Peter Fonda Labelled ‘Domestic Terrorist’ After Tweets Against Barron Trump


Peter Fonda has been reported to the Secret Service by Melania Trump and labeled a domestic terrorist by the National Border Patrol Council.

 Deranged Hollywood weirdo Peter Fonda has been reported to the Secret Service by Melania Trump and labeled a “domestic terrorist” by the National Border Patrol Council after issuing vile, unhinged threats on Twitter against Barron Trump and the children of patriotic federal employees.

 Peter Fonda started the week by unleashing an appalling tweet storm on Twitter, calling for President Donald Trump’s 12-year-old son Barron Trump to be locked in a cage and raped by pedophiles, among other foul-mouthed and disturbing suggestions. After a violent backlash, the fading D-list actor was forced to backtrack and apologize, but it was far too late.

 Now, the spoiled, entitled Hollywood whack job — and brother of the anti-American actress Jane “Hanoi” Fonda — has learned his punishment.

“Wanna stop this f**king monster? Really wanna stop this giant a**hole? 90 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE STREETS ON THE SAME WEEKEND! THESE REPUBLICAN A**HOLES ARE ALL IN ON IT! THE CHIEF A**HOLE IS HAPPY WE ARE ALL VERY UPSET. WE HAVE TO GET EVEN MORE ANGRY WITH THESE REPUBLICANS,” he wrote in a series of unhinged tweets that only got worse.

“WE SHOULD RIP BARRON TRUMP FROM HIS MOTHER’S ARMS AND PUT HIM IN A CAGE WITH PEDOPHILES AND SEE IF MOTHER WILL STAND UP AGAINST THE GIANT A**HOLE SHE IS MARRIED TO. 90 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE STREETS ON THE SAME WEEKEND IN THE COUNTRY. F**K,” the Hollywood whack job continued, in tweets that were since deleted.

 MadWorldNews reports: It shouldn’t be a surprise that a member of the Fonda family is speaking out against the president and against his own nation. But it was a surprise to many, even liberals, that he would go after a child.

The president’s oldest son, Donald Trump Jr., shot back at Fonda and challenged him to take him on. A challenge that Fonda never responded to.

“You’re clearly a sick individual and everyone is an internet badass but rather than attack an 11 year old like a bully and a coward why don’t you pick on someone a bit bigger. LMK,” Trump Jr. wrote.

Donald Trump Jr.
@DonaldJTrumpJr

 You’re clearly a sick individual and everyone is an internet badass but rather than attack an 11 year old like a bully and a coward why don’t you pick on someone a bit bigger. LMK. :https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1009452017352364034?ref_s...

 But Peter Fonda did respond to the backlash by issuing an apology for his abhorrent statement. “I tweeted something highly inappropriate and vulgar about the president and his family in response to the devastating images I was seeing on television,” he said in a statement. “Like many Americans, I am very impassioned and distraught over the situation with children separated from their families at the border, but I went way too far.”

“It was wrong and I should not have done it. I immediately regretted it and sincerely apologize to the family for what I said and any hurt my words have caused,” he added.

 Trump Jr. was not the only first family member who went on the attack against the “Easy Rider” actor. Barron’s mother, First Lady Melania Trump, contacted the Secret Service to report the actor and his tweet, according to her communications director, Stephanie Grisham.

 Sony Pictures Classics said on Wednesday that it would still release its movie “Boundaries,” in which he had a minor role. And how ironic is it that the movie is named “Boundaries” when the actor proved that he has none?

“Peter Fonda’s comments are abhorrent, reckless and dangerous, and we condemn them completely. It is important to note that Mr. Fonda plays a very minor role in the film. To pull or alter this film at this point would unfairly penalize the filmmaker Shana Feste’s accomplishment, the many actors, crew members and other creative talent that worked hard on the project. We plan to open the film as scheduled this weekend, in a limited release of five theaters,” the studio said.

 Now leaders of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) have labeled the actor a “domestic terrorist” for his tweets. In a statement on its website, the council said, “Law enforcement isn’t pleasant Peter, it isn’t a movie where you are constantly being catered to by sycophants and you’re pampered, protected and made to think you’re really someone better than the rest of us. You aren’t!”

 NBPC officials wrote, “For us, the bad guys and the constant danger are real. Ask the Tucson agent who was shot last week by illegal aliens, Peter. Yes Peter, the bullets were actually real. Do his traumatized children deserve to be terrorized at their schools because he’s a Border Patrol agent. What about his wife? Should she be hunted down and terrorized too? What about the children of agents who have been killed in the line of duty Peter? Should they be terrorized at school as well?”

“Peter, you are a despicable, hateful, spoiled, and entitled punk. Your life of privilege since birth is not what most of us deal with. We have to work hard every day to make a living for our families. Some of us do dangerous jobs that most Americans wouldn’t touch. Our children have to put up with enough as it is. Demonizing us is low. But encouraging domestic terrorism against our children is unforgivable. Encouraging violence against the President’s son is unforgivable. Asking people to kidnap the DHS secretary, strip her naked, put her in a cage and letting people poke her with sticks demonstrates just how unhinged you really are,” it added. “Peter, seek some mental health treatment. You need it!”

 Peter Fonda is only part of the problem. From Kathy Griffin to Tom Arnold, many have called for the kidnappings, murder and terrorizing of members of President Trump’s administration and his supporters. After the shooting of Rep. Steve Scalise a year ago, you would think they would learn that their words could incite a terrorist, but their unhinged minds don’t allow them to think of anything other than themselves. If any type of domestic terrorist incident against this administration or its supporters happens, the hands of Hollywood will be soaked with blood.

https://yournewswire.com/peter-fonda-domestic-terrorist-trump/

Views: 17

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Nice

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service