Welcome To Our Community!
Are you concerned about America? Join our community, where you can post your own articles and content, without leftist censorship. Team up with us today and make your voice heard!
Join Us!

CNN’s Don Lemon Claims Radical Left Mobs Have Constitutional Right to Harass Republicans

Conservative Angle

Conservative Angle Administrator
Staff Member
Feb 22, 2018
3,245
988
113
conservativeangle.com
CNN anchor Don Lemon defended far-left radical mobs who have been harassing Republicans in restaurants and elevators claiming they are only expressing their constitutional right under the First Amendment.

Lemon would say, “That doesn't mean people don't get to object. That's your right as an American. To object. It's covered in the First Amendment. It's like the first one.”

The Daily Caller's Matt Lewis would call out Lemon's double standard stating, “Don, If they started following you around to restaurants and running you out of place, and cornering you.”

Lemon would interject, “I would say they are wrong because I'm not an elected official. I'm not an elected official. If I put my name on a ballot and run for office. Journalists are not public officials. They are not public servants.”

Don Lemon would declare these radical left activists are not engaging in mob behavior, “No, it is not mob behavior. It's people who are upset and they are angry the way the country is going and the policies these people.” Lemon then shouts, “Will you let me finish, Matt. Please. Before you jump in. Okay? I'm making a point. I can't make it if you keep interrupting me.”

Lemon continues, “I'm the moderator and the host of this show. I'm trying to make a point to tell you. You are giving mob rule.” He adds, “You should look up mob in the dictionary. You should also, as a Republican, whatever it is you are, look at the Constitution of the United States. And it gives people the right to protest. It doesn't say where you can protest, and how you can protest.”

Don Lemon then gets visibly angry shouting, “Will you let me finish, Matt? Please. Let me finish. You can do whatever you want. You can leave the show if you want. But let me finish. I will make my point. Okay well then shut up and let me do it.”

Lemon gets to his point, “In the Constitution, you can protest whenever and wherever you want. It doesn't tell you that you can't do it in a restaurant, that you can't do it on a football field. It doesn't tell you that you can't do it on a cable news — you can do it wherever you want.”

He concludes, “To call people mobs because they are exercising their constitutional right is just beyond the pale.”

Lemon is off his rocker. While the First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” That doesn't give radical left mobs the right to harass people in public.

States usually have their own laws in regard to criminal harassment and that harassment usually has to be a credible threat to the person's safety or their family's safety. Radical left mobs have proven they are a threat to the safety of a number of Republicans' families. The most outspoken of how left hate mobs has made her fear for her family is Senator Rand Paul's wife, Kelley Paul.

After her husband Rand Paul was actually physically attacked by one of these hateful leftists, Kelley Paul revealed:


“In the last 18 months, our family has experienced violence and threats of violence at a horrifying level. I will never forget the morning of the shooting at the congressional baseball practice, the pure relief and gratitude that flooded me when I realized that Rand was okay.”

She would also detail the struggle she has had to go through after the attack:


“I hope that these women never have to watch someone they love struggle to move or even breathe for months on end.”

Even after getting physically attacked, Rand Paul would suffer harassment at the airport.


“Earlier this week, Rand was besieged in the airport by activists ‘getting up in his face,' as you, Senator Booker, encouraged them to do a few months ago. Preventing someone from moving forward, thrusting your middle finger in their face, screaming vitriol — is this the way to express concern or enact change? Or does it only incite unstable people to violence, making them feel that assaulting a person is somehow politically justifiable?”

Who is to say that one of these whack jobs doesn't have a knife? Or maybe even something more deadly?

But Rand Paul isn't the only to face this type of behavior. Ted Cruz and his wife were harassed at a restaurant by a radical left mob. Betsy DeVos saw one protestor shout at her while also physically blocking her car from leaving the area. There have also been numerous Antifa mobs viciously attack peaceful protestors. In fact, one Antifa mob beat up a Bernie Sanders supporter for merely carrying an American flag. These far left hate mobs aren't just targeting civil servants as Lemon claims. They are targeting ordinary citizens.

This type of behavior is not exercising your 1st Amendment right to free speech. It's harassment and in many states its criminal.

The post CNN's Don Lemon Claims Radical Left Mobs Have Constitutional Right to Harass Republicans appeared first on The Political Insider.

The post <a href=https://thepoliticalinsider.com/cnns-don-lemon-claims-radical-left-mobs-have-constitutional-right-to-harass-republicans/ target=_blank >CNN’s Don Lemon Claims Radical Left Mobs Have Constitutional Right to Harass Republicans</a> appeared first on Conservative Angle | Conservative Angle - Conservative News Clearing House

Continue reading...
 
Reactions: JPConservative

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
So it was wrong for Alex Jones to protest and get in the face of a CNN reporter but OK for people to do that to Republican Senators?

I'm sure there are words for that sort of attitude, um, let me think!



Oh, and not forgetting according to CNN those violent protesters aren't a mob, but the Tea Party protesters were accused of being a mob by CNN. I wanted to find an example of how the Left-Wing media reacted to the Tea Party behaving like those violent Leftist radicals... After several futile searches, I remembered Conservatives don't behave like spoilt children and there aren't any examples because the Tea Party acted in a civil and respectful way.
 

Jayhawker

Active Member
Sep 5, 2018
138
176
43
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” That doesn’t give radical left mobs the right to harass people in public.....

...including politicians and other gov't officials.
 
Reactions: JPConservative

JPConservative

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2018
322
302
63
Littlehampton, UK
Let's see what the law says on this matter:

The following is an example of a state law dealing with harassment:

"S 240.25 Harassment in the first degree.

A person is guilty of harassment in the first degree when he or she intentionally and repeatedly harasses another person by following such person in or about a public place or places or by engaging in a course of conduct or by repeatedly committing acts which places such person in reasonable fear of physical injury. This section shall not apply to activities regulated by the national labor relations act, as amended, the railway labor act, as amended, or the federal employment labor management act, as amended.

Harassment in the first degree is a class B misdemeanor.

S 240.26 Harassment in the second degree.

A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person:

  1. He or she strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects such other person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same; or
  2. He or she follows a person in or about a public place or places; or
  3. He or she engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which alarm or seriously annoy such other person and which serve no legitimate purpose.
Subdivisions two and three of this section shall not apply to activities regulated by the national labor relations act, as amended, the railway labor act, as amended, or the federal employment labor management act, as amended.

Harassment in the second degree is a violation.

S 240.30 Aggravated harassment in the second degree.

A person is guilty of aggravated harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm another person, he or she:

  1. Either (a) communicates with a person, anonymously or otherwise, by telephone, or by telegraph, mail or any other form of written communication, in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm; or (b) causes a communication to be initiated by mechanical or electronic means or otherwise with a person, anonymously or otherwise, by telephone, or by telegraph, mail or any other form of written communication, in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm; or
  2. Makes a telephone call, whether or not a conversation ensues, with no purpose of legitimate communication; or
  3. Strikes, shoves, kicks, or otherwise subjects another person to physical contact, or attempts or threatens to do the same because of a belief or perception regarding such person`s race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation, regardless of whether the belief or perception is correct; or
  4. Commits the crime of harassment in the first degree and has previously been convicted of the crime of harassment in the first degree as defined by section 240.25 of this article within the preceding ten years.
Aggravated harassment in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.

S 240.31 Aggravated harassment in the first degree.

A person is guilty of aggravated harassment in the first degree when with intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm another person, because of a belief or perception regarding such person`s race, color, national origin, ancestry, gender, religion, religious practice, age, disability or sexual orientation, regardless of whether the belief or perception is correct, he or she:

  1. Damages premises primarily used for religious purposes, or acquired pursuant to section six of the religious corporation law and maintained for purposes of religious instruction, and the damage to the premises exceeds fifty dollars; or
  2. Commits the crime of aggravated harassment in the second degree in the manner proscribed by the provisions of subdivision three of section 240.30 of this article and has been previously convicted of the crime of aggravated harassment in the second degree for the commission of conduct proscribed by the provisions of subdivision three of section 240.30 or he has been previously convicted of the crime of aggravated harassment in the first degree within the preceding ten years.
Aggravated harassment in the first degree is a class E felony.



Clearly, those protesters are guilty of harassment. People are free to protest, they are not free to harass or intimidate Senators.
 
Reactions: Conservative Angle