ACLU Board Member: Trump Supporters Should Be Shot!

The Gateway Pundit ^ | 12-10-2015 | Kristinn Taylor

[servo1969]

Liberals are taking their war on leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump to a new level-beyond calls to assassinate Trump-with a call to shoot his supporters before they can vote for him!

"The thing is, we have to really reach out to those who might consider voting for Trump and say, "This is Goebbels. This is the final solution. If you are voting for him I will have to shoot you before election day." They're not going to listen to reason, so when justice is gone, there's always force, as Laurie would say.'

Loring Wirbel, a board member of the Colorado ACLU and co-chair of Colorado Springs chapter, is reported to have posted on Facebook a screed that said Trump supporters should be shot. The Daily Caller and Twitchy reported on and made screen grabs of Wirbel's post and professional positions.

Daniel Cole, Executive Director of the El Paso County Republican Party is credited with first finding the post by Wirbel.

No fan of Trump, but if you are threatening to shoot his fans... you're doing it wrong. Good catch @Daniel_J_W_Cole pic.twitter.com/JTvHn4Ur6P

— Aaron Gardner (@Aaron_RS) December 10, 2015

Trump was recently given Secret Service protection as a result of threats. Is there a precedent for a presidential candidate's supporters getting their own Secret Service protection?

[MarkL]

It’s a shame there is no longer a Department of Justice. The left have replaced with the the department of “Just Us.”

Mark

[windsorknot]

I doubt that Wirbel could shoot his way out of a paper bag.

[Norm Lenhart]

Whats left to debate? we closed the last one with me proving my assertion. Is there some other topic you’d like to discuss?

[eyedigress]

I substituted knowledge for intelligence.

My intentional bad.

[spodefly]

We knew this day was coming for the past 7 years. History repeats/rhymes. Progressives always (try to) kill anyone who dissents.

[firebrand]

Where’s Loretta?

[eyedigress]

Norm, try to bring up a thread about something that concerns you.

I am a psychologist.

You only seem to address issues that are presented to you.

You really need to move along.

[Mariner]

"Is there a precedent for a presidential candidate's supporters getting their own Secret Service protection?"

We carry ours everywhere we go.

And we look forward to an attempted "assassination" by one of these ACLU twits, or THEIR supporters.

[grey_whiskers]

She’s one ugly broad. She ought to shave
...oh wait.

[grey_whiskers]

SJWs always lie.

SJWs always project.

SJWs always double down.

(h/t Vox Day)

[altura]

The ACLU has much to answer for. Libs are talking now about keeping crazy people from having guns.

There was a time in our country when family members could have someone put in a mental hospital at least long enough to be evaluated.

Then someone saw the Snake Pit and the ACLU got to work so that this is no longer possible.

Face it; crazy people don’t usually voluntarily commit themselves. Instead of gun bans, how about insanity bans?

But the ACLU put a stop to families helping these people before they hurt somebody.

[octex]

Every assassin in history has been a Marxist.
*****************************
John Wilkes Booth, too?

[HandyDandy]

Loreeeeeettttaaaa, where arrrrrrrrrre you?

[kingu]

A) with what? The same person also has no belief in private ownership of guns.

B) Last I checked, this is what we call ‘non protected speech’ and would be generally referred to as terrorist speech as it is intended to convey a threat if someone fails to perform exactly as the speaker desires.

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

I looked at his picture and we better watch out.He looks like a really mean customer.NOT

[Norm Lenhart]

You haven’t said anything coherent and strayed off topic a lot into excuses and projection, so I have no reason to doubt your ‘professional’ claims. They are consistent with your profession.

[dragnet2]

Bookmark

[Jarhead9297]

Bring it cup cake. I bet I have more ammo than you and your rabid followers

[BykrBayb]

You win the Internets!

[BlueDragon]

He was responding to post 6 which specifically referenced Mitt Romney.

Yeah, but in which way? Was he intending to be also talking about;

People who -- on this forum actively supported Romney for the nomination?

What has come to be referred to as the GOPe for seeming to help steer things Romney's way? Those guys?

Wait, it was said people here should have little signs next to their freep handles? (for the chubby among us "handles" is sort of a double entendre'< > )

So just who? People who voted for Romney? (not that I'm proud of it). Even though he was about dead last on the list of most anyone around this place, Romney ended up with the GOP presidential nomination. In my own case it wasn't Party loyalty, but like, man, just what else was there to do? They had us snookered, didn't they? (try not to think about that too much, right before mealtimes).

So who should be lined up and mistreated? People who refused to vote for Demo-cra (go ahead, finish that word) lite?

I think that would only have mattered for those in close-elections locales. Sadly enough there were not enough of those to swing the election if every freeper in the world voted twice. If it's voter apathy that is to blame (and should be lined up and shot) then I suppose the IRS, the FBI, "Homeland Security", and every other now well-supplied with ammunition, three letter government agency would need to be called in since they'd be the only ones with enough ammo to go around (other than DOD, maybe). Hey, Zippo the Majic Knee- Petulance said that we should have a domestic force as strong as our DOD. How's he doing, so far?

In many States, such as where I voted in the general election 2012, (Romney ending up 3,000,000+ popular votes behind 0Bama) my own vote's potential to make a difference had a Frosty's chance of tap-dancing on the surface of Sol (by the pale moonlight) it was that much of a foregone conclusion.

Just look at the guy...

See any feet there? Tap-dancing was strictly not going to happen, out of the picture.

I voted for the guy anyway (not Frosty, he couldn't get on the ballot in enough States to be a contender) even though I do not believe the man has a solid enough rock within himself that is made of the same lodestone which many carry (that is Christ, no matter if but a mustard seed-sized chip off the 'ol block). Close imitations may be helpful, but nothing but the real thing baby is the real thing, baby. (Norm, did you eat your peas before hopping off that highchair? lol)

That lodestone has helped serve to guide this nation. Even if somebody was or is not "Christian" for whichever reasons, it can still be seen that Christian sensibilities and worldview were among the most crucial deciding factors behind why the Constitution and form of government which we have (had?) was framed the way that it was. Though not perfect, this nation has been a refuge from tyrants for many, from all over the world.

Romney had and likely still has other talents. That skill set, managing companies for the profit of managing (and take-over specialist) majority shareholders -- is that what we needed? More than Zippy the "race and the Constitution" lecturer, of that I was sure enough. But otherwise...?

He wouldn't have so thoroughly gone about trashing the Constitution as Zippy the Hopey_Changey, perfectly blank slate candidate (for hopey-changey seekers to project their own best favored emotions & ideals upon) who was in reality a stealth marxist cryto muslim who hated America for being "colonialist" and "racist" and a long list of other "ists", HAS, but who else would? William Ayers, maybe?