No Kings 2.0

[Sky727]

NGOs and Soros providing millions of dollars to fund the protest. 

Trump’s coming for George Soros—this time through the IRS. Chris Chappell breaks down how Trump’s Treasury team could cripple Soros’s Open Society network by revoking its tax-exempt status.

[Kurokage]

Calls for violence are violence.
Instigating.   Provoking.   
"Make assassination great again"

The amount of times certain members on ATS and here claim free speech is their god given right, yet now because it's a view they don't agree with, it's classed as violence???

Remember those on ATS defending Westboro baptist church for there freedom of speech, or many other times people have commented "I may not agree with your comments, but I'll defend your right to say it"
How easily people change their opinions when it's really not their view point, very sad.

[Kurokage]

So a piece of shit slob mocking Charlie Kirk's murder is ok with you?

A piece of shit slob that's also a teacher in an elementary school?

The Left is completely unhinged, what happened to the party of tolerance that welcomes everyone?

Please see above post of mine...

[Kurokage]

There was plenty of violence on Saturday.
Just because there’s wasn’t a murder, like the murder during No Kings 1.0, doesn’t mean it wasn’t violent.
Mostly peaceful protest.
Mostly, except all those assaults.
We love how the libs continue to ignore and sugar coat the violence from their side.

I see you didn't actually post any evidence of the 'violent' protests??
A handful of people chanting unsavoury remarks isn't a violent protest, especially seeing as 7 million people were on the streets.

[UltraBudgie]

especially seeing as 7 million people were on the streets.

Think of all the iPhones that could have made if those 7 million had spent just a few of those hours in work camps instead. No wonder America isn't great anymore.

China is laughing,

[David64]

The amount of times certain members on ATS and here claim free speech is their god given right, yet now because it's a view they don't agree with, it's classed as violence???

Remember those on ATS defending Westboro baptist church for there freedom of speech, or many other times people have commented "I may not agree with your comments, but I'll defend your right to say it"
How easily people change their opinions when it's really not their view point, very sad.

I am all for her Freedom of speech. I believe everyone has the Right to speak their mind and say what they want, even if I don't agree with it because it tells me what kind of person they are and if I want to associate with them.

The fact remains, you are not now, nor ever been, free of the consequences of your own actions. She mocked the death of Charlie Kirk and now she may be out of a job. That's her own fault.

Just because you can say it, doesn't mean you should.

[chr0naut]

All weekend long there was no debate over Trump's "kingish" policies.

He's enforcing existing laws which the democrats don't want.

All weekend long there was no debate over Trump's "kingish" policies.

He's enforcing existing laws which the democrats don't want.

Back in the 1700's, a British King oversaw a system that put tariffs on commodity items being sold to North Americans, who were concerned that trade tariffs represented a tax on non-represented non-constituents of the taxing authorities, in their parlance they wanted "No taxation without representation". It was a big part of the reasons for the American Revolution.

Apparently, now, your government is re-implementing similar excessively high tariffs on foreign goods for sale to North Americans - the very thing that your revolutionary founding fathers opposed.

[FlyersFan]

The amount of times certain members on ATS and here claim free speech is their god given right, yet now because it's a view they don't agree with, it's classed as violence???

Yellilng 'fire' in a crowded movie theater is not 'free speech'.
Inciting violence is also not 'free speech'.
You aren't American.   You don't know the law here.

What is sad is that you are condoning calls to violence 
because it's coming from the left and you are left wing.
And what else is sad is that you are okay with calls to 
violence in the USA because you live thousands of miles away
and don't have to live with the consequences of it.

Here ... I'll educate you ....  

AI GOOGLE ASSIST - Incitement to violence is a crime where a person urges or instigates others to commit violent acts, and the specific law varies by jurisdiction. In the U.S., protected speech that incites violence is limited, particularly under the Brandenberg Test, which states that speech can only be punished if it is directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to produce such action.

ALSO -18 U.S. Code § 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence(a)
Whoever, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against property or against the person of another in violation of the laws of the United States, and under circumstances strongly corroborative of that intent, solicits, commands, induces, or otherwise endeavors to persuade such other person to engage in such conduct, shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half of the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the crime solicited, or both; or if the crime solicited is punishable by life imprisonment or death, shall be imprisoned for not more than twenty years.

AND we have from Georgetown Law - FACT SHEET

• The First Amendment does not protect violent or unlawful conduct, even if the person engaging in it intends to express an idea. United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367, 376 (1968).

• The First Amendment does not protect speech that incites imminent violence or lawlessness. Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 447 (1969).

• Threats of violence, stalking, and harrassing people, whether private individuals or public officials, are not protected by the First Amendment and may violate multiple federal and state criminal laws.

• Crimes of violence intended to intimidate and coerce are considered terrorism under federal law, see 18 U.S.C. § 2331, and the laws of many states, and threats to commit such crimes are not protected by the First Amendment.

Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 750.543b, 750.543f & 750.543m; 18 Pa. C.S.A. § 2717. • It is a felony under federal law to intentionally “solicit, command, induce, or otherwise endeavor to persuade” another person to engage in a crime of violence against a person or property. 18 U.S.C. § 373. Many states have similar laws.

So basically it is a crime to say 'make assassination great again' at a rally on a big sign because it induces people to commit felony crimes.   It is NOT protected free speech.

[Kurokage]

I am all for her Freedom of speech. I believe everyone has the Right to speak their mind and say what they want, even if I don't agree with it because it tells me what kind of person they are and if I want to associate with them.

The fact remains, you are not now, nor ever been, free of the consequences of your own actions. She mocked the death of Charlie Kirk and now she may be out of a job. That's her own fault.

Just because you can say it, doesn't mean you should.

Funny how things change?

Only recently some members were criticising the British police for questioning someone for posting remarks on twitter claiming an infringement of his rights and freedom of speech. Now suddenly things are very different because it's a perceived 'threat' to someone who's already dead?? I also know that most moaning here have claimed "freedom of speech" when someone is sacked from a job after voicing opinions about a social issue in the work place.    You can't have it both ways.

Trying to incite violent attacks is already covered by laws in most western countries, and 7 million people (mostly) peacefully showing their distain for a government is democracy in action. This would be a wake up call to any politician in power to listen to their people.

[Sky727]

Yellilng 'fire' in a crowded movie theater is not 'free speech'.
Inciting violence is also not 'free speech'.
You aren't American.   You don't know the law here.
What is sad is that you are condoning calls to violence 
because it's coming from the left and you are left wing.

Left wing people only believe in free speech if they are doing the speaking .... They seem to have a real problem with a two way conversation unless they can out shout someone or do violence to those who disagree with them. Tyrants no matter how big or small will outlaw any opposition which is a classic hallmark of totalitarian systems and all Tyrants.. On a personal level dominance by one person over another without a free discourse of ideas is just being a bully and a self serving Idiot..IMO