'll get to in a second.
But here, this is the basic thing that is going on.
Let's say some woman, you go out on a date with her, you find she's a little nuts or a lot nuts, a real Glenn Close territory, and you don't want to go out with her again.
And she says, no, no, that's totally fine.
I understand.
It's perfect.
You know, I understand.
Sometimes there's no chemistry.
You don't click.
No problem.
And then...
You wake up the next morning and your car is on fire!
And there she is running off in Spanx and high heels down the road with a petrol can, a gas can in her hand.
Well, I guess you're sad to have lost your car, but I guess you're kind of happy you didn't keep dating her.
And this is the reality, that if the left doesn't get what they want politically, then they escalate to violence.
Now, you can say, well, it's a small minority.
of these protesters.
They don't represent the entire left.
They're the symptom, you understand?
They're the symptom.
You know, like if you look down and there's a little red spot on your belly, that's the symptom of perhaps the knife that's just gone through your gizzards.
And they are the symptom because the question isn't what are these lunatics out there doing?
The violence.
The question is how is the left responding to it?
What are they saying?
How are the Democrats responding to it?
And what are they saying?
And most importantly, What is Hillary Clinton saying, or rather not saying?
And what is President Barack Obama saying, or rather not saying, about all of this?
Don't tell me they don't represent the left.
Remember?
David Duke, do you repudiate?
Do you reject David Duke?
Well, he's not organized riots and burnt down neighborhoods.
Isn't it time for a little repudiation to come from the left?
I do believe that in fact is.
Yet it is not forthcoming, and that should tell you something very important.
Now, there are two cover words that are being used in describing these political riots, acts of domestic terrorism.
If you're using violence to achieve political goals like overturning an election, I think that makes you a domestic terrorist, unless I'm wildly mistaken about my understanding of basic English and the law.
So the first discourse, they're called anarchists.
And they're not anarchists.
Anarchism means without rulers.
And so what diminishes the size and power of the state should be a plus for anarchists.
And they're not.
I mean, Trump is going to diminish the size and power of the state as he openly stated.
Anarchists should be thrilled.
So they're calling them anarchists.
Why?
So they don't have to call them communists.
That's the basic reality.
They don't have to call them left-wing extremists, far-left agitators, communists, whatever you want to call them.
They can call them anarchists because that's a word that most people dislike.
And it avoids them having to call them...
See, if you're on the right in Europe, or England for that matter, and you are a nationalist and you oppose globalism, you're on the far right!
You see, they want to call these people far left.
They don't.
Because they don't want them to be associated with the left or communism.
And so they call them anarchists, right?
In the same way that you never refer to national socialism, you refer to Nazism so it doesn't get associated with socialism.
Basic manipulation.
Language control 101.
So that's the first thing.
And the second thing, of course, is they're called protesters.
And they're rioters.
They're seeking to overturn an election through violence.
That is insurrection.
That is domestic terrorism.
This is not a protest.
They're violent, politically motivated rioters.
And here's the thing.
I mean, it's funny, but it's tragic.
Because the people who are out there doing all this crazy stuff, you know, they're...
Hate the rich, unjust rich, more egalitarian society.
This is the kind of crap that they talk about.
But really?
If you hate the unjust rich...
You've got to love Trump even just based on the data of the past few days.
So, Carla Slim, the guy who has significant holdings in his personal blog, formerly known as the Newspaper of Record, now known as Carla Slim's blog.
Well, multi-billionaire Carla Slim, who gets his money from monopolies granted by the state in telecommunications in Mexico and so on.
Well, he lost $4.7 billion from his fortune just Wednesday.
Went down from $53.7 billion to $49 billion.
That's according to the New York Daily News.
So look at that.
A massive punishment to a corporatist monopolist, big government, crony capitalism or crapitalism monster.
He came, boom!
Five billion dollars down as the result of Trump's election.
There are a lot of unjust rich people in the world.
There are some people who've earned their money through general appeals to what remains in the free market.
And there are other people who've got it through political connections and monopolies and so on.
Bloomberg News has reported that the richest people in the world have lost 41 billion dollars.
After Trump's win.
41 billion dollars.
Now, that just means that money has been transferred to less rich people.
So you've had a 41 billion dollar transfer from the richest people in the world to less rich people in the world just in a day or two.
Shouldn't egalitarians really, really like that?
No, they don't.
They're rioting and protesting.
It would not have happened!
If Hillary Clinton had gotten into power, because if Hillary Clinton had gotten into power, the rich people who had all donated to her political campaigns would have had their own pet president with which to enact laws favorable to their own economic class and interest, but now they don't.
They have someone who is not beholden to rich, corporatist, Wall Street, speculative, nasty, financial, thumb-jiggery special interests, most notably the Federal Reserve.
We'll get to that perhaps in another show.
So all the egalitarians, all the people who dislike the unjust rich, as I do, as everybody does, should be thrilled at this massive transfer of $41 billion from unjust rich people, and not all of them, but a lot of them, to other people.
But no, see, it doesn't matter, because they're interested in destroying the free market.
They use the rich as a leverage to rouse your resentments against the free market, but that's the deal.
Now, these death threats are extraordinary.
On Wednesday night, on CNN, there's live coverage.
There were live coverage of these.
They're not protesters.
They're thugs and rioters.
So this woman, identified as Lily, said, well, you know, people have to die, right?
She said, if we don't fight, then who will fight for us?
People had to die for your freedom where we're at today.
We can't just do rallies.
We have to fight back.
There will be casualties on both sides.
There will be because people have to die to make a change in this world.
Trump, enough with your racism.
Stop splitting families.
Don't split my family.
I shouldn't laugh because, I mean, this is a threat of war, a threat of domestic insurrection and war and terrorism and murder and all of that kind of stuff.
But it is, for me, particularly rich to see the family banner being held up by the left.
The left has been anti-traditional family since its inception.
The modern form of the left, not the ancient Platonic form.
But the modern form of the left, starting in the mid-19th century, has been openly and explicitly anti-nuclear family.
And now, of course, that the right is in power.
Oh no, family is so important.
Don't split up families.
Yeah, I remember the left being really concerned about splitting up families when they instituted no-fault divorce, when they encouraged women to leave their patriarchal, pig-ignorant husbands and destroyed the family as a whole.
I've noticed that they're really, really pro-family when they tell women that marriage is a form of slavery and they should never get involved with misogynistic patriarchs and they should go their own way, which apparently means...
Relying on men to pay taxes, which supports the government that transfers money from men to women, but that's already been discussed.
So yeah, the idea that the left is pro-family is completely ridiculous.
You know, another thing, Lily, I just want to sort of point this out.
This may have escaped that rolling hamster wheel of peas you might call a brain.
But you see, if you're interested in not having families split up and families separated or people separated from their families, you know if you kill people, They're not part of the family anymore.
They may be part of the family plot, like they may be buried together eventually, but if you kill people, you're kind of splitting up families.
Just a point there.
I wouldn't expect her to understand it, but it's important to point these things out.
Now, who is rioting, right?
I mean, the spontaneous, organic protests against Havala.
Oh, come on.
Come on.
All these people, if they're Hillary supporters, then Hillary said how terrible, remember how Hillary said how god-awful and terrible it was that Donald Trump might even conceivably not respect a fair democratic election.
Fair and left generally don't go in the same sentence, but...
Hillary said it was going to be absolutely terrible, destabilizing democracy, the entire system, if Donald Trump...
See, when she was winning, you had to respect the outcome of the election, but when she lost, now you don't have to respect the outcome of the election.
You understand, it's just...
Never, ever get into the rolling, kaleidoscopic brain blender of leftist, to quote, integrity.
You'll just come out dizzy and having thrown up in your mouth a little bit, which, you know, is a good precursor for spewing leftist propaganda.
So who's rioting?
Are these spontaneous riots?
Well...
I'll tell you this, my particular opinion, we'll see if the proof comes out over time, who knows, maybe there'll be another leak.
But after Project Veritas pointed out the Democrat strategy of bird-dogging, of paying mentally ill protesters to start violence at Donald Trump rallies, after Project Veritas has revealed this, to me, all leftist violence should be assumed to be centrally coordinated by DNC operatives, left-wing national organizations, OWS, Revcom, BLM, you know, all that kind of stuff, until proven otherwise.
And Gateway Pundit has reported that protesters were bused into the anti-Trump protests in Austin, Texas.
All of these riots, I'm not assuming them at all to be spontaneous or local, that they're centrally coordinated by left-wing groups, funded by Soros or whoever it's going to be who's...
This is my general...
This is where I go to first.
And until proven otherwise, I think we have good reason for assuming that to begin with.
These are not spontaneous protests.
These are, in my view, externally funded, centrally organized leftist agitations against a democratic election because it didn't go their way.
And this is exactly why.
Donald Trump got in.
I mean, the idea that these people think that they're protesting and this is somehow going to change people's minds against the Donald Trump election, this is exactly why people are so relieved.
When you're looking at the flaming wreckage of your car and the woman in Spanx running down the street, it's like, whew, dodged a bullet there, didn't I? Perhaps even literally when it comes to this kind of mess.
So, conspicuously absent from the rhetoric of what's going on are Obama and Hillary Clinton.
And why?
I mean, this stuff is erupting in Democrat-controlled metropolitan areas and, you know, they're collapsing into rampant terrorist-style political violence.
Why are they allowing this to happen?
They could clamp down very, very quickly.
But more importantly, they could take to the airwaves, right?
Hillary Clinton could take to the airwaves and emphatically point out that, you know, we expected our opponents to respect the outcome of the election, therefore we can't be hypocritical and not respect the outcome of the election.
We'll work within the system politically, we'll make a better run at it next time, maybe get someone who doesn't have the FBI sniffing around them like a dog in heat.
We'll try and do better next time, but we have to do what we demanded of our enemies, which is to, or our opponents, which is to respect the blah blah blah, right?
Why aren't they doing that?
Well, nobody knows.
But let's just say there are a few theories floating around that might be worth examining.
So I did a presentation, The Truth About Saul Alinsky, this amoral, manipulative, power-seeking, god-awful communist mess that goes on, that passes for integrity in the left.
You know, so Hillary Clinton was a devotee of Saul Alinsky.
We've got the Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers.
And there are...
I think counting on this violence and promoting this violence, or at least not opposing it, in the hopes of applying pressure to Donald Trump so that maybe Donald Trump will promise that Obama and Hillary Clinton may escape investigation, which I think in an honest FBI would lead to prosecution.
So I think that this is leverage.
So first of all, they want to make it bad that Donald Trump got into power.
And therefore, look at all these riots.
Donald Trump, people must be angry for a reason.
He must be a really bad person because they're really angry for...
No.
No, no, no.
Come on.
Be ridiculous.
And so, yeah, I think that this is political leverage.
I think that when...
President Obama met with Donald Trump recently.
I think there was a little bit of a feel-out as to, okay, what's going to go on with this?
You know, you said you were going to appoint a special prosecutor to look into Hillary Clinton and her emails.
They already have a bunch of FBI investigations into the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Associates and their relatives and so on.
And whatever, like the dominoes that fall down.
Dominoes, black and white.
When the dominoes fall down, they're going to eventually land on Obama.
He's involved in this stuff.
He knew about this stuff, lied to the American public, said he didn't know about the email server, and it turns out that he'd been emailed Hillary Clinton using a pseudonym, because that can never be tracked.
But...
Yeah, I think that there are feelers out there saying, okay, well, are you actually going to do this special prosecution thing?
And, you know, be a nice America, be a shame if something happened to it.
You sure you don't want to call off your dogs here?
And so, yeah, Obama and Secretary Clinton, they need to speak out today and stop this rioting mob.
They need to very openly say.
The other thing, too, is that if George Soros is behind any of this, as some people think, and he certainly has been implicated in funding some of these radical left-wing groups in the past, well...
What's going to happen to George Soros?
If prosecution of anybody starts to go, is it going to lead somewhere that way inclined?
So people got a lot at stake here.
And there's a quote from Machiavelli that's important to remember.
Just the forces that are aligned against Donald Trump doing what he said he was going to do.
I think he's going to.
I really do.
I'm certainly going to hold his feet to the fire if he doesn't for what that's worth.
But Machiavelli said...
It must be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than a new system.
For the initiator has the enmity of all he would profit by the preservation of the old institution and merely lukewarm defenders in those who gain by the new system.
And that's from Machiavelli and that's important to remember.
So here's the thing.
Here's the thing.
How should we view these hysterics, these violent people, this crazy mob?
And this is not just happening in the streets.
This is happening on Facebook, on YouTube.
Paul Joseph Watson has a good video of helping to shower yourself in leftist hysterical tears.
But how should we view these people?
How should we treat these people?
Well...
A mind exercise, a thought exercise is important.
So imagine if Hillary Clinton had won, and tens of thousands of Trump supporters were rioting, were setting fires, assaulting people, smashing up property, and calling for her assassination.
What do you think would happen?
What do you think the reaction of the media would be?
What do you think the reaction?
What do you think they would say about these Trump supporters?
Would they call them vicious racists?
Would they call them the misogynists?
Would they call them deplorables?
Would they have them immediately arrested?
Would they demand that Donald Trump speak out against these people?
For God's sakes, if there was anybody out there in the world committing violence in my name...
I mean, you couldn't keep me from the camera to bellow at these people to stop this crap and get back to reasoning and making arguments from evidence.
So, all you have to do to know how to think about and treat these people is imagine if they had the power and Donald Trump supporters didn't.
Imagine if the shoe was on the other foot, if the situation was reversed, Hillary Clinton had gotten into power, tens of thousands of Trump supporters rioting, beating people up, beating black people up for voting Donald Trump as white people have been beaten up for perceived voting towards Trump.
Imagine if all of this was happening, neighborhoods in flames and People being beaten up and fires being set.
Imagine what?
The reaction of the mainstream media, the reaction of President Obama, Secretary Clinton, what would it be?
That's what it should be.
You understand?
There's integrity to your values, which is important when you are in control of the situation.
But when you are responding to a situation, here's a rule.
I learned this many, many years ago.
It has guided my life ever since.
It is...
Actually, mathematically, in Prisoner's Dilemma experiments, it is really, really well established.
Here's the rule.
You ready?
This is all you need to know to deal with this kind of stuff in your mind and in your social circle and online.
The first time you meet people, the first time you meet someone, you treat them the very best that you can.
Generous, kind, assume the best.
After that, you treat them exactly as they treat you.
Imagine if these people had the power over you and you were rioting.
