yes

Yeah, that is essentially the same thing I'm saying. I wouldn't want to listen to 10 seconds of whatever the skinheads had to say, but their right to say it (on public property) is absolute. The same First Amendment that the media holds so dear, gives those creeps the same right to assemble and speak/whatever. They also had a permit to do so, the Antifa group(s) did not, and I think the better thing to do would have been for the police to just block the streets and shut down all access, etc., but hindsight is 20/20.

Both groups were looking for a rumble so to speak, they all came well-equipped it seemed like. If you don't want a fight, it's very possible to just walk away. For that reason, I think all of them were in the wrong.

Our free speech in the US is part of what facilitates the smooth transition of power from one elected leader to the next, something that is very rare in the world.

We need a broad reset, with all rights as "absolutes".

They have all banded together to cause chaos and take down America, Capitalism, our history and our sense of right and wrongs.

The left draws a distinct line between antisemitic and anti-Israel attitudes. Israelis are depicted as evil Zionist oppressors, not good progressive Jews. As weird as that may seem, since the Jews of Israel were refugees fleeing from the Holocaust, it nonetheless is the prevailing leftist opinion. Having someone with an anti-Israel anger problem actually fits quite well into the Antifa mindset.

I can only conclude that the Occupy freak was paid to organize the white nationalists to create a high probability hostile confrontation. Lots of Soros money poured into this and many other incidents. The Obama connection fits, as he's currently carrying out a program of sedition aimed at tearing apart the fabric of the republic.

With the actions of Antifa and BLM now being portrayed by the media propaganda arm as a heroic movement against white oppressors, they've become the new SA (Nazi Brownshirts). The Deep state is preparing for the return of Obama, now as President for life and savior. Like Hitler, his first attempt failed, but he sees the possibility for a victorious return, just like Adolf. When will we see the new Reichstag fire?

"I actually agree with him on the both sides thing,"
I agree with your post, except to me calling it sides is just wrong. If you had people with banners admiring Hitler fighting in the street with people admiring Stalin, it would not be two sides. Consider if there had been gangs of thugs fighting for territory where they control the drug trade and street prostitution. We wouldn't say there crimes committed by both sides. It legitimates criminals engaged in street fighting and murder.

ever heard of The Wizard of Oz....ignore the man behind the curtain....stay focused on the media talking head...

Humans frighten me. They are so easily manipulated by the circus of events, sports or irrational people saying; if only we could make someone else pay for it! Then once a mob is formed they turn on any who are not like them or even if they do not like your team.

Excellent, K.

Excellent, K.

The slow thing didn't bother me either, I thought it better to get the facts and get it right than Obama's rash hugging of thugs and the media putting out the photos of the thug when they were 8 years old, rather than the 25 year old they were or whatever.
His second then just got weird. I actually agree with him on the both sides thing, I live in California and the violent left has successfully squelched free conservative thought here (through violence or threat of violence)... but then he just couldn't stop.

Cohn looked like he wanted to resign and walk away.

Much of Trump's policies are dead-on, particularly with how to handle the short fat kid in NOKO, but his weird personality trait of pushing something he is wrong about until looking like an idiot is going to doom himself. He needs a handler, no other way to put it.

"I think we are witnessing the unelected media and the DC swamp taking down a lawfully elected president."
He's doing it to himself. After he made the statement condemning extremists, he could have just let it go. The only thing President Trump had done wrong at that time was be slow to condemn extremists. I wrote a comment to the NYT saying that Trump's critics just won't let this minor thing go and are intent on carrying on talking about his slow response. It reminded me of President Obama's critics never being satisfied with his condemnation of religious extremists.

Then on Monday President Trump made comments that sounded to me like defending Nazis. Why? My guess is he naturally seeks attention, and doesn't care if it's for something good or bad. That's why I think he's dangerous.

This was just a big news day. They needed a new things to bash trump over. I ignore it all.

Smells like Obama. I think he wants this country deeply divided and erupting in violence.

All of this is pure text book activism and again outlined in their guide "Rules for Radicals".
Too bad the cops in Charlottesville did not simply protect property but let the groups kick the snot out of each other and just do mop up after.

I think it particularly deceptive that they refer to White Supremacists as part of the "Alt Right". This is an epic slander campaign on the same level of re-branding "liberalism". Fascism and Racism have been a hallmark of the left - not the right - for centuries. The KKK was supported primarily by Democrats, including President Wilson and others. Andrew Jackson was openly racist. Dinesh D'Souza's expose on Hillary goes into the racist past of the Democratic Party including Lyndon Johnson. I would also point out that violence at rallies is also a hallmark of the left.

I knew that Osama (Obama) was a professional Commie Leftist Agitator. He practiced what his Commie Leftist Agitator "father" taught him in Kenya and Hawaii. He has NOT changed EXCEPT to become even more deceptive.
- - and - - the LEFT believes everything he says (but does not really believe).

And I thought Ellsworth Toohey was a master manipulator.

He seems to insist on having the last word all the time, his weird comment over the weekend had almost died out, then he had to stir it up again.

I think we are witnessing the unelected media and the DC swamp taking down a lawfully elected president.

"He decried bigotry, racism and violence on all sides."
In my view of it there are not sides. Sides would be if it were a dispute over taking down the statue or not that turned violent. I don't consider people marching under the banner of the swastika a side. President Trump pointed out that the Nazi's "side" wasn't the only side committing crimes, without condemning the Nazi cause. This, along with his history of making unequivocal snap condemnations of things he thinks are wrong, makes him appear an apologist for Nazi's, racists, etc.

As I said, I think this is a minor issue. He eventually condemned the Nazis. I can imagine him saying to an adviser, "Really!? Because of "optics" and the rules of politics I have to proclaim repeatedly that Nazis are evil, as if I maybe I think Nazis are good?" I could imagine President Obama saying the same thing about Islamist militants.

The major issue is why he brought it up again. His critics could have kept the issue of him not condemning Nazis fast enough alive while he went on to other things. It seems he can't resist attention. I'm afraid his attention-seeking activities will eventually have real consequences.

I suspect he's thinking up something outrageous right now. I used to think he confined it to things that didn't matter. Maybe he does. I don't know. I wonder if he had an opportunity to stoke a conflict and work things out such that he was first president to deploy a low-yield tactical nuke if he wouldn't jump at the opportunity to have something related to him on the front page for weeks. I think he's dangerous.

I've read a number of accounts and it's unclear that the Nazi's started the fight. They had a permit for their gathering the anti-fa counter protesters came to protest them and certainly have been involved in violence before.

While I have no love for the Nazi's whatsoever that doesn't mean that the immediate reaction to the mayhem should be to blame them and only them. I think Trumps initial statement was correct. He decried bigotry, racism and violence on all sides. There is nothing wrong with that.

It's extremely suspicious. If true, the first things that come to my mind:
1. Is Kessler just someone who loves leading political movements without regard to what they're about?
2. Is Kessler an example of the same phenomenon that made Bernie Sanders' praise some of then candidate Trump's ideas in a NYT article? My thought is politics may be changing to gov't intervention vs laissez faire. If Kessler, Trump, and Sanders represent the gov't-action side. Sadly, I don't see a strong laissez faire side.
3. Is it some kind of conspiracy to make President Trump look bad?
4. [goofiness]In the Star Trek episode Wolf in the Fold, the psychic identifies the monster as "Kesla". Maybe she was pronouncing Kessler but with the non-rhotic Mid-Atlantic accent actors used at the time.[/goofiness]
Sorry for the bad joke.

My guess is it's a mixture of #1 and #2. #3 is intriguing, but I lean away from the "great person" view of history. It's hard for me to see how with all the money and savvy in the world, conspirators could have hired someone to make these protests happen or make them not happen. Conditions had to be ripe for it. I can't rule it out, though. A great agitator could tip the scales.

I find it odder how President Trump appears to shoot himself in the foot on this issue. I thought it was bad that someone who usually is keen to pound is chest at the bad guys failed to do it immediately to the Nazis at the protest. Eventually he did. His critics carried on in the way President Obama's critics carried on saying he wasn't denouncing religious extremists hard enough, even after he repeatedly called ISIS "a vicious brutal death cult". They just wouldn't be satisfied. President Trump's critics were doing the same thing, trying to keep this minor issue of his slow response alive. It was really a non-issue. If he went back to his job and they kept harping on him, it worked in his favor. Then he brings the issue back to life again. It's like he wants attention and he doesn't care what it's for. Even if a conspiracy instigated the protests to goad President Trump into saying something stupid, Trump totally took the bait.

My impression is President Trump craves attention so badly he'll do anything to get it. Usually it's things with high outrage-to-importance ratios. I'm very concerned he'll accidentally do something important and destructive in the course of his attention-seeking.