Give his guys some brown shirts already.

According to the news report above, “the fights came as the Republican frontrunner attempts to broadcast a more tolerant side.” While he’s saying that, his thugs are outside stealing and ripping up the banners of protesters, and cold cocking them in the face. There have been plenty of articles of late comparing Trump to fascists. I guess they were right. This is getting ugly.

Of course, Trump will be pressing charges against the guy who got smacked in the face. It’s just the way The Donald works. Brownshirts, indeed.

Per the New York Daily News:

A top security guard for Donald Trump smacked a protester in the face after the man chased him for snatching a banner Thursday, video shows.

The guard grabbed the blue sign that said “Trump: Make America Racist Again” — a play on the billionaire’s campaign motto — outside a press conference on the Donald’s new pledge of loyalty to the Republican Party, NY1 Noticias video shows.

Demonstrator Efrain Galicia ran after Schiller and appeared to reach for the banner and grab the guard from behind. Within seconds, the guard turned around and whacked him in the face with an open hand as a scrum of reporters snapped photos.

Galicia stumbled as another guard tried to restrain him, appearing to briefly put him in a stranglehold. Galicia fought back, grabbing at the second guard’s arms before the two yelled at each other outside Trump Tower.

A source familiar with the Trump campaign identified the first guard as Keith Schiller, Trump’s director of security and longtime bodyguard.

After the 10-second tussle, Galicia told reporters the guards are “just acting like their boss.”

“This man thinks he can do whatever he wants in this country, and we’re going to stop him,” Galicia said in Spanish.

He compared the incident to the ejection of Univision anchor Jorge Ramos from an Iowa news conference last week for asking Trump questions without being called on.

The News source said Schiller is the same guard who removed Ramos from the Dubuque event.

Republican strategist and commentator Michael Caputo said Schiller is “the kindest, most gentle man I’ve ever worked with.”

“But attack him from behind and you’ll definitely regret it,” Caputo said on social media. “A little advice: DON’T ATTACK HIM FROM BEHIND, IDIOT.”

Schiller is a retired NYPD detective and a U.S. Navy veteran, according to his LinkedIn profile.

He’s been with Trump for 16 years and was photographed restraining Vince McMahon of the WWE when he tried to attack Trump at a match in 2007.

Trump’s campaign said the guard was “jumped from behind” and will “likely be pressing charges.”

  1. meursault1942 says:


    Meanwhile, GOPer Steve Schmidt finally figured out what we’ve known for years:

    “We’re at this moment in time when there’s a severability between conservatism and issues. Conservatism is now expressed as an emotional sentiment. That sentiment is contempt and anger.”

    It’s been that way for a while, Steve, but welcome aboard. Also, you forgot fear in addition to contempt and anger.

  2. casper says:

    I’m enjoying CSL’s melt down over Trump. If there is a female version of Trump, it’s her. Whines about everything. Attacks anyone who disagrees with her. Knows everything, but unwilling to provide facts to back her position up. Yep, it’s her.

  3. rustybrown2014 says:

    I just tried to invite “Bob” over here from BFV but my posts aren’t taking at all. If any of you have better luck have at it, we could use more traffic!

    • Well, I’m surprised they waited so long. They are now blocking anything from your email address, or possibly your IP address so that they don’t have to moderate you anymore. That’s what they’ve done with others, including me. They also block ping backs when this blog links to one their blog posts because they are afraid for their readers to see an opposing point of view.

      I notice that when you click on Bob’s name at the top of one of his B4V comments, it takes you to his Facebook page. You could message him via Facebook.

      i agree that it would be nice to hear some other voices around here, including conservative ones. As was demonstrated by our debate a couple of threads ago, we _can_ go at it and end up still civil.

  4. mitchethekid says:

    Did you read Ama’s non description description of this blog? And what happened to poor Jay when he and I started it over 2 yrs ago? How about Noonans complaint about the Enlightenment. What a lunatic!

    • So what happened to “poor Jay” in your view, Mitch? Seems like he got mad that some people didn’t agree with him and took his ball and went home.

      • rustybrown2014 says:

        What happened with Jay is what happens with all of them: their ideas can’t withstand scrutiny so they must flee from any challenge. The only way they can feel justified in their beliefs is to omit all dissension and proceed to give each other hand jobs. I mean, as you say, we’re talking about a blog that’s arguing against the fucking Enlightenment. It doesn’t get much kookier than that.

        Watson and my recent debate was a good example of how adults argue: we each have our own points of view that are different but not necessarily mutually exclusive. Nobody won or lost the debate but we were able to air it out a bit as an intellectual exercise. In the end, I suspect we’re probably not that far apart from each other, or at least we can appreciate the other’s point of view. That’s not how it works at bfv. I tried that approach with Ama, I literally said in several posts “I can appreciate your point of view, but…” and that just infuriated her. She’s a very sick woman and I’m sure she’s deeply unhappy.

      • mitchethekid says:

        Pretty much he took his ball and went home. But I don’t think he’s as extreme as he appears on B4V.

  5. So much generalizing over there, e.g., “Most Progressives simply know nothing of history.”

    I love this from Amazona: “We both want homosexual couples to have the same rights, responsibilities and restrictions as heterosexual couples, but our ideas on how to achieve this are different.” Really? Her very next sentence reads, “I think a separate classification for same-sex couples should be created, acknowledging the differences between them and traditional man-woman marriage.”

    Yeah. We’ve heard the old “separate but equal” argument before, haven’t we?

    And yes, ya gotta love Mark Noonan’s denunciation of The Englightment, where, according to him, “a bunch of half-educated people dressed up their personal desires as ‘liberty’ and ‘free thought’, providing a justification for all manner of selfish and cruel behavior.”

    I guess he’s referring to Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, John Adams… you know, half-educated people of their ilk. Does he not understand that the hallowed Founders were themselves products of, and leading lights of enlightened thinking?

  6. meursault1942 says:

    Secretive donors gave US climate denial groups $125 million over three years. But, you know, climate change is all a hoax cooked up by scientists (and Al Gore, who is fat) to enrich themselves and force everybody else into gulags…or something.

    • rustybrown2014 says:

      Why, that’s shocking, M! Who could ever have guessed that big money was behind the oil industries’ interests? Nice link.

  7. I really can’t tell if Cluster is ignorant or just plain dishonest:

    Could this be any more detached from reality? In re: to TARP. That bill was written by the then Pelosi controlled House, where all spending bills originate, quickly approved by Harry Reid’s Senate and sent to Bush for his signature which of course he did based on the “crisis” we were facing. So no, Bush did not have to sell it to Congress.

    Do some reading, Cluster. TARP was proposed by Henry Paulson, Bush’s Treasury Secretary. Bush promised that the Republican votes would be there to support it. They weren’t, of course. Because Republicans were happy to let the economy go down in flames in the name of ideology. Seriously, Cluster, get a grip.

    Here’s a helpful, short interview with Pelosi about that time:

    Do you think Cluster will read it? I don’t think so. Talk about remaining “ignorant of history.”

  8. rustybrown2014 says:

    Spook says:

    “Truth be told, I doubt that many anti-religious people have thought through what life would be like in a world where there is no religious liberty. Without the freedom to believe as you choose and follow your conscience, there really is no freedom at all.”

    What world is he living in? What country? Is there another country on this earth that is more amenable to Christianity than America? Where is the attack on religious liberty? These people are certified freaks.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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