An anti-Trump sociology professor at the College of Southern Nevada shot himself on campus last month as way to protest the president, police said.
Mark J. Bird, 69, was found bloodied outside a bathroom in the Charleston campus K building with a self-inflicted gunshot wound the morning of the second day of classes August 28.
He was treated for his wound and later charged with possessing a dangerous weapon on school property, discharging a gun within a prohibited structure and carrying a concealed weapon without a permit.
Not to mention Google executives…
Who do you suppose is supplying all the money? Soros?
Hereâ€™s how Tucker Carlson began the interview:
â€œThis is a sham, your company isnâ€™t real, your website is fake, the claims you have made are lies, this is a hoax. Let me start at the beginning, however, with your name, Dom Tullipso, which is not your real name. Itâ€™s a fake name, we ran you through law enforcement-level background checks and that name does not exist. So letâ€™s start out with the truth. Tell me what your real name is.â€
Okay, letâ€™s back up a second.
Carlson invited the man identifying himself as Dom Tullipso on his show to talk about this new group thatâ€™s popped up called Demand Protest. It says on the site, â€œWhen your strategy demands paid protest, we organize and bring it to life.â€
A few sites picked up on supposed ads this group was passing around reading â€œGet paid fighting against Trump!â€ However, it seems pretty clear this is a hoax.
The back-and-forth between Carlson and â€œTullipsoâ€ was kind of amazing, and this was the moment when Carlson realized he was witnessing performance art before his very eyes:
â€œWe are greatly, greatly supportive of national treasures such as Julian Assange, Edward Snowden, and Peyton Manning, and we really support their efforts to really get the truth out there, and in the case of the current client we have right now, uh, that client is, um, very interested in releasing the Roswell papers.â€
Oh, and in case youâ€™re wondering if the reference to Peyton Manning instead of Chelsea was a slip-up, he did it again a bit later, after he actually said, â€œWe shifted from being against Trump to Trump about 30 minutes ago.â€
But towards the end of the interview, even Carlsonâ€™s guest couldnâ€™t help but admit his surprise that he was invited on TV in the first place. After, of course, he said this:
â€œWe are now supporting Trump in the hope that the Roswell documents from 1947 are finally released and put back into the hands of Fisher Stevens.â€
The above linked an earlier story from this from The Verge which contends that the story is a hoax:
According to publicly available who.is information, although demandprotest.com attracted virtually no attention until last week, the domain name was registered last month. Despite having no discernible presence until after the election, the website claims to include an endorsement from an â€œunnamedâ€ 2016 presidential campaign chair, who allegedly called the groupâ€™s work â€œastonishing.â€ The page also lists a â€œcopyrightâ€ of 2015 to 2017 for Demand Protest, LLC., and claims to have been extraordinarily busy in that time, racking up 48 â€œcampaignsâ€ with 1,817 paid â€œoperatives.â€ Phone contact information leads to a dead-end voicemail box, and the group did not respond to an email.
The story gained traction yesterday, and was picked up by conspiracy website Infowars â€” where, even then, it was met with some skepticism. (â€œItâ€™s unclear if the DemandProtest.com website is actually legitimate,â€ the siteâ€™s story says.) Still, other conservative-leaning websites with reputations for inaccuracy have joined in. â€œBREAKING: Far Left Group Is Paying Activists a Monthly Salary to Stop TRUMP,â€ the Gateway Pundit blog blared.
Deeply weird. It is still entirely unclear what “Dom Tullipso” and “Demand ProtesT” are all about, but it seems clear that they are not a subsidiary of MoveOn.org.
Older and more respectable (i.e. employed) lefties weren’t occupying Wall Street. Instead, they were smiling happily and fantasizing about the Revolution, or at least another great big wave of punitive regulation and taxation, as the young, the dumb, and the Bohemian took to the streets in Lower Manhattan to protest against Wall Street and the bankers.
Somebody gave those protesters the wrong address.
If they want to wave signs and shout slogans at the people really responsible for our economic problems, they ought to be protesting in front of the offices of their own educators, the same people who overcharged them and left them quite commonly without either wisdom or marketable skills, but buried in student loans.
Those protestors are typically college graduates, and there they are on the streets, bearing allegiance to political sentiments and theories alien to their own country’s fundamental values and traditions. They are overloaded with fashionable poses and slogans, but are perfectly innocent of serious political philosophy. They don’t like their own country’s political and economic system, institutions, and history, but they might think very differently if they had ever actually been informed accurately what any of those things are.
If those protestors knew enough of history and economics to associate the material prosperity and technological progress that they are accustomed to with the free economic system that produced them, if they even had been given enough of an adult understanding of the world that they could understand that business corporations, like Wall Street banks, are not, and cannot possibly be, charities, they would not be protesting where they are.
Wall Street did not cause the recession. Government caused the recession (by following the same left-wing philosophy that those protestors and the people who educated them embrace) by inadvertently grossly inflating home real estate prices, as the product of efforts to make long-term mortgage financing ever more widely and easily available. Government has worsened, and prolonged the recession, by dramatically meddling in the economy in the area of health care, by adding to the regulatory burden, and by generally increasing uncertainty. All of the damage was done on the basis of precisely the same ideas and philosophy that those demonstrators are trying to advance.
If all those kids, drop outs, poets, and Bohemians had the benefit of a decent education; if they actually understood history, economics, and political philosophy; if they understood how the world actually works and what banks do; none of them would be where they are doing what they are doing.
The astonishing demonstration of massive popular opposition to socialism naturally proved a problem for the left’s commentariat. The preferred discounting technique was demonstrated by Think Progress: point to Confederate flags, identify expressions of opposition to Barack Obama as “racism,” describe open expressions of conservatism as “offensive” and “radical.”
Glenn Greenwald at Salon dismisses all opposition to Obama as illegitimate, coming from people with heretical and unacceptible views, worthy only of contempt and dismissal.
What I find amusing is the leftist Greenwald’s claim to proprietorship of “the country’s core founding values.” Since when was the left in favor of the framer’s republic of federalism, individual rights, personal responsibility, and limited government?
Nothing that the GOP is doing to Obama should be the slightest bit surprising because this is the true face of the American Right — and that’s been true for a very long time now. It didn’t just become true in the last few months or in the last two years. Recent months is just the time period when the media began noticing and acknowledging what they are: a pack of crazed, primitive radicals who don’t really believe in the country’s core founding values and don’t merely disagree with, but contest the legitimacy of, any elected political officials who aren’t part of their movement. Before the last year or so, the media pretended that this was a serious, adult, substantive political movement, but it wasn’t any truer then than it is now. All one has to do is review their behavior during the Clinton presidency — to say nothing of the Bush years — to see that none of this is remotely new. Nothing they’re doing to Obama is a break from their past behavior; it’s just a natural and totally predictable continuation of it.
UPDATE 23 Feb 2010: The Daily Mail, at some point subsequent to this posting, revised the estimate in its article downward to “As many as one million people.” The original estimated figure was also cited here.
ABC News also denied having made a 1M to 1.5M estimate.
Michelle Malkin sheds more light on the numbers controversy.