Extreme Center Goes After Anti-Trump Protesters

Extreme center trolls try to discredit anti-Trump protestors as sore losers and “Soros agents.”

Rise Up Times

 Bershidsky, for some odd reason, thinks these protests are about convincing Trump in some interpersonal manner. They’re actually about demonstrating mass disapproval of the pending regime and its stated goals, not appealing to Trump’s better angels.   

By Adam Johnson  FAIR  November 17, 2016

After Donald Trump’s surprise victory last week, protests against his pending presidency—and against the racism, misogyny and xenophobia he embodies—popped up from New York City to Portland to Kansas City to Austin to Nashville. Thousands of protesters gathered under the banner of #NotMyPresident, expressly rejecting the Trump administration’s agenda of, among other things, forced deportations, Muslim bans and attacks on women’s reproductive rights.

Media for the people!  Bringing you the best of the alternative media and original articles and videos.  Click here to help by learning more about Rise Up Times, spreading the word, and making a donation. 

On cue, several center and center-left pundits…

View original post 1,264 more words

13 thoughts on “Extreme Center Goes After Anti-Trump Protesters

  1. If those on the left, or right, don’t like the result of this completely corrupt political system, then they should stop feeding it by taking part in its bullshit elections.

    Both sides and the middle make me sick! Whiners all! And they are getting exactly what they deserve.

    Activism from the inside will not work, period! It’s time for a change all right, a change that modern humanity has never witnessed; a change away from these ancient systems of governments, where the lazy, immature majority, who still need a mommy and daddy state to take care of them, finally take responsibility for themselves, and so no have need of the STATE.


    • Sojourner, according to the reports, a good proportion of the protestors in the streets are socialists and anarchists and they definitely didn’t vote on 8 November. In my experience, mass protests are nearly always the first step in building a mass movement. And if you want to dismantle capitalism, it’s going go have to start in the streets.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Agreed! But most of these are paid stooges by Soros and crew. This has been documented.

        I don’t have a problem with people protesting in the streets, as long as they are not paid off or whining about Hillary losing.


        • I beg to disagree that most of them are paid Soros stooges. Soros, among many others, contributes on an annual basis to MoveOn.com (which is captured by the Democratic Party), which helped pay for some buses to increase the size of the initial protests. The notion that he’s paying individual protestors to stand in the streets yelling and holding signs is ludicrous.

          In the first place, he doesn’t have that much money. In the second place, the genuine Bernie supporters, Anonymous and other anti-capitalist protestors know all about MoveOn’s pro-corporate and pro-Hillary agenda are not gullible enough to be taken in by it..

          The statement that most of the protestors are paid by “Soros” and his crew is blatant Wall propaganda designed to drive a wedge between left-leaning and right-leaning anti-corporatists.

          If you are really serious about overthrowing the 1%, you need to learn to recognize and support the efforts of grassroots anti-capitalist who have been engaged in steady movement building since the 1999 Battle in Seattle that shut down the WTO. Unreported by either the corporate or the official “alternative” media, they became visible this year for the first time in the massive pro-Bernie rallies and in the current street protests.

          We even have people from Anonymous putting up “Rise Against Trump” posters here in New Plymouth. And you can bet your bottom dollar George Soros isn’t paying them to do it.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. Trump Is the Legitimate President Based on Constitutional Principles of Federalism and States Rights

    Any first year law student should be able to tell you that we have 51 sets of laws, one for the federal government, and 50 for each state. Federalism is a fundamental principle of government, in the United States, that defines the relationship between the federal government at the national level, and its constituent units at the state and local levels. Trump won the majority of states, and he won the majority of electoral votes. We live in a shared system of government. Those citizens who do not like the laws or political make-up of their states are free to move to another state per the Privileges and Immunities Clause, the Commerce Clause as well as other federal statutes and Supreme Court Constitutional interpretations. This is not a communist country, citizens are allowed to freely emigrate- no one is shot trying to climb over any type of Berlin wall of yore. Of course, all we hear the liberal media talking about is how Hillary won the popular vote by 200,000 to over a million votes. That does not mean she won the Presidency under our federalist system of government. It is also not unique, it has happened five times before, the last time was Al Gore’s winning the popular vote in the 2000 Presidential election. If you do not like our federalist system of government, that is too bad for you. Your dislike of federalism does not undermine Trump’s legitimacy one whit. Happy trails Hillary!


  3. PeaceFrog, I agree with you that we probably would have been worse off under Clinton. However in view of the mass vote rigging that occurred (which Greg Palast has documented clearly went in favor of the Republicans), I think we have to acknowledge that this wasn’t a legitimate election. See https://stuartjeannebramhall.com/2016/11/12/greg-palast-the-election-was-stolen-heres-how/ and https://stuartjeannebramhall.com/2016/11/11/breaking-election-experts-explain-how-the-election-was-stolen-youtube/

    The 2000 election was also stolen (also documented by Palast and other observers) and Bush only won the election because the Supreme Court illegally and unconstitutionally stopped the vote count in Florida. Legal scholars have gone back and counted those votes, and it turned out Gore would have won if the counting had continued.

    I still lived in the US then and I was out in the streets protesting this vote rigging even though I myself didn’t vote for Al Gore – who I regarded as a corporate shill. At the time, we still had a Bill of Rights and the First Amendment protects citizens’ rights to peaceably assemble to petition for redress of grievances.


  4. All governments, whether they are communist, socialist or capitalist in economic form are inherently violent, and, seek a monopoly on violence. University studies on Democide are illuminating on the issue. The alternative, anarcho-syndicalism leaves power vacuums that give rise to less efficacious, but more openly brutal gangs, that are more amorphous and less predictable in their behavior, e.g., ISIS, Los Zetas. I believe that a more pragmatic, and reality-based solution for large economies, where land re-distribution does not resolve the issues, is New Deal socialist wealth redistribution in an open manner, and, with minimal bureaucratic /technocratic micromanagement. This would simply be government support for employee owned businesses like PUBLIX, a national minimum income, a minimum wage adjusted to real inflation, universal healthcare, universal car insurance, and, utilities and housing paid for by the government for the poor. Much of the criticism of Milton Friedman, and other free market icons, correctly points out that a lack of transparency and mismanagement have been hallmarks of state economic intervention (e.g., rent control and rent stabilization in NYC being received by people with substantial incomes and net worth).


  5. All I have to go by is what I read, Dr B. I can’t know what is happening everywhere around the world, every second of the day.

    I should have clarified that I am speaking of the protests over Trump, where Trump supporters have been attacked by Hillary whiners. According to the articles I have read, many to most of these protesters have been hired on Craig’s list or elsewhere.

    As I tried to make clear in my response (but evidently failed), I am not slamming those who are truly out there putting their asses on the line to bring this system down!

    You really believe I am against anyone trying to help end this madness?

    Here is the problem for me: there are so many hypocrites on the left these days (and right as well), at least here, in this hell hole. And these particular left leaning folk were all screaming that if Trump would lose, then his supporters would beat and kill all of them.

    Well, in fact, the exact opposite has occurred here, and many of these left protesters have been hired by Soros and others, according to the articles I have read, which is all I have to go by:





  6. Sojourner, most of the links you post are based on an article by Clare Bernish, who is a CIA troll. http://thefreethoughtproject.com/soros-funding-hiring-anti-trump-protesters/

    If you look at the article very closely, you will see that the headline claiming Soros is paying protestors is very misleading. Later in the article she admits that he isn’t paying protestors. If you look closely at the Craig’s list ad, you will see that MoveOn is hiring “organisers.” Then she argues that because his Open Society Institute has donated to MoveOn and because he sponsored colored revolutions in Europe that this automatically means there are anti-Trump protestors because Soros is paying them all.

    I can understand that you might not be aware that MoveOn (like Avaaz) is a CIA sponsored group used to infiltrate genuine leftist organizations – and that they have infiltrated efforts by anti-capitalist groups to challenge the legitimacy of the 2016 elections. It’s also possible you aren’t aware that there was massive vote rigging, both in the Democratic primaries and in the recent general election. It’s also possible you don’t know the difference between an “organiser” and a “protestor.”

    But Clare Bernish does – or should.


    • The FBI re-opened the investigation into Hillary’s emails a week prior to the election, and, this was the proximate cause in Trump’s spike in polls and subsequent victory. The FBI and CIA work in coordination most of the time. In fact, FBI intelligence units (“I” units) are essentially CIA attachments. Why would the FBI do this, if the larger intelligence scheme was to purge Trump through front groups? I think that it is more likely that there is a split in neocon versus old school intelligence views (this is what Ray McGovern talks about). I believe that the reactionary wing of war hawk, Zionist neocons lost the battle, and Trump, in large part, owes his victory to non-interventionist factions within the intelligence community.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.