Fake patriot attacks media at Trump rally

Appropriately, the man who attacked media members at a Trump rally in Texas last night was wearing a brown shirt.

Let the record show that BBC cameraman Ron Skeans was rescued by a blogger, who pulled the unidentified man away.

“You all right? Everything OK?” President Trump asked the journalist, stopping his remarks, then flashing a thumbs-up sign in Skeans’ direction.

“The crowd had been whipped up into a frenzy against the media by Trump and other speakers all night,” BBC Washington producer Eleanor Montague said.

A campaign official for Mr Trump afterwards suggested the attacker was drunk, which explains everything.

  • Gary F

    That’s a brown jacket, not a brown shirt.

    The brown shirts are reading the New Green Deal that recently was shoved down The Memory Hole.

  • Rob

    My understanding is that The White Supremacist Overlord/Brownshirt-In-Chief has begun referring to the fact checks provided by various media as “fake news.”

  • AL287

    Being the BBC generally does not deal in “fake news”, I find it ironic a Trumpie would attack their cameraman.

    The BBC is one of the few sources I can get unbiased coverage of U.S. and international news.

    • jon

      So you are saying they aren’t only members of the news media, they are also taking american jobs!?!!??!


    • wannabgod

      BBC, phony all day long.

      • BBC, phony all day long.

        What makes you say that?

        Please be specific.

        • Nope. Please don’t engage the trolls.

          • Just hoping for clarification.

            I’ll mark it and move on.

          • That’s his first comment here and he’s got his account set to private and he’s got 59 flags in his comment history. That’s a troll.

          • Very good.

            I checked but couldn’t see anything due to the “private” setting.

            Have a good rest of the day.

            /Sorry you have to deal with trolls.

          • kevins

            MAGA. He is evidence that stupid abides.

          • Barton

            Thank you for allowing the “block user” feature on your blog. Just used it for the first time after seeing one of his comments to you, Bob.

        • wannabgod

          Just one example, because you probably don’t care at any rate.
          They certainly have not been reporting on the severity of the yellow vest revolts in France. Day after day the country is boiling over and BBC considers it a picnic in the park.
          I have a sister there, don’t even consider telling me different.

          • These stories don’t seem like a “picnic in the park”, from what I see. They are factually stating what is happening there with links to more in-depth analysis for readers if desired.


            They seem to be following the way the AP disseminates news stories.

            But that’s just my take on this story.

          • Barton

            Two weekends ago, BBC News did a 2 hour special on the events in France, including having had an embedded journalist for the last 2 months. It isn’t ignoring the issue at all.

    • Mike Worcester

      When people ask me where I get most of my news, I typically respond with a list that is, at the top, almost exclusively not U.S-based: BBC, Al Jazeera, CBC, The Guardian, NPR/MPR.

  • kevins

    I pity anyone old enough to recall the rise to power of pure evil in Europe in the 1930’s. They must be shaking their heads and worrying for our country. Individual # 1 lies shamelessly, but the truly scarey thing is how many people believe him. I pray that our country survives this administration.

    • jon

      I tried to talk to my grandfather on the topic of politics maybe a year ago, given that he was there in WWII.
      His answer was “I don’t like democrats.”

      Though he is fond of his social security checks, medicare, VA benefits, and his union pension.

      My father (a boomer) expresses nearly identical sentiments.

      • I tried to talk to my grandfather on the topic of politics maybe a year ago, given that he was there in WWII.
        His answer was “I don’t like democrats.”

        Funny, since he was most likely a Dem back during WW2.

        • Joseph

          He was likely a Republican back then, before the parties basically switched in their beliefs and polorized during the 1960’s with the civil rights/great-society laws being passed.

          • The parties started switching platforms shortly after the ACW and continued through to the Civil Rights movement.

            The FDR Democrats bear little resemblance to the current GOP and many of those policies had already been swapped.

        • jon

          I can’t speak to that… at least not knowledgeably…

    • I pity anyone old enough to recall the rise to power of pure evil in Europe in the 1930’s.

      According to my mother, her father, an immigrant from Norway, would have screaming matches at the dinner table with his son, her brother, about Hitler.

      Her father basically gave Hitler a pass while her brother tried to open his eyes to the pure evil that was happening in Europe at the time.

      Her father changed his mind as soon as the Germans invaded Norway.

      First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

      Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist.

      Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

      Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

      – Martin Niemöller

      • RBHolb

        “Her father changed his mind as soon as the Germans invaded Norway.”

        I think that was true in much of Europe. Fighting the Nazis was about preserving one’s homeland, not about quashing evil.

      • Sonny T

        The lesson is let’s not squelch legitimate criticism, just because it suits our politics

        • Trying to relate this to the post. I know you’re not saying beating up a photographer is speech.

          • Sonny T

            But let’s not blow this up for partisan purposes. A drunk attacking a photographer at a rally for nitwits is just that.

          • Unless there’s context.

          • Sonny T

            We’ve locked horns on this before and not sure we can add anything. You feel one way, I feel another.

            If you are suggesting Trump successfully convinced this person to attack the photographer, I would disagree.

          • Why, then, would this person attack the photographer who, by all accounts, was just doing their job?

            Trump has been banging the “media is the enemy” drum for years now, it’s pretty much a given that that message has taken root with at least SOME of his supporters, drunk or not.

          • Sonny T

            He’s made it clear not all media. His favorite phrase is “Fake news.” Not “The news”.

          • However “fake news” is just the news he doesn’t like…which, as we all know, changes from day-to-day.

    • Jeff

      What bothers me is that I don’t think we are descending into fascism. I believe that our institutions and a significant portion of the population wouldn’t let that happen. It’s just what we are slipping into that I’m very uncertain about. It feels dystopian, but not sure what it will be.

      • The Resistance

        I think it will likely be a version of what we see in Turkey, Hungary, and other governments that use the vocabulary and ornamentation of a democratic republic but have the beating heart of authoritarianism.

        Once we have another catastrophic event on the scale of 9/11 or greater–which will happen–many citizens will give up the freedoms we still retain quite easily.

        That’s why it’s important to defend the free press. To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. The president and his followers, one of whom is joining our conversation today, are asking us to do that now.

        • Sonny T

          The security state as we know it was put into place by Bush/Obama. Taking a partisan stance on this one is dangerous.

          • with the full approval of the American people who were fond of responding “if you’re not a terrorist, what are you worried about?” whenever anyone noticed that civil liberties were being eroded.

            Still, those days seemed like ones where you could actually have a discussion about civil liberties vs. security and not come away feeling you just lost a bunch of brain cells.

          • Jay T. Berken

            “if you’re not a terrorist, what are you worried about?”

            I guess this is what is stuck in my craw about the whole Omar deal. It just seems to me that people are looking for her to trip up and point, “see, she isn’t one of us!” What she has tweeted is not advisable, but we have people wanting retribution that needs to check themselves before pointing fingers.

          • Sonny T

            Yes, a bipartisan loss of liberty.

          • The Resistance

            I’m not talking about today’s security state. I’m talking about the future. That’s why I used “will likely be”, “will give up”, and “will happen”.

            But just to clarify, there is only one American political party that is currently calling the free press the enemy of the people so I’m pretty comfortable with my partisanship.

            Thanks for the danger warning, but I’m good. You’re welcome to respond, of course, but know that I won’t be sticking my head down that rabbit hole any farther than this.

          • kevins

            Sonny, you must have missed the 50’s and 60’s..but most could trust POTUS to be on the side of OUR country then.

          • Sonny T

            This argument has more holes than Swiss cheese. Vietnam alone should give us enough pause to “trust POTUS to be on the side of OUR country…”

          • kevins

            You must have missed that era also. Which POTUS during that era had such close relations with Russia, was as corrupt as Individual # 1, and manufactured crises just so he could solve them and look good. There was a time when crowd size was not the measure of the man. Sad.

          • Sonny T

            An argument could be made the other way. But this is thread creep and I don’t think we should engage in it.

          • Bravo

        • Jeff

          I think that’s plausible, Trump and followers are laying the foundation for an autocratic leader and a catastrophe could be the catalyst. However, I think it will be more subtle that that, we will wallow along and nothing will get done because there’s a group that believes what they want to believe regardless of facts and block anyone who disagrees with them. We will fade into irrelevancy and places like China will make their own agenda for the world. (Oh, maybe we’re already there).

          Another and perhaps bigger threat to a free press is that newspapers in particular don’t make the money they used to.

          • Jay T. Berken

            “bigger threat to a free press is that newspapers in particular don’t make the money they used to”

            Or that the big parent companies (mostly hedge companies) not putting resources into the small newspapers due to lower profits.

          • The Resistance

            Since the only government we’ve known is a democratic republic, it’s easy for all of us to forget that historically we are an anomoly. Some form of autocracy is the global historical norm. Free, economically prosperous citizens are just a historical hiccup.

            Seeing the world as I do from my dystopian mindset, if we survive the Trump administration just wallowing along and getting nothing done I think I’m counting it as a win. 😉

        • Rob

          Yup. And the billionaire class would be highly supportive of a government with a democratic facade and an autocratic heart.

          • The Resistance

            Correction…the correct terminology is now ‘people of means’. ‘Billionaire’ is hurtful and demeaning.

    • Rob

      I pity all of us who are currently living through the anti-democratic cruelty, corruption and venality that are the stock-in-trade of T.Rump and The Quisling Party.

  • wannabgod

    It is both disappointing and telling when you can’t post an opinion different then the group think on this site without being called a troll by one of it’s moderators,
    Carry on without diversity in opinion then all of you free thinkers.

    • Maybe try to offer intelligent thought and substantive dialogue and analysis instead of drive-by , cable TV-generated nonsense and we won’t think of you as someone who go blown by the wind of the storm over from the newspaper websites, OK?

      Your turn. Give it a shot. Make us smarter.

      But if you just want to post trolly stuff, maybe get lost, eh, mystery person?

    • Jay T. Berken


  • The Resistance

    I listened to Michael Barbaro’s interview with AG Suzlberger (publisher of the NY Times) on The Daily recently. It was interesting to hear what it was like for him to directly confront the president on the life and death consequences of his ‘enemy of the people’ rhetoric.

    Lip service to the importance of the free press was paid, compliments were made to the Times by the president (“who’s more important than the NY Times? No one”, he said), and yet the the president continues to exaggerate and channel popular anxieties into aggression against the free press.

    The president’s pleading for “just one good story” about him from his hometown newspaper made him seem even smaller and more psychologically damaged than I previously thought.

    Give it a listen:https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/podcasts/the-daily/trump-interview-news-media.html

  • dukepowell

    Doesn’t it seem odd that the man who violently attacked a journalist and was witnessed by thousands remains unidentified? This was an obvious assault. Why weren’t the police involved?

    I’m perfectly willing to be wrong but there seems to be at least a fighting chance that this was a staged, false flag operation.