I have more of an issue with people who disrupt proceedings where you expect decorum. Such as city council meetings and school board meetings and such. That goes for protestors on both sides. I’m ok with short interruptions, as that is a form of protest as American as apple pie. Get your point across, then let the meeting continue (or get escorted out). But when the objective is to totally disrupt the meeting, drown out opposing viewpoints or not allow debate to continue, it’s something else. I think a guy calling an impromptu press conference on the street is a different bar than town hall meeting type arrangements. The whistle was a tad obnoxious, but if the woman wanted to just mock the guy and call him a grifter and traitor the whole time she has as much right to do that as this convicted criminal does to host a “press conference”.
I hear you. I don't know why others mentioned freedom of speech other than their reactions to the video being visceral, thinking how they would be bothered by being trolled and mocked in public.
Her freedom of speech? That's harassment. We know the left loves to protest. They protest climate and glue themselves to the ground or lay in traffic. They protest with vagina hats and trash whatever city they are in. They protest by throwing paint on works of art. They protest by burning down cities, looting businesses and calling it peaceful. They protest by harassing Supreme Court Justices and their family's private residences. They used to protest war, but now they all have Ukrainian flag emojis in their Twitter titles. How is Navarro scum? What has he done to hurt your feelings?
So if Navarro's free speech rights were being violated, what would like to see done about it? Should the police put a muzzle on her? haul her away? beat the shit out of her? or just skip a few steps and shoot her on the spot? ( all of those are BIG government, too big).
As someone who has issued thousands of subpoenas, I can assure you the language on them is not couched in terms of "please come if you feel like it." Mine all say "You are hereby commanded to appear..." If the subject believes there is a legal reason he/she they don't have to, there are ways to address that concern. Simply ignoring it isn't one of them.
Yeah, the whistle was a bit much. I mean, it's your Constitutional right to get free TV advertising for your fund-raising website. OT: I might break Google if I keep trying to get to www.whrrrrrDefendWHRRRRrrrrPetWhrrrrWhrrrWHRer.coWhrrrrrrrrrrrm
I read they argued that the subpoena didn't identify which part of the building he was supposed to go to and couldn't prove he wasn't in the area. Jury didn't buy it. Not sure if the jury heard about him saying he was willing to go go prison over it, but if they did, I'm sure that didn't help either.
You can ignore the prior precedent of Attorney General Eric Holder refusing to appear before Congress and give testimony; the rules are different for Trump Republicans. Fact.
This is false of course. The Holder issue was over contested DOJ documents, not over his personal disregard for a subpoena. Holder testified to Congress both before and after the GOP Congress pulled their “contempt” stunt.
If his argument is some crazed maximalist “executive privilege” that never expires, it probably isn’t helpful that his defense includes bs like not knowing the specific room # of his summons. As a judge in a different case said, that’s weaksauce.
After attempting to disenfranchise 80M voters Peter Navarro’s diagnosis of what is wrong with America is…. protesters have whistles. Seems about right.
Disgraceful and pathetic. You applaud that crap? That's straight up rude, childish, bush league, uncivilized, immature crap. Would you think it funny if some maga hack made silly noises and held clever signs while a Pelosi or AOC type tried to talk? Becha wouldn't. Becha then you be more STFU than LOL.
