Billionaires in The Hot Seat at Humboldt’s Latest Pro-Democracy Rally in Eureka
Barbarah, an artist, painted both sides of her sign – one side reading “No bonds on America’s Freedoms” while the opposite side featured a phoenix in the forefront a colorful background reading, “No Dictators or Orange Kings, In America Freedom Rings” as she stood along the front line of protesters collecting honks from passing traffic on Hwy 101. [All photos by Ryan Hutson]
Dubbed the “MAKE BILLIONAIRES PAY” protest, the overall sentiment in the crowd was one of frustration, with signs ranging from “SCOTUS bought and paid for” to “CURE MORBID WEALTH,” a phrase used commonly by political commentator and “free speech” radio show host Thom Hartman. The protest was planned in conjunction with the Women’s March that took place in Washington DC the same day.
Live from the protest, several attendees offered their thoughts.
Some were there to rally against the current administration’s tactics in immigration enforcement, relaying concerns about “authoritarian use of police and National Guard,” as one attendee put it. Growing concerns about the Trump administration cutting funding to social programs was also evident at the rally.
One man, holding a sign reading “LAST CENTURY WE KILLED FASCISTS – THIS CENTURY WE ELECT THEM” with an upright American flag attached and waving in the day’s afternoon breeze, explained why he showed up to the protest. “We need to get rid of all the fascists in this country,” he told us, adding in regard to President Trump’s statement declaring that he would posthumously award the nation’s ‘highest honor’ to Charlie Kirk, a Medal of Freedom, “If I had a [Medal of Freedom], I would melt it down, send it back,” the protester said, hypothetically adding, “You put me in with Kirk and I don’t want it.”
Grandson of a World War II Veteran, a protester insists on defending freedom of speech and political expression, and supporting immigrant community members while denouncing recent ICE actions.
Many of those in attendance called attention to what they see as misuse of police in regard to immigration enforcement. A pair of veterans standing together at the rally shared a sign reading “When Injustice Becomes Law, RESISTANCE Becomes DUTY” and when prompted, explained, “Right now we have a tyrant that was elected as the President of the United States, and right now he’s trying to get rid of all the news media, anything opposing him,” he told us in a street-side interview.
Explaining his contention, he added that he felt Trump, “out of his own mouth has declared the fact that he’s after all news media, to stop them from putting out the information.” Donning an Army Vietnam Veteran cap, he added, “He doesn’t respect free speech, he wants to declare anybody making comments about him as hateful speech, but he’s the one that originated hateful speech in all of his commentary.”
A man and woman stand in the shadow of the courthouse flagpole holding signs “DEFEND OUR DEMOCRACY” and one with an outline of “American values” listing “RULE OF LAW, DUE PROCESS, CODE OF ETHICS” alongside a ‘yes on Prop 50’ lawn sign.
Standing with Barbarah, a man held a sign honoring his grandfather’s anti-fascist stance, advocating for resistance against what he called fascism against free speech, from the Trump administration.
Two friends stand in solidarity against over-policing of the immigrant community, and political dissidents like Mahmoud Khalil*, with a sign reading, “First they came for the immigrants and I spoke up because I know the rest of the DAMN POEM”.
*This information was misattributed to the wrong photo.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
That crack in the Liberty Bell keeps getting wider and wider.
The ten points from The Communist Manifesto are a list of proposed interim measures intended to help transition a capitalist society into communism. The points were written by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848.
The ten points are as follows:
.
And a modernized version after much failure.
.
These are the eight levels of controls by Saul Alinsky to transform a nation through socialism into communism.
1. Healthcare – control healthcare and you control the people.
2. Poverty – Increase the poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you provide everything for them to live.
3. Debt – Increase the debt level to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes and this will produce more poverty.
4. Gun control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5. Welfare – Take control of every aspect (food, housing, income) of their lives because that will make them fully dependent on the government.
6. Education – Take control of what people read and listen to and take control or what children learn in school.
7. Religion – Remove belief in God from the government and schools because the people need to believe in only the government knowing what is best for the people.
8. Class warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. Eliminate the middle class.
This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to tax the wealthy with the support of the poor.
It should be clear to all how our nation is well on its way to winning its race to the bottom.
Is it our public servants in both political parties who are constitution-despising oath breakers?
Or, we the people who vote and revote them in office to sell us out?
Allen. The United States is a Republic. It is not Fascist or socialist but some politicians are swinging towards radical left controls. Are you insinuating the Trump Administration is fascist? Are you aware of the last administration? The lawfare use on a political opponent? Take a close look at Alinsky’s plan.
So do you even know what it means when you say America is a republic? I do.
–
It means that we have a form of government in which the People hold the power, but elect representatives to represent our interests in government. With the advent of corporate fascism and the blatant corruption in the present administration, the ideal of representative democracy is dying. Is that what you want?
This isn’t LOCO. “Please improve the conversation by disagreeing thoughtfully and backing your claims with facts”
What I submitted IS a fact and I did disagree thoughtfully. I see that statement about the US being a republic as if it means something else entirely when it means EXACTLY what I stated. I shouldn’t have to cite attribution when the explanation of representative democracy and republicanism within the context is easily Googled. If you don’t think so, then try it yourself…
“Siri, can you explain what it means to say America is a republic?”
You’ll get the same answers I posted. The fact that you don’t seem to know that is telling.
Sovereign citizenship idiocy, anyone?
I’m just wondering where you got the notion that the “ideal of representative democracy is dying”. Are we cancelling the vote on Prop 50 and next year’s election? Or is it just deliberate inflammatory hyperbole?
You have no understanding of corporate structure nor what fascism is.
Oh really? Methinks you’re the one who is clueless:
“Fascism embodied corporatism, in which political representation was based on trade and industry rather than on geography. In this, fascism revealed its roots in syndicalism, a form of socialism originating on the left. The government cartelized firms of the same industry, with representatives of labor and management serving on myriad local, regional, and national boards—subject always to the final authority of the dictator’s economic plan. Corporatism was intended to avert unsettling divisions within the nation, such as lockouts and union strikes.”
From econlib.org/fascism/sheldonrichman
It would behoove you to read the entire article.
Syndicalism means government control of the means of production. Where do you see this happening in America?
Why dont you read more reliable sources. Like the Supreme court case of Liggett v Lee for starters. And then perhaps Winston Churchills work, rather than some leftwing misinterpretations of those concepts.
Your argument is a statement of communism in that you apparently support statism over free-enterprise, the former which has never produced a successful outcome for the citizenry and ultimately leads to fascism and dictatorship.
We don’t want a democracy either. Ours is a republic with representatives democratically elected. Their powers are constrained by the constitution. A democracy is mob rule where 51% of the population can do anything it wants including jailing and executing the 49%. No Bueno.
Republics are a form of democracy.
Even with direct democracy, which we employ to a very small degree here, the majority cannot vote away the rights of the minority.
And the chisel has WOKE engraved on the handle.
Team Whitey?
The real racist is NorCalNative.
The price we pay for freedom gets higher every day!
You describe the Biden administration perfectly.
I can’t wait for the day when MAGA has to take responsibility for their missteps and mismanagement, being no longer able to blame it on other administrations.
“LAST CENTURY WE KILLED FASCISTS – THIS CENTURY WE ELECT THEM”
“Listen, to what the flower people say”
Finally. A protest by the right people…
Listen to the Geezers… They know some stuff…
My sign would say
“Evangelists off Campus”…
I don’t qualify as a Geezer, cause I’m not old enough…
When I’m 85, I’ll run for a seat on the HOA Board…
7. Religion – Remove belief in God from the government and schools because the people need to believe in only the government knowing what is best for the people.
.5 Media–Install Goebbels as Propaganda Minister. Arrange the media toward only one view. Resurrect Goebbels as Carr.
Something along the lines of Biden’s “Disinformation Governance Board”, his version of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth?
Google search of “Disinformation Governance Board”:
“The Disinformation Governance Board was a short-lived advisory board within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that was established and dissolved in 2022. Its stated function was to provide guidance on combating disinformation that posed a threat to U.S. national security.”
Oh, this is rich in irony, particularly in the wake of the Kimmel controversy:
”Controversy and opposition (May–August 2022): The board drew intense criticism from conservative lawmakers and commentators, who labeled it an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth” that could infringe on free speech. This backlash focused on concerns over government censorship and included personal attacks and death threats against Jankowicz.”
“Examples of the board’s intended scope included:
Yeaaaah. So harmful and threatening. Maybe just as much as canceling broadcast licenses and preventing corporate mergers?
The Board was dissolved after only a few months after someone in the administration realized it was not only terribly unpopular, it was blatantly unconstitutional. What happened to Kimmel was going to happen anyway but it was wrong for Carr to bully the corporation that employed him. Being wrong doesn’t respect political parties.
The whole idea should be unthinkable. Who is worthy to decide what information can be made public?
Not everyone follows the same religion. I’m not sure you’d be comfortable with a Satanist or someone who believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster teaching your kids their beliefs. Some of us feel the same way about religious doctrines that end up promoting hate or misogyny. No one is telling you not to believe what you believe but keep it out of our schools because that is disrespectful to people who don’t follow your beliefs.
The paradox of the Flying Spaghetti Monster:
Pastafarians believe that religious beliefs should not be taught at schools.
But if a Pastafarian were to tell their students that religious beliefs should not be taught at schools, they would thereby be teaching their religious beliefs at school.
(The same paradox applies to teachers who part of The Satanic Temple.)
The principle of separation between church and state is a foundational element of American constitutional law, particularly as it applies to public education. Under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, public schools and their employees are strictly prohibited from endorsing, promoting, or imposing religious beliefs on students.
Accordingly, discussions involving religious doctrine such as the existence or nature of God should not be initiated by school personnel. Public school employees are not permitted to instruct, persuade, or otherwise influence students regarding religious beliefs or non-beliefs. Doing so constitutes a violation of students’ constitutional rights and may be grounds for legal action.
In accordance with Supreme Court precedent, including Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963), any attempt by a public school employee to promote or discourage religious belief is unlawful. Such conduct should be documented and reported to the appropriate school authorities, district officials, or civil rights organizations such as the ACLU.
Parents have the right to advocate for the religious neutrality of public institutions, ensuring that all students are free to learn in an environment free from religious coercion or discrimination.
Even telling a student not to say the lords name in vain is a violation you must never impose your beliefs and violate free speech. This is cut and dry constitutional law. This goes for Christians, Satanists, Pastafarians etc
Does encouraging students to talk like a pirate on International Talk Like a Pirate Day (one of Pastafarianism’s holiest days) cross this line?
Black got it wrong.
“The principle of separation between church and state is a foundational element of American constitutional law,”
-Farmer-
___________________________________
Does the term “separation of church and State” appear ANYWHERE in the constitution…???
No, the exact phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the U.S. Constitution.
The concept is, however, rooted in the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. This principle was famously articulated by Thomas Jefferson in an 1802 letter, where he referred to it as a “wall of separation between Church & State”.
Key Points:
Constitutional Text: The words “separation of church and state” are not in the Constitution.
First Amendment:
The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause prohibits the government from establishing a religion or favoring one religion over another.
Thomas Jefferson: Jefferson coined the “wall of separation” metaphor in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802.
Supreme Court Interpretation:
The Supreme Court has, in turn, affirmed and used the concept of a wall of separation to interpret the First Amendment’s meaning.
Implied Principle:
➡️While the words aren’t there, the principle of a separation between religion and government is considered a fundamental constitutional principle.⬅️ ”
✅
How about a parent’s right to not have you woke liberals trying to sexually groom our children to be queers tranny’s or politically indoctrinate them to be liberals communists or socialists?? Put the American flag and the pledge of allegiance back in our schools and take your pride flag home or burn the pedophiles symbol at the school assembly in front of all the student and parents, fire those bringing their sexual oriented bullshit into our kids classrooms, and suspend or fire those trying to indoctrinate our kids with their political views as well. We the parents have the right and the authority to demand that, and so here and now I’m making that demand on behalf of all of us parents..
Stop monkeying around, Jebs…
Your comment has no supporting evidence…
(You haven’t provided “The Missing Link”…)
The paradox of the atheist…
Man evolved from apes…
…OR…
Apes evolved from Man…
That’s where the story of evolution crumbles…
You can’t have it both ways, Jebs…
Stop monkeying around while simultaneously imitating the theists…
(That’s bananas…)
…And take your Atheist, Evolutionary pick, Jebs…
That’s the beauty of evolution, Jebs, it could have gone either way…
I Love God…
So, I’m going with Creation…
Subsequent Evolution, I don’t deny, but Evolution takes a back seat to God and Creation…
Believers can go to church to visit their cousins and uncles…
Non believers can go to the Zoo…
And that is absolutely your right as an American. You also have the right to send your children to private Christian schools. All public entities have different rules. I support your freedom of expression and religion. Why is it so hard to support freedom for all people, freedom to practice a religion of their choice and freedom to abstain from practicing religion? These are basic fundamental rights that our very country was founded to uphold. This is the American ideal the bedrock of our democracy. Supporting freedom for all doesn’t weaking your own.
There is no constitutionally protected religious freedom FROM religion…
The only constitutionally protected religious freedom is freedom OF religion…
Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) is a pivotal Supreme Court case that established the Lemon test, a three-pronged approach used to determine if government actions violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment. The Lemon test requires that, to be constitutional, a statute must have a secular legislative purpose, neither advance nor inhibit religion, and not foster excessive government entanglement with religion. This framework remains a crucial tool in maintaining the constitutional separation of church and state.
Government institutions must uphold the First Amendment by maintaining strict neutrality toward religion. This means they cannot endorse, promote, or inhibit any religious belief or practice. Employees may not initiate religious discussions, display devotional materials in public-facing spaces, or use their official roles to influence others’ beliefs. Religious content may only be referenced in a secular, educational, or historical context when relevant to the agency’s mission. Any government-sponsored event, communication, or policy must be free from religious bias or favoritism, ensuring equal treatment of all belief systems including non-belief.
At the same time, the Free Exercise Clause protects employees’ rights to personal religious expression, provided it does not interfere with their official duties or create a perception of government endorsement. Wearing religious attire, praying privately during breaks, or briefly acknowledging one’s beliefs in response to a question is generally permissible. However, any religious activity must remain personal and voluntary, and must not involve clients, constituents, or the public in a way that could be construed as coercive. Agencies should provide reasonable accommodations for religious observance while preserving the secular nature of their operations.
That applies to government institutions and government employees, ONLY…
AGAIN YOU NEGLECTED TO PROVIDE A LINK.
Link…
The establishment clause, found in the First Amendment, works alongside the free exercise clause to protect religious freedom. This clause ensures government neutrality in religious matters and maintains the separation of church and state. It prevents the government from endorsing, supporting, or becoming entangled with religious institutions while protecting individual rights to practice their faith freely.
The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause – FindLaw
That says nothing about a constitutionally protected freedom from religion.
So are you arguing that an American can be forced to have a religion? That argument is a very slippery slope (a slope I experienced as a child as a Catholic. Southern Baptists and their fellow travelers can take a hike.)
I realize that it isn’t in the Constitution, but Jefferson did believe in separation of church and state.
“But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. ” -Thomas Jefferson.
https://tjrs.monticello.org/archive/search/all?keys=religion
when was the establishment clause ratified
The Establishment Clause was ratified in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights. It is the first of two clauses within the First Amendment that deal with religion, stating that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”.
Ratification: The Bill of Rights, which includes the Establishment Clause, was ratified on December 15, 1791.
Meaning: The clause prohibits the federal government from establishing a religion.
Application to States: While the clause initially only applied to the federal government, it was later applied to state governments through the incorporation doctrine via the Fourteenth Amendment in the 1947 Supreme Court case Everson v. Board of Education.
_________________________________________
Angela Robinson,
Thomas Jefferson didn’t even mention a “separation of church and state” until more than 10 years after the ratification of the establishment clause, on January 1, 1802…
“So are you arguing that an American can be forced to have a religion?”
-A.R.-
Did I say that…???
Nope…!!!
Let me try your “logic” right back towards you, to illustrate your illogic, Angela Robinson…
So, are you arguing that an American can be forced to NOT have a religion?
“Did the establishment clause originally address religion vs nonreligion or did it address prompting one religion over a different religion…???
“The Establishment Clause originally sought to prevent the federal government from establishing a single national religion, but its purpose was broader than just preventing one sect from being favored over another. The language also reflects a deeper concern for protecting individual conscience and avoiding government entanglement with religious affairs altogether, a concept debated since the nation’s founding.
The founders’ evolving intent
While there is no single, universally accepted interpretation of the founders’ intent, two historical views are prominent:
Preventing a national church
Protecting religious liberty more broadly
The modern Supreme Court and its interpretations
The Supreme Court has interpreted the Establishment Clause in various ways throughout American history, indicating that the original intent is still heavily debated.
Yes, and we as a nation tend to go with Modern interpretation. You are free to practice your religion as long as you do not violate someone else’s rights. And The Establishment Clause ensures that government itself cannot violate rights by promoting religion, which includes protecting citizens from unwanted religious influence in public life.
For example, a teacher is fully within their rights to pray privately during their break. However, that same teacher cannot instruct a student not to say “Oh my God,” as doing so would infringe upon the student’s constitutional right to free expression. Imposing personal religious standards in a public school setting constitutes coercion and violates both the Establishment Clause and the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. Public institutions must remain neutral, not just to protect religious freedom, but to safeguard freedom from religious imposition. That is how it works
Prepare for the modern interpretation to change back to it’s original intent…
So, you’re in favor of eliminating the First Amendment from the Constitution? Hmm. I am not sure I have ever heard anything less patriotic
Did I say that…???
Nope…!!!
I’m in favor of the constitution’s original intent, along with the original intent of the establishment clause when it was ratified on December 15, 1791, not some entirely twisted political interpretations more than 155 years post hence, let alone an interpretation over 233 years post hence..
Stop putting words in my mouth…
You actually haven’t heard that which you are implying you’ve heard…
So, you’re in favor of spreading total bullshit..???
Is that your idea of patriotism.???
It seems as though you must be feeling the debate slipping through your fingers…
The establishment clause was definitely not written for, nor was it intended for, accommodating or protecting the non religious…
Deal with it…
“Our original Constitution was both brilliant and highly flawed. It brilliantly articulated the idea of fundamental equality — human equality. It beautifully articulated the notion that government’s power flows from the people, and that government serves the people. But it was fundamentally flawed in preserving and propping up slavery, that ultimate form of inequality. And for excluding women, non-white people, indigenous people, non-property owners, from the definition of “the people.” From a racial justice standpoint, it was highly flawed, moreover, because it explicitly provided for the return of people who had escaped from slavery.”-Alan Jenkins
‘Our original Constitution was both brilliant and highly flawed’ – Harvard Law School | Harvard Law School
Originalism is reliant on white supremacy
White supremacy with a law degree: How do we escape “The Originalism Trap”? – Salon.com
“Did the establishment clause originally address religion vs nonreligion or did it address prompting one religion over a different religion
➡️The Establishment Clause was originally intended to prohibit the federal government from establishing an official national religion or showing a preference for one religion over another.⬅️
➡️ The issue of government neutrality between religion and non-religion evolved later through judicial interpretation. ⬅️
Historical context at the time of the Founding Preventing a national church:
Many early American colonists came to the New World to escape state-sponsored religions, such as the Church of England, and the persecution of religious minorities. The Framers were concerned that a national church could bring religious oppression, conflict, and taxes to support a religion with which citizens did not agree.
Acknowledging diverse state practices:
At the time the First Amendment was ratified, several states had their own established religions. ➡️The original intent of the clause was focused on limiting the powers of the federal government, not the states, regarding religion.⬅️ The Supreme Court did not apply the Establishment Clause to the states until the 1947 case Everson v. Board of Education.
Protecting religious minorities:
The clause was championed by figures like James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, who advocated for the freedom of conscience and opposed compelling any individual to support a religion they did not believe in. Its purpose was to protect individuals from being forced to fund or follow the beliefs of another.
Evolution of the Establishment Clause’s interpretation
➡️The idea that the Establishment Clause prohibits favoring religion over non-religion is a more modern development, built upon Supreme Court precedent. ⬅️
Wall of separation:
Neutrality toward non-religion:
This interpretation was later formalized by the Supreme Court. In the 1963 case School District of Abington Township, Pennsylvania v. Schempp, the Court explained that the government must remain neutral not only among different religions but also “between religion and nonreligion”.
Ongoing debate:
How far this separation and neutrality should extend has remained a source of disagreement and shifting interpretations, resulting in conflicting Supreme Court decisions over the decades.
___________________________________
“The principle of separation between church and state is a foundational element of American constitutional law, particularly as it applies to public education”
-Farmer-
__________________________________
“While the phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson famously used this metaphor in an 1802 letter to describe his interpretation of the clause.”
-AI-
So, the Consitituion establishes the freedoms of its citizens and defines our rights and these do change. As a living document it evolves through interpretation and amendments. That is why we have amendments because we amend the constitution to evolve with our society. The most recent amendment was added in 1992 the 27th amendment which Prevents Congress from giving itself immediate pay raises. Kind of important to be able to update a document to reflect the current condition of our country. We aren’t going backwards as much as anyone might want that. Time doesn’t flow that way
You are getting there…
You are not…
An odd comment considering that I didn’t even mention evolution.
But, since you brought it up…
Modern apes and humans both evolved from a common ancestor.
It’s best to take the time to actually understand something before criticizing it.
And there’s absolutely nothing preventing someone from both accepting science and loving their chosen deity.
Not such an odd comment, considering…
You mentioned religion…
Religion includes creationism..
“Modern apes and humans both evolved from a common ancestor.”
-Jebs-
___________________________________
Way to punt the paradoxical question, Jebs…
Hence the paradox…
You’re stumped…
You’ve deliberately dodged…
But that’s not an answer…
And that’s the glaring void in the Darwinist dogma…
It doesn’t hold water…
It’s not too tough, Jebs…
Scientifically speaking…
Simple question…
Was this common ancestor of “modern man”, of which you speak, “a man”…???, or, was this common ancestor of which you speak, “an ape”…???
Simple question…
Was this common ancestor of “modern apes”, of which you speak, “a man”…???, or was this common ancestor of “modern apes”, of which you speak, “an ape”…???
Simply choice…
“Both” is your only other option….
(That’s funny, Jebs, you STILL can’t come up with a/the “MISSING LINK”…)
The missing link can be understood, if you mean the last common ancestor of humans and chimps, with molecular clocks and genetics can pretty much pinpoint a period between six and seven million years ago.
There have been some fairly recent finds that could be, but an abundance of caution is required. And, it is quite possible that it wasn’t just linear, but more of a tree with branches winding back (see the Neanderthal and the Denisovans (and other “ghost” ancestors) found in human genetics for a later example).
I am reminded of the origins of the horse. Scientists knew that the tiny (dog sized) five toed critters were the ancestors of the modern horse. Thomas Condon, the great Thomas Condon (he’s one of my heroes) worked the region the Painted Hills (John Day Fossil Beds) in Oregon and discovered the “missing link”, the three toed horse. I won’t get into Condon’s history because I would get all fangirly about it, but Darwin would later say that his (Condon) work was the best evidence for evolution,
But he was also a Congregationalist pastor who came to believe in theistic evolution and that the world was much, much older than was taught by religion. He stated that the Bible is not science.
There is absolutely ZERO EVIDENCE OF THE ENTIRELY THEORETICAL, TOTALLY NON-EXISTENT “Chimpanzee-Human Last Common Ancestor”…
AKA “CHLCA”
(Note the, …”Chimpanzee-Human Last Common Ancestor”… identifying question mark, “?”, on the accompanying chart…)
(Emphasis on, “the missing link”…)
That’s why Jebs dropped out of the conversation so quickly…
He determined that the Evolution theory was entirely unscientific…
I Believe in God, not “CHLCA”…
“CHLCA” IS A MEANINGLESS PLACEHOLDER TO A DEAD END IN THE EVOLUTION THEORY, BACKWARDS, OR FORWARDS…
ITS ALSO JUST ONE OF MANY DIFFERENT THEORETICAL EVOLUTION HYPOTHESES, THAT SIMPLY HAVE NEVER, EVER, “PANNED” OUT…
(SCREENSHOT CREDIT)
-SCI-
In a communist state the people are subjects, not citizens, and exist only to serve the state. That’s why American citizens push back so hard against the cultural revolution.
Belief in god is the main problem. The belief that god is the only gateway to a moral and just society is pure unadulterated bullshit! Belief in god is why humans will devolve back into the stone age and worse. I am a moral person and have even been called a moralist by others on the LoCo. I have no need of the hypothesis that gods exists for any reason. Any belief that raises the survival and well being of human beings at the cost of and above all other living things is a death cult for the species. Your god is guilty of filicide and your religion practices spiritual ritual cannabilism. God knows NOTHING as he doesn’t exist and never did. God is a primitive ignorant superstition that has been responsible for far more pain, suffering and death than all totalitarian regimes combined.
Amen brother.
‘Your god is guilty of filicide.”
“God knows NOTHING as he doesn’t exist and never did. God is a primitive ignorant superstition”
-Kabloona-
___________________________________
“A know NOTHING primitive ignorant superstition” that is somehow “guilty of filicide”, AND both CAPITALIZED, AND uncapitalized…???
I’d say it sounds to me like you don’t have God quite figured out, quite yet…
And your, “…your religion practices spiritual ritual cannabilism.” comment is as as yet uncalled for as it is as yet unfounded…
I don’t see where Mr. Clark has Identified his religion, and I don’t see where you have identified it either…
Or even whichever religion you are talking about…
Until then you are inappropriately pigeonholing Mr Clark.
It sounds to me like you don’t really know of what you speak…
And that you are making that glaringly obvious…
You’re a goofball. God is only capitalized in my post when the word begins a sentence. The holy eucharist: Different christian traditions view the eucharist in different ways, with some believing the elements of bread and wine transform into the actual body and blood of Christ (transubstantiation), while others view them as symbolic representations. Mr. Clark doesn’t have to identify his religion, I already know he is some form of a christian. Only an obtuse or willfully ignorant person would not understand Mr. Clark’s religion through the context of his posts. You are being completley disingenous by claiming you don’t know his religion. Would you like to bet on whether he is a christian or not? Don’t play word games with me. Your pseudo-intelectualism is on full display.
Why have morals? Morals are a God given thing called a conscience. You must have way more faith than I to not believe in a creator, where everything just happened. Where man just happened to be some cosmic slime that over billions of years just happened to become man, who just happened to have a conscience to know right from wrong and have guilt when doing wrong. I see God the painter with his brush every day, with every new sunrise or star-filled sky. The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handiwork.
Selah.
And you have no scientific proof that god exists. Being as how you are the one claiming the existence of god the burden of proof is on you. You have nothing but anecdotal evidence of a god. You speak in platitudes just like every god-botherer does.
Tell me if this list from Saul Alinsky is not fitting for these protesters.
1. Healthcare – control healthcare and you control the people.
2. Poverty – Increase the poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you provide everything for them to live.
3. Debt – Increase the debt level to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes and this will produce more poverty.
4. Gun control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5. Welfare – Take control of every aspect (food, housing, income) of their lives because that will make them fully dependent on the government.
6. Education – Take control of what people read and listen to and take control or what children learn in school.
7. Religion – Remove belief in God from the government and schools because the people need to believe in only the government knowing what is best for the people.
8. Class warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. Eliminate the middle class.
Copy and pasting the original thoughts of others does not make them yours. Try again.
Ad hominem attacks do even less. Try again.
These are Alinski’s Rules for Radicals.
Tell me if this list from Saul Alinsky is not fitting for these protesters.
I guess you miss this part. You try again to read it.
You sound like a broken record….
So funny watching these 60s has-beens making fools of themselves.
So funny seeing the sheep follow the orange cult step by step, actually not funny. Mrs Kirk says we must ALL conform to Christian Nationalism. Are you really & prepared to be told what to do? I’ve lived under a religious cult before, not interested in it again. Please God forgive these fools for they know not what they do. Like bugs to the zapper. Wake Up People you’re being used!
it certainly is getting a bit “Divine Righty” in this country isn’t it. Religion and Social Control by ruling class is an old old tatic
so glad we dont have O’biden doing it to us anymore. Thanks President Trump, and God Bless Charlie Kirk.
And I counter your blessing: Oh great Quantum field, unbless Charlie Kirk for he was but an ignorant pawn in the continuing mythos that has lead countless humans astray and poisoned their minds with fear and hate! He was but an ignorant grifter blinded by his lack of insight and cognition. He deserved to live, if only to eventually discover the error of his ways and make amends to all those who suffered from his actions.
A tale as old as time
I missed that. When and where did “Mrs Kirk say we must ALL conform to Christian Nationalism”?
So are you.
Ah, the good old, ‘I now you are but what am I?’, defense. Check and mate, game over.
I know you are but what am I? gtfoh 😂 and come back with some sanity and not this everything not me is violent
🐂 💩
Yeah, thinking the same thing. BTW, the taxpayers foot the bill for all this virtue signaling
I just got a call from Elon, he says e’s in the hot seat. ; )
From the photos it looks like 7 to 5 protesters (not 75)
This is a serious question to the tiny group of protesters. Where do you get your signs? it’s obvious they’re not handwritten as they are made to appear. it doesn’t say much for your cause when you can’t even take the effort to make your own sign.
These protests every week are kind of insane! New mexico is a democratic state but has held 2 protests, to your twenty. And wow you must really be democratic, deciding what other people’s money should do! That’s actually communism. Of coarse arcata had the most registered communists in the country at one point.
You mean per capita don’t you Bear, with “most registered communists”?
It’s their turn in the barrel; an old maritime (navy) joke. Funny but serious.
Arcata is but one of many fucked up communities here in Humboldt county. Look at what they did when turning point came to the university, they had a band come down and play right in front of the table then they had assholes in masks come down and break up the event forcing charlie Kirk off the campus. Nothing like silencing free speech of others by any means possible when you don’t like what they have to say, all while claiming that those attempting to speak are Nazis and fascists.. straight out of the Demonrats playbook, and they can’t say that ain’t exactly how it went down I was there and I witnessed it myself.. and yes it was very disgraceful.
Yeah, don’t you folks have, like, bingo night up there, or something?
In the opening video the reporter says it’s sponsored by Moveon.org
Why are these protests always on the northbound side of 101? Why no love for the southbound travelers?
Less space to spread out and I’m sure the Sheriff’s Dept would have some objection to protests occurring at their front door. After all, I think Billy is still waiting for those Antifa busses to arrive.
Yes he is, and he needs to be voted out yesterday.
First of all, you free speech illiterates, the constitution doesn’t allow the government to restrict free speech. It DOES NOT restrict private parties from limiting free speech. The government didn’t fire shitbag Kimmel. His offensive behavior got him because it didn’t align with company standards and policies. Same with hundreds if not thousands of others who spewed disgraceful hate across this country.
Then, there’s billionaires. It’s just like leftist losers to think people who work hard and make lots of money OWE them. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the rich don’t owe you shit. If you want more, work more. You have the ability to go out and create something exceptional and make your billions. Once you do that, feel free to give it away to greedy entitled people all you want. Don’t stand around looking pathetic holding up signs and demand things from people when you’re too lazy to go earn it yourself.
Now to criminal illegals. Newsom just had the state of California pass a law that LEOs can’t wear face covering while on duty in an attempt to control border agents and ICE. He has absolutely zero control over Federal cops, so they will, and rightly so, continue to do their jobs exactly as they have been. What actually happened here is Newsom put state and local cops at risk. This is just another example of how incompetent, ignorant and just plain stupid the “Governor” the lefties voted into office really is, which doesn’t speak very well of California voters.
Major problem in California is the stupidity of its voters.
at least 52% of them.
There are non so blind as those who will not see, Mr. Clark.
Someone becoming a billionaire simply by working hard is a fallacy.
Many people work two jobs and can barely afford rent.
Raising taxes on the ultra-wealthy will not stop them from still being rich.
But it could help to make life easier for those who are struggling to just get by.
Yes, indeed. Working two jobs at a janitorial company will not make you rich because wages are low. After all it’s work that illegal immigrants compete to have.
However owning the company that hires illegal workers to keep expenses down can do it for you.
You are falling for the free cheese.
#8. Class warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. Eliminate the middle class.
This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to tax the wealthy with the support of the poor.
Didn’t read the comment you are responding to again, did you?
I said nothing about eliminating the middle class.
In fact, raising taxes on the ultra-wealthy could provide a lot of things that would greatly improve the quality of life for the middle class, while also making t possible for more people to join the ranks of the middle class.
Just because you didn’t doesn’t mean it isn’t possible…
Stealing from the rich to give it to deadbeats? Do you really want to go there? Nowhere in the constitution is there the right to do that.
I have no desire to pay one cent to entitled shitbags who refuse to at least try. I have no desire to pay one cent to help illegals do anything but go back to wherever they came from.
The Constitution gives the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The left somehow don’t get these rights, and most recently took all three away from Charlie Kirk. Many celebrated it. Some, like shitbag Kimmel celebrated it and lost employment. Couldn’t be happier to see their hate take away their livelihood just like their rhetoric so often does to others. Karma is exactly what they deserve.
“Someone becoming a billionaire simply by working hard is a fallacy.”
-Jebs-
___________________________________
That’s bullshit, Jebs…
The fucking lotto creates billionaires…
How easy is that, effort wise…???
How hard did a Bitcoin billionaire work…
It’s not just about how hard you work, it’s about how hard you work, how smart you are, how well you manage your earnings, how smart you invest, and how lucky you are…
Nah, not really. It all boils down to one of the seven deadly sins: GREED!
The government didn’t fire shitbag Kimmel.
The FCC chair made backhanded threats against ABC for Kimmel’s comments and that certainly sounds like government infringement on free speech. Trump’s applauding the move and then threatening to go after Fallon and Stewart is likewise government infringement. Then there’s Trump’s statement that because 97% of the coverage (a number he made up) is negative towards him, that should be illegal.
For arguments sake let’s pretend everything you say is true. I have a few questions for you.
do you agree that kimmel told lies about Charlie Kirk’s murder
do you agree that Kimmels show was losing 10s of millions of dollars every year.
do you agree his viewership has drastically decreased
do you agree that cable TV is dying on the vine
do you agree that kimmel has a well-documented history of wearing blackface and making derogatory comments about black Americans
do you agree that kimmel, in the name of comedy, groped unsuspecting women
do you agree that Jimmy Kimmel was not funny
Do you agree that a large number of affiliate stations also dropped JK
Is it possible that one or more of the things listed above may have also contributed to his firing or been the cause
All of that is true but Carr should not bully people just because they criticize or disagree with him
Excuse me, but when the head of the FCC, a government broadcast licensing agency, threatens to pull licenses and prevent mergers/acquisitions in the entertainment industry, it is most certainly a government infringement on free speech. ABC took Jimmy Kimmel off the air in order to acquiesce to the threats and even conservatives in Congress have stated disapproval.
As for billionaires, we don’t want their wealth. We want that they pay their fair share of taxes and provide their workers with fair compensation. If the top 1% paid their fair share in taxes, they’d still have billions in income. The fact that they have lobbied Congress to lower their tax burden and provide corporate welfare is one of the main reasons why we can’t have nice things in this country.
And why you would support ICE agents covering their faces while they routinely prevent people in this country from Constitutional protections is just shameful. The right to due process is not limited to citizens only and many of the folks rounded up and imprisoned are here legally while their cases are decided in Immigration Court. That the courts are overburdened with pending cases is not their fault and they still have a right to have their pleas heard. It’s the law.
When the common citizen protests, be thankful!
Yeah, right. “Gov. Gavin Newsom has raised roughly $70 million in less than two months for the California ballot measure to redraw the state’s congressional lines, with the family of the prominent Democratic financier George Soros recently kicking in $10 million, according to two people with direct knowledge of the fund-raising.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/19/us/politics/gavin-newsom-redistricting-california-fundraising.html
Any comment about California’s redistricting that doesn’t also mention Texas’ redistricting is not a comment to be taken seriously.
Yes, it’s frustrating that Californians are being asked to compromise our principles in order to counter the undemocratic efforts of another state.
All states should agree to a system like California has and keep politics out of redistricting.
An ethic that justifies itself with “They started it” is not an ethic at all. That is not a comment to be taken seriously. It’s literally how every criminal justifies their crimes.
Though all my comment did was pointing out the irony of an anti-billionaire protest including a sign for support funded by billionaires. You’d think they would notice. But apparently not.
Especially one holding u p a protest sign touting “rule of law” next to one supporting suspending the law. Oh well.
Nice catch…!!!
The sign supports changing the law by a vote of the people. That’s how we do things in a democracy. Oh well.
No it doesn’t. It supports “suspending” a law to allow something the law prevents can be done for political expediency. Having achieved that, how “temporary” do you think any law will become if it stands in the way of a politician’s ambition?
It is in itself saying the law is good but needs to be suspended so bad can be done. Even worse, it has trigger a chain reaction of other states doing the same so no one knows whether the willingness to sacrifice honesty for short term gain will even get the short term gain. The road to hell indeed.
Forgot the “oh well”
Because it’s chances of passing would be zero if it was to “change” the law. And Newsom needs it to pass not to look incompetent. It’s a gamble to make him look effective with a Party roiled by complaints of ineffective leaders. Heck of a risk for one man’s ambition to redeem his place on the national stage. Certainly if it fails but also if it passes and is immediately challenged in court.
Suspending the law is a CHANGE, your pedantic sophistry notwithstanding.
I like your perspective and delivery. You speak the truth, kudos to you!
The road to hell paving project started in Texas.
Link please… Evidence please…
I believe the origin of that project is CLEARLY spelled out in Genesis, where it is said that it all started with “THE BIG APPLE”..
(NEW YORK)
Genesis is an ignorant superstitious cosmogeny plagiarized from the Sumerian mythos. It is over 4000 years old and is completely and ridiculously unscientific. You need to read some hard science, your brain will rot if you don’t.
I take it you didn’t get the joke…
Then, by golly, Jebs, ALSO by your “logic”…
“Any comment about…”…, [Texas’] …”…redistricting that doesn’t also mention New York’s redistricting is it a comment to be taken seriously.”
“Yes, it’s frustrating that…”…, …[Texans]… , …”..are being asked to compromise [their] principles in order to counter the undemocratic efforts of another state.”… …(New York)…
[California] should [ADHERE] to a system like California [HAS HAD/HAS] and keep politics out of [NEWSOM’S ENTIRELY UNDEMOCRATIC UNCALLED FOR AND UNNECESSARY POLITICAL GERRYMANDERING] redistricting.
Oh dear, you used the S word, as in Soros. Those poor fools out there, virtue signaling is their life, while the rest of us get on with it…
Where have these people been living for the last few decades? Ethics? Rule of law? Grandpa fought nazis? I stand up for immigrants? When injustice becomes law? Make billionaires pay?
No, you stood up for a lack of ethics, you objected to the rule of law because ethics and law stood in the way of the goals of identity politics. Hello? Illegal immigrants, not just immigrants, are who you want to stand for. When the Supreme Court didn’t go your way, you wanted to add enough new justices to get your way. Rule of law? You despised the law. You decided you could choose to ignore the law when you didn’t like it. You cheered over courts being used to attack those whose politics you hated and hissed when they protected those you hated. you decided that criminal’s rights should take precedence over victims or society’s rights. You chose quotas, you ranted about the Constitution (you know the law of the land?) preventing you from eliminating religions or guns or whatever else you wanted eliminated, you invented cancel culture and still insist on it.
You demanded government enforce your wants. You ridiculed, dismissed and refused to accommodate and Congress became paralyzed because of it. You think vengence is justice. You became the authoritarians. The only reason you can’t be called fascists yourself is because you despise your country. All the other parts of fascism- using the military in service of politics, cult-like adherence to personalities, using violence for political purposes (justifying riots as long as they served your goals), you wanted the government to use its power to control politics, you wanted and apparently still want the government to control society through regulation and taxation as long as it serves your wants. Now you object because the authoritarianism that you created has turned against you.
If you had resisted the liberal fantasy of the previous decade of globalization that created so many billioniares, you wouldn’t need billionaires to tax because there would be a large population of working people- you know the people you despise who have always paid most of taxes anyway, to take good wages from those billionaires before they profit. You could have been concerned for government not making your fellow citizens poor. You know even to the point of-gasp- patriotism! Trump did not spring into existence out of a vacuum. You made him the villain in your personality authoritarian culture. Which turned him into the hero for others. Now you are all pro democracy? All pro rule of law? All government needs to be reined in? Too bad you were so good at subverting it previously.
👏👏👏👏👏🎉🎉🎉🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🦅🦅
Very well said — thank you!!
Wow, don’t sugar coat it, tell it like it is.
Who in the hell is YOU? And by the way tRump sprung into existence because he represents what has always been the underpinning and experiential reality of this nation: genocide, slavery, and exploitation of those less fortunate than the privileged minority. This country was founded on the blood sweat and tears of the indigenous peoples of not one but two continents. This land was stolen from the indigenous peoples then more was stolen from the mexican peoples. This nation was built on the blood of the exploited, not the blood of patriots. The US is declining as all nations do. American exceptionalism is a pompous lie. Read “Guns, germs, and Steel” to learn the truth.
Talk about “Excited Delirium Syndrome”…
In yet another, ongoing ORANGE MAN BAD 2.0 “episode” …
Humboldt County Courthouse Lawn Anti Trump Protests, where TDS Team “Trump Derangement Syndrome” meets and inseparably becomes, now as one, “Excited Delirium Syndrome”…
“HERE’S YOUR SIGN…!!!”
PS…
You can still clearly see the now scorched spot where a previous participant in one of these types of Anti Trump protest hysteria, subsequently “pyro” “technically” and neurotically “auto” immolated his supporting vehicle which he had used as his previous protesting platform, burning it up in typical inflammatory lunatic fashion, during a single handed anti establishment follow up protest, surrounded by only his own genuinely generous, goofy gypsum graffiti graphics, on that very spot on the courthouse lawn..
This deranged demonstration episode, too, shall pass…
Where do i find out about these demonstrations before they occur?
If you worked nearly as hard as you protested, you may have some of that elusive “money”.
Clowns
Well at least they seem peaceful. If they care to stand there with their points of view it is fine with me. One man said my granddad fought against the Nazi’s to keep America’s Freedom and so will I. I really don’t understand why some folks are holding the American Flag upside down. The is not the proper way to display the flag and it makes me angry! It just shows lack of respect for our country and the men and women who fought and died to keep it free.
The idiots continue to whine. So amusing.
So does the hatred of billionaires include George Soros and Bill Gates and their ilk, all lefties pushing socialism on the gullible masses? No? Thought not. Again, standing around with signs outside the county courthouse has NO EFFECT on national issues, just runs up an overtime bill for the PD.
After the lefty Tyler Robinson so recently brutally assassinated Charlie Kirk in cold blood, this lefty protest sign drums a very hollow, extremely dull, now meaningless, thud… It’s a dud…!!!
➡️ “AMERICAN VALUES”…????
I DON’T THINK SO…
NOT THIS AMERICAN’S VALUES…
➡️ “RULE of LAW”…???
NOPE…!!!
NOT IN MY BOOK …!!!
➡️ “DUE PROCESS”…???
WTF…!!!
NOT BY A LONG SHOT…!!!
➡️ “CODE of ETHICS”… ???
SERIOUSLY, FFS…!!!???
HOW DOES THE ASSASSINATION OF A RIGHTY FIT INTO YOUR LEFTY “CODE OF ETHICS”, LEFTY…???
And OK, Kym Kemp and Ryan Hudson, you have published an extremely heinous attitude, one that I would consider a statement that could be promptly be reported to the proper Homeland security and or secret service authorities, yet you amplify it, and highlight it, instead of PROMPTLY rejecting it…???
“We need to get rid of all the fascists in this country,” he told us, adding in regard to President Trump’s statement declaring that he would posthumously award the nation’s ‘highest honor’ to Charlie Kirk, a Medal of Freedom, “If I had a [Medal of Freedom], I would melt it down, send it back,” the protester said, hypothetically adding, “You put me in with Kirk and I don’t want it.”
This is clearly verging on, if not, and/or far exceeding advocating violence…
And instead of properly suppressing it as the fomenting of violent tendencies that it so clearly is, you have actually highlighted it, thereby disseminating it, while simultaneously amplifying it…
Is it also part of the including video…???
Snap out of it, please, and delete it, before someone gets hurt or worse due to it…!!!
Maybe you have failed to properly recognized malicious speech when you hear it, but I HAVEN’T…
The very idea of “melting down” a “medal” and “sending it back”, IF YOU HAVE FAILED TO UNDERSTAND IT IN YOUR POLITICALLY SLANTED OVERZEALOUS GLEE, very strongly suggests pouring the melted medal into a bullet mold, before loading the newly formed product of the meltdown into a cartridge or muzzleloader, and violently sending it back, through the barrel of a gun, as the resulting projectile…!!!
And if you don’t believe me, just simply ask yourself this ONE very simple question…
Why would anyone otherwise need to “melt down” a “medal”, before simply “sending it back” via US MAIL, UPS, FED EX, ETC…!!!???
SNAP OUT OF IT…!!!
YOU ARE AMPLIFYING THIS DANGEROUS HATE SPEECH…???
_____________________________________
➡️ “LAST CENTURY WE KILLED FASCISTS – ⬅️ THIS CENTURY WE ELECT THEM”
➡️ “We need to get rid of all the fascists in this country,” ⬅️ he told us, adding in regard to President Trump’s statement declaring that he would posthumously award the nation’s ‘highest honor’ to Charlie Kirk, a Medal of Freedom, ➡️ “If I had a [Medal of Freedom], I would melt it down, send it back,” ⬅️ the protester said, hypothetically adding, “You put me in with Kirk and I don’t want it.” ”
To paraphrase…
______________________________________
…”LAST CENTURY WE KILLED FASCISTS – THIS CENTURY WE ELECT THEM”…
…”We need to get rid of all the fascists in this country,”…
“adding in regard to President Trump’s statement declaring that he would posthumously award the nation’s ‘highest honor’ to Charlie Kirk, a Medal of Freedom, “If I had a [Medal of Freedom], I would melt it down, send it back,” ”
______________________________________
THAT COULD EASILY BE CONSTRUED AS A THREAT TO OUR PRESIDENT, AND OR OUR GOVERNMENT…
IF THAT’S NOT ADVOCATING INFLAMMATORY, INCIENDIERY, VIOLENCE,
I GUESS I AM JUST NOT INTELLECTUALLY CAPABLE ENOUGH TO CASUALLY DISMISS IT AS ANYTHING ELSE…!!!
ARE YOU AOK WITH THAT…???
IN LIGHT OF RECENT EVENTS, WOULDN’T IT BE PRUDENT TO TONE DOWN THE VIOLENT RHETORIC, INSTEAD OF AMPLIFYING IT…???
“LIBERALLY PUMP THE DAMN BRAKES , ALREADY, ‘REDHEADED BLACKBELT’, LIBERALLY PUMP THE DAMN BRAKES, ALREADY…!!!”
PLEASE, BEFORE “ANYONE” IS THE SECONDARY RECIPIENT OF ANY CURRENT, PAST, AND/OR, FUTURE PRESIDENTIALLY AWARDED MEDAL, WHICH GETS “MELTED DOWN” AND “SENT BACK”, AS THIS WACKO SUGGESTS, WHICH WOULD BE A REFERENCE DIRECTING THE MELTED DOWN PRODUCT BEING “SENT BACK” TOWARDS THE PRESIDENT FROM WHENCE THOSE MEDALS WOULD HAVE COME FROM, QUELL THIS KIND OF HATE SPEECH, AND DON’T AMPLIFY IT, PLEASE…
It’s your choice, of course, but, please, be reasonable…
Discretion is the better part of valor…
Or something like that..
Peace.
I recently read Bill Gates is withdrawing funding for these protests. See:Gates pulls out of Arabella Advisors:
It will be interesting to see which billionaire elitist is next to change their mind on providing funds for these anti Trump Astro turf demonstrations. Even more interesting will be how well they are attended once the cash dwindles.