[GOPBiker]

‘Since there were no firearms or significant bodily inury involved’

There were certainly firearms at the Chicago protest/disruption that forced the cancellation. People were there to rally and were assaulted and threatened.

I would bet there were Secret Service on site to prep the site and provide early protection preparations.

There are several videos as well so many of the ‘protestors’ were recorded.

Sounds to me like a decent job of conservative lawful pay-back could occur.

[usconservative]

Sounds to me like a decent job of conservative lawful pay-back could occur.

Let us hope so!

[Amendment10]

"There were certainly firearms at the Chicago protest/disruption that forced the cancellation. People were there to rally and were assaulted and threatened."

Thanks for the info.

Other than his death threats to Trump when he was in police custody, corrections welcome, I understand Dimassimo didn’t use a gun or inflict injury.

I’m trying to find constitutional justification for the federal law that has been referenced concerning this issue. And come to think of it, the 14th Amendment actually doesn’t apply in this case, as I had previously suggested, since 14A deals with state laws.

And I would like to justify with federal election laws since the feds have constitutional authority to make such laws, except that campaining is arguably not the election process per se.

So although I agree with the federal campaining law that has been referenced in principle, I’m actually struggling a little bit with respect to finding constitutional justification for it.

Again, insights welcome.