DemocratsDonald TrumpFeaturedPoliticsProtestsRepublicansSocietyWashington DC

‘No Kings’ Protesters Reveal What Their Movement Is Really About

admin
October 19, 2025
0Points
0
0
'No Kings' Protesters Reveal What Their Movement Is Really About

Some of the language on the signs is offensive and not appropriate for children.

A beautiful and gentle autumn day in Washington, D.C. was turned ugly Saturday by the piercing screams and vile signs of the “No Kings” protests.

This second round of the “No Kings” protests turned out to be a hate-filled and unpatriotic parade where attendees could freely let out their vitriol for the president, while openly calling for the death of their political opponents, whom they deemed comparable to Hitler.

And here I thought after the assassination of Charlie Kirk Democrats believed, as former Vice-President Kamala Harris wrote on X, that “Political violence has no place in America.”

Here are some of the most … let’s say “interesting” signs I encountered at the protest:

Can’t disagree with that!

Crabby protesters. I wonder what President Donald Trump did to the blue crab population.

“I’m glad Hitler [referring to Charlie Kirk] is dead.” This lady was a real piece of work! Daily Signal intern Angelina Deflin had an awkwardly interesting interview with this lady.

Again, Republicans and MAGA are the threat to the U.S. but Democrats are the ones calling for the assassination of Trump and to harm all 77 million voters who support him.

“The party of love and inclusion,” ladies and gentlemen.

Here comes the “Plushy Squad.”

Political protesters or walking advertisements for a Halloween costume shop?

Didn’t the president just broker a monumental peace deal in the Middle East, putting an end to the war in Gaza?

It’s true when the president said that he could find a cure for cancer and people would still find a reason to criticize him.

Perhaps we should look on the bright side. At least the Left is now pretending to respect the Founding Founders again.

Source link

admin

Related Posts

Featured
9

On April 12, 2021, a Knoxville police officer shot and killed an African American male student in a bathroom at Austin-East High School. The incident caused social unrest, and community members began demanding transparency about the shooting, including the release of the officer’s body camera video. On the evening of April 19, 2021, the Defendant and a group of protestors entered the Knoxville City-County Building during a Knox County Commission meeting. The Defendant activated the siren on a bullhorn and spoke through the bullhorn to demand release of the video. Uniformed police officers quickly escorted her and six other individuals out of the building and arrested them for disrupting the meeting. The court upheld defendants’ conviction for “disrupting a lawful meeting,” defined as “with the intent to prevent [a] gathering, … substantially obstruct[ing] or interfere[ing] with the meeting, procession, or gathering by physical action or verbal utterance.” Taken in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows that the Defendant posted on Facebook the day before the meeting and the day of the meeting that the protestors were going to “shut down” the meeting. During the meeting, the Defendant used a bullhorn to activate a siren for approximately twenty seconds. Witnesses at trial described the siren as “loud,” “high-pitched,” and “alarming.” Commissioner Jay called for “Officers,” and the Defendant stated through the bullhorn, “Knox County Commission, your meeting is over.” Commissioner Jay tried to bring the meeting back into order by banging his gavel, but the Defendant continued speaking through the bullhorn. Even when officers grabbed her and began escorting her out of the Large Assembly Room, she continued to disrupt the meeting by yelling for the officers to take their hands off her and by repeatedly calling them “murderers.” Commissioner Jay called a ten-minute recess during the incident, telling the jury that it was “virtually impossible” to continue the meeting during the Defendant’s disruption. The Defendant herself testified that the purpose of attending the meeting was to disrupt the Commission’s agenda and to force the Commission to prioritize its discussion on the school shooting. Although the duration of the disruption was about ninety seconds, the jury was able to view multiple videos of the incident and concluded that the Defendant substantially obstructed or interfered with the meeting. The evidence is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction. Defendant also claimed the statute was “unconstitutionally vague as applied to her because the statute does not state that it includes government meetings,” but the appellate court concluded that she had waived the argument by not raising it adequately below. Sean F. McDermott, Molly T. Martin, and Franklin Ammons, Assistant District Attorneys General, represent the state.

by admin
October 8, 2025

From State v. Every, decided by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals…

1 of 96

TRENDING

Copyright © 2025 conservdailyusa - .
Copyright © 2025 conservdailyusa - .