[VictoryGirls] Murder of a Trump supporter is absolutely fine.according to Erik Loomis, a history professor.
"Michael Reinoehl is the guy who killed the fascist in Portland last week. He admitted it and said he was scared the cops would kill him. Well, now the cops have killed him.
I am extremely anti-conspiracy theory. But it’s not a conspiracy theory at this point in time to wonder if the cops simply murdered him. The police is shot through with fascists from stem to stern. They were openly working with the fascists in Portland, as they were in Kenosha which led to dead protestors."
Oh my.... where to begin? First of all, Erik Loomis is a HISTORY professor at the University of Rhode Island. Secondly, he essentially asserts that anyone who supports President Trump is a fascist. Third, Loomis is supporting a guy who literally targeted a Trump supporter and shot him in cold blood. In a response to a comment on his blog post — Loomis wrote:
""Erik, he shot and killed a guy," referring to Reinoehl.
Loomis responded by saying, "He killed a fascist. I see nothing wrong with it, at least from a moral perspective." He further added that "tactically, that’s a different story. But you could say the same thing about John Brown.""
We are supposed to feel sorry for Reinoehl?? No. As Lisa wrote, this is a guy who has been protesting for weeks, endangered his children, and declared he was sure and certain his cold blood murder of Danielson was fine.
The Portland riots are now at the 100 days mark. The Portland mayor has snuck out of his condo building lest he encounter any more of those looting thugs, the Portland PD is being targeted by all of Reihoehl’s pals, a facial recognition ban was passed...to protect the looters, what was once a lively downtown area is a disaster... and here we have a history professor claiming an unarmed Trump supporter is a fascist and essentially deserved to be shot.
When the pushback happened, he doubled down in a second blog post.
"Fears about CANCEL CULTURE are always projections from right-wingers who want to fire, if not imprison, liberals and left-wing professors for speaking out for justice. And thus of course, they are trying to cancel me. In the blog post about the police killing the guy who shot the fascist in Portland, we had a bit of a debate over the use of violence in protest movements. This means that like the NRA, I am not objectively pro-murder, at least according to the fascists at Campus Reform and bought and sold man of the Koch Brothers Jonathan Turley."
Defensive much? In his original post Loomis literally stated that Reinoehl was a victim of police brutality, why? Because all police departments are riddled with fascists. Therefore, that somehow justifies the killing of Trump supporters he has labeled as fascists? Good to know.
Needless to say, he isn’t a fan of Jonathan Turley, and definitely didn’t appreciate Turley calling him out. Turley specifically shows how Loomis gets John Brown completely wrong, and then lays out the following for consideration.
"Loomis’ rhetoric and views are strikingly similar to those in the "bible" of the Antifa movement: Rutgers Professor Mark Bray’s Antifa: The Anti-Fascist Handbook. As I stated in my Senate testimony, Antifa bears strong resemblance to groups that emerged during earlier periods of attacks on free speech. Simply replacing anti-communism with anti-fascism does not materially change the same anti-free speech purpose of these movements. The purpose of governmental or non-government threats are the same in seeking to not only silence opponents, but to deter others from joining them. The absolutism of their goals is used to justify any means to achieve them. Specifically, Antifa’s categorical rejection of opposing views as worthy of protection is strikingly similar to the view of anti-Communists during the Red Scare. Antifa followers refuse to recognize the views of opponents as legitimate or "a difference of opinion." Their goal is not co-existence but, as stated in the Antifa Handbook, "to end their politics.""
|
