Hillary's Campaign and the DNC Inciting Violence and Anarchy

[FindersKeepers]

This is disgusting but not really surprising.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

[exploited]

I was wondering when you guys were going to stumble across this. I watched it last night and figured there would be a thread about it here immediately.

What do you find more disgusting? Paying trolls to be trolls, or mouth breathers punching out those trolls because they have a Planned Parenthood shirt and tell his supporters that Trump is a nazi?

The naivete of some about the nature of politics is really astounding. If you think these kinds of tactics haven't been commonplace for two hundred plus years, I don't know what to tell you.

[nic34]

Another O'Keefe hit piece? lol lol lol

[Cigar]

Yet another attempt by The Right to De-Legitimize The Presidency if that can't have it. :rollseyes:

[Private Pickle]

I was wondering when you guys were going to stumble across this. I watched it last night and figured there would be a thread about it here immediately.

What do you find more disgusting? Paying trolls to be trolls, or mouth breathers punching out those trolls because they have a Planned Parenthood shirt and tell his supporters that Trump is a nazi?

The naivete of some about the nature of politics is really astounding. If you think these kinds of tactics haven't been commonplace for two hundred plus years, I don't know what to tell you.

The fact that you write this off as the "nature of politics" is equally astounding. Perhaps you can add some color to your comment about this being commonplace?

[FindersKeepers]

I was wondering when you guys were going to stumble across this. I watched it last night and figured there would be a thread about it here immediately.

What do you find more disgusting? Paying trolls to be trolls, or mouth breathers punching out those trolls because they have a Planned Parenthood shirt and tell his supporters that Trump is a nazi?

The naivete of some about the nature of politics is really astounding. If you think these kinds of tactics haven't been commonplace for two hundred plus years, I don't know what to tell you.

The guy in the vid -- Foval -- has reportedly been fired from his position.

I find violence as a means to a political end to be disgusting all the way around.

However, it's a bit worse when the violence is intentionally started by one entity who then tries to frame another entity for it.

[FindersKeepers]

Another O'Keefe hit piece? lol lol lol


What did you find wrong in it?

[DGUtley]

Yet another attempt by The Right to De-Legitimize The Presidency if that can't have it. :rollseyes:

You're ok with this?

[exploited]

The fact that you write this off as the "nature of politics" is equally astounding. Perhaps you can add some color to your comment about this being commonplace?

What is astounding about it?

People going to their opponents political rallies and getting them worked up into a frenzy is literally one of the oldest tactics in the book. Mouth breathers fall for this all the time. What do you think a counter-protest is?

[exploited]

The guy in the vid -- Foval -- has reportedly been fired from his position.

I find violence as a means to a political end to be disgusting all the way around.

However, it's a bit worse when the violence is intentionally started by one entity who then tries to frame another entity for it.

Note that violence was not "started" by provocateurs. Literally all they did was show up to Trump rallies in offensive t-shirts and carrying offensive signs, and then they got physically assaulted by the attendees. There is nothing particularly unethical about this - showing the world the true face of a movement is an effective media tactic. In much the same way, Gandhi would "bird dog" the British into abusing thousands of people, all under the gaze of the world media.

What you would have to do in order to argue that "they started it" is demonstrate that they were throwing punches, or physically inciting people, and not just being confrontational and saying mean things. But of course the video tries very hard to negate the clear differences between doing these things.

[FindersKeepers]

Note that violence was not "started" by provocateurs. Literally all they did was show up to Trump rallies in offensive t-shirts and carrying offensive signs, and then they got physically assaulted by the attendees. There is nothing particularly unethical about this - showing the world the true face of a movement is an effective media tactic. In much the same way, Gandhi would "bird dog" the British into abusing thousands of people, all under the gaze of the world media.

What you would have to do in order to argue that "they started it" is demonstrate that they were throwing punches, or physically inciting people, and not just being confrontational and saying mean things. But of course the video tries very hard to negate the clear differences between doing these things.

There's plenty of evidence that some of the paid provocateurs start the violence.


“It doesn’t matter what the friggin’ legal and ethics people say, we need to win this motherf*****,” Scott Foval, founder of consulting firm the Foval Group told an undercover journalist.
“I’m saying we have mentally ill people, that we pay to do s***, make no mistake.

“Over the last 20 years, I’ve paid off a few homeless guys to do some crazy stuff, and I’ve also taken them for dinner, and I’ve also made sure they had a hotel, and a shower. And I put them in a program.

“Like I’ve done that. But the reality is, a lot of people, especially our union guys, a lot of our union guys … they’ll do whatever you want. They’re rock’n’roll.

“When I need to get something done in Arkansas, the first guy I call is the head of the AFL-CIO [American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organisations] down there, because he will say, ‘What do you need?’ And I will say, ‘I need a guy who will do this, this and this’. And they find that guy. And that guy will be like, ‘Hell yeah, let’s do it’.”



http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/donald-trump-rallies-infiltrated-by-paid-hillary-clinton-operatives-investigation-reveals/news-story/30e3eebc262bdb00a225628e6157a5cc

While he doesn't use actual violent terminology -- the intent is quite clear.

But, even if all they did was carry obnoxious signs, they're still inciting violence. What do you think would happen to a person who stood in the middle of a Black Lives Matter rally holding a sign with the n-word? He'd get his clock cleaned. And, he'd deserve it, but you really couldn't blame the person who swung first.

[Private Pickle]

What is astounding about it?

People going to their opponents political rallies and getting them worked up into a frenzy is literally one of the oldest tactics in the book. Mouth breathers fall for this all the time. What do you think a counter-protest is?

Firebombing political HQs?

[exploited]

There's plenty of evidence that some of the paid provocateurs start the violence.



http://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/world-economy/donald-trump-rallies-infiltrated-by-paid-hillary-clinton-operatives-investigation-reveals/news-story/30e3eebc262bdb00a225628e6157a5cc

While he doesn't use actual violent terminology -- the intent is quite clear.

But, even if all they did was carry obnoxious signs, they're still inciting violence. What do you think would happen to a person who stood in the middle of a Black Lives Matter rally holding a sign with the n-word? He'd get his clock cleaned. And, he'd deserve it, but you really couldn't blame the person who swung first.

Sure you could. Speech in the US is not grounds for violence. Almost all of it is protected. Literally all you have to do to negate this tactic is not punch people.

As for the intent, I think the message is very unclear. Perhaps doing something crazy is going among a thousand mouth breathers and calling them Nazis.

[exploited]

Firebombing political HQs?

Unacceptable, of course I don't think you'll find anyone who endorses that.

[Private Pickle]

Unacceptable, of course I don't think you'll find anyone who endorses that.

Hence this election is not an example of "politics as usual"....

[FindersKeepers]

Sure you could. Speech in the US is not grounds for violence. Almost all of it is protected. Literally all you have to do to negate this tactic is not punch people.

As for the intent, I think the message is very unclear. Perhaps doing something crazy is going among a thousand mouth breathers and calling them Nazis.


It's called "Criminal Incitement," and it is illegal. Dependent upon the laws of the state in which it occurs and the violence that results, the inciter can be charged with either a felony or a misdemeanor.

I think we can all agree that what the Clinton campaign did was wrong and very dangerous.

Knuckle-dragging types that take part in those practices are part of the problem -- not the solution.

Seeing as violence was tracked to "protesters," there's a very good chance that Clinton's campaign was involved.

[exploited]

Hence this election is not an example of "politics as usual"....

I didn't say this election was politics as usual. I said the tactics outlined in the video are politics as usual.

[exploited]

It's called "Criminal Incitement," and it is illegal. Dependent upon the laws of the state in which it occurs and the violence that results, the inciter can be charged with either a felony or a misdemeanor.

I think we can all agree that what the Clinton campaign did was wrong and very dangerous.

Knuckle-dragging types that take part in those practices are part of the problem -- not the solution.

Seeing as violence was tracked to "protesters," there's a very good chance that Clinton's campaign was involved.

Going to a protest and saying mean things is not criminal incitement. Calling a person a Nazi at a rally would not pass the Brandenburg test. On this point, you are simply wrong. Consider the Westboro Baptist Church - living proof that your understanding of criminal incitement is incorrect.

I think that what the Clinton campaign did was dangerous, sure... but wrong? No. The wrong part is when Trump supporters started throwing punches at people for speech.

[FindersKeepers]

Going to a protest and saying mean things is not criminal incitement. Calling a person a Nazi at a rally would not pass the Brandenburg test. On this point, you are simply wrong. Consider the Westboro Baptist Church - living proof that your understanding of criminal incitement is incorrect.

I think that what the Clinton campaign did was dangerous, sure... but wrong? No. The wrong part is when Trump supporters started throwing punches at people for speech.

Wrong -- and criminal.

States vary but here's MT's law:


45-8-105. Criminal incitement. (1) "Criminal incitement" means the advocacy of crime, malicious damage or injury to property, or violence.
(2) A person commits the offense of criminal incitement if the person purposely or knowingly advocates the commission of a criminal offense and the advocacy is:
(a) directed to inciting or producing that imminent unlawful, criminal action; and
(b) likely to incite or produce that unlawful, criminal action.
(3) For purposes of this section, "imminent" means immediate in time, impending, or on the verge of happening.
(4) A person convicted of the offense of criminal incitement shall be imprisoned in the state prison for a term not to exceed 10 years. History: En. 94-7-503 (http://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/94/7/94-7-503.htm) by Sec. 1, Ch. 513, L. 1973; amd. Sec. 29, Ch. 359, L. 1977; R.C.M. 1947, 94-7-503 (http://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/94/7/94-7-503.htm); amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 350, L. 1999.



And, we know from Foval's admission that he did so knowingly.

[Tahuyaman]

Yet another attempt by The Right to De-Legitimize The Presidency if that can't have it. :rollseyes:

The presidency can only be delegitimized by the person currently holding the office.

[exploited]

Wrong -- and criminal.

States vary but here's MT's law:



And, we know from Foval's admission that he did so knowingly.

Did you even read what you just posted?

How does calling a person a Nazi at a rally, or wearing an offensive t-shirt, or holding an offensive sign advocate for "...crime, malicious damage or injury to property, or violence?" All of these actions are protected speech, and they do not in themselves advocate imminent lawless action, which is the legal standard.

The only people who we know committed crimes here are the mouthbreathers who started punching the trolls for exercising their rights.

[Private Pickle]

Hence this election is not an example of "politics as usual"....

Perhaps. Can you provide other examples from previous elections?

[FindersKeepers]

Did you even read what you just posted?

How does calling a person a Nazi at a rally, or wearing an offensive t-shirt, or holding an offensive sign advocate for "...crime, malicious damage or injury to property, or violence?" All of these actions are protected speech, and they do not in themselves advocate imminent lawless action, which is the legal standard.

The only people who we know committed crimes here are the mouthbreathers who started punching the trolls for exercising their rights.

I think you're giving them too much benefit claiming they were only wearing offensive clothing or calling names. When Foval said he pays them to do some "crazy $shit" I don't think he's talking about dressing them in offensive clothing. That's not all that crazy.

Besides, we have the reports from numerous rallies where the anti-Trumpeters swung first -- or threw eggs, etc.

[exploited]

I think you're giving them too much benefit claiming they were only wearing offensive clothing or calling names. When Foval said he pays them to do some "crazy $$#@!" I don't think he's talking about dressing them in offensive clothing. That's not all that crazy.

Besides, we have the reports from numerous rallies where the anti-Trumpeters swung first -- or threw eggs, etc.

And yet you have already identified the idea of going into a BLM rally and calling people "ni**ers" to be crazy. What makes you think that Trump supporters would react any less forcefully to being called Nazis and rape-defenders?

There are reports of that, yes. Of course you can't connect these actions to the DNC - you can assume they are related, but you can't actually prove it. Further, these reports are conflicted, and who started what, and how, is mostly unclear.

[stjames1_53]

Note that violence was not "started" by provocateurs. Literally all they did was show up to Trump rallies in offensive t-shirts and carrying offensive signs, and then they got physically assaulted by the attendees. There is nothing particularly unethical about this - showing the world the true face of a movement is an effective media tactic. In much the same way, Gandhi would "bird dog" the British into abusing thousands of people, all under the gaze of the world media.

What you would have to do in order to argue that "they started it" is demonstrate that they were throwing punches, or physically inciting people, and not just being confrontational and saying mean things. But of course the video tries very hard to negate the clear differences between doing these things.

at one Trump rally, they burned cars and attacked police, all of this outside the rally meeting place.......you're blaming Trump supporters for what the thugs did............absolutely amazing

[exploited]

at one Trump rally, they burned cars and attacked police, all of this outside the rally meeting place.......you're blaming Trump supporters for what the thugs did............absolutely amazing

Actually, I have limited my comments to instances where there is no evidence that these trolls were paid by the DNC to commit actual acts of violence.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that they were? Or are you just going to blame all such incidents on the DNC now that you have proof that they paid trolls to show up at rallies in offensive t-shirts?

You're at the big boy table right now james. I think you can do this.

[stjames1_53]

Actually, I have limited my comments to instances where there is no evidence that these trolls were paid by the DNC to commit actual acts of violence.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that they were? Or are you just going to blame all such incidents on the DNC now that you have proof that they paid trolls to show up at rallies in offensive t-shirts?

You're at the big boy table right now james. I think you can do this.

My question still remains unanswered. Do you really believe that Trump supporters burned cars and fought with the police? There is such a thing as peaceful rallies where people carry signs and sing their songs. The violence at those rallies were caused by anti-Trump people. What you are insinuating is that Trump supporters caused this problem because you're claiming no Hillary supporters were even at these rallies, IMO.

Just a further note, I don't think that Sander, Stein, or even Johnson supporters would have caused any violence against Trump at his rallies.
If there is no one else to blame, let's just say the Russians caused all of this violence...........seems to be the favorite scapegoat for Hillary

[exploited]

My question still remains unanswered. Do you really believe that Trump supporters burned cars and fought with the police? There is such a thing as peaceful rallies where people carry signs and sing their songs. The violence at those rallies were caused by anti-Trump people. What you are insinuating is that Trump supporters caused this problem because you're claiming no Hillary supporters were even at these rallies, IMO.

Just a further note, I don't think that Sander, Stein, or even Johnson supporters would have caused any violence against Trump at his rallies.
If there is no one else to blame, let's just say the Russians caused all of this violence...........seems to be the favorite scapegoat for Hillary

Okay, your spot at the big boy table has been revoked. You'll get a chance sometime again soon.

I didn't say there were no Hillary supporters at those rallies, nor did I imply that Trump supporters were at fault for burning cars or attacking police. Review my post and try again.

[stjames1_53]

Okay, your spot at the big boy table has been revoked. You'll get a chance sometime again soon.

I didn't say there were no Hillary supporters at those rallies, nor did I imply that Trump supporters were at fault for burning cars or attacking police. Review my post and try again.

someone is to blame, but I'd bet it wasn't Trump supporters. So in your opinion, just who is responsible?

[Common Sense]

Sorry, are we shocked that political races are played roughly?

Both sides are doing it. That doesn't mean I advocate it. The American political process is a fucked up one...but that is the current reality.

However selectively edited hit pieces by a guy known to fabricate is a little hard to take seriously.

[exploited]

someone is to blame, but I'd bet it wasn't Trump supporters. So in your opinion, just who is responsible?

Those involved. Do you have any evidence that links them to the DNC or the Clinton campaign? Any evidence that they were paid to commit acts of violence? Or is this just an assumption?

[decedent]

Another O'Keefe hit piece? lol lol lol

James O'keefe, a criminal, talking about "criminality" from the Clinton camp.

[AZ Jim]

You have never seen video of Clinton preaching violence or condoning violence. But Trump has done it numerous times. He has done it for months egging on this kind of behavior. You can say what you may but don't preach to us about violence unless you are attributing to it's source, one Donald J. Trump.
http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000004269364/trump-and-violence.html

There are many such videos. Trump is the initiator and promoter of violence. Remember "violence begets violence".

[stjames1_53]

Those involved. Do you have any evidence that links them to the DNC or the Clinton campaign? Any evidence that they were paid to commit acts of violence? Or is this just an assumption?

we are a an impasse...you cannot prove they weren't...............I never claimed they were paid, that's a "you" thing

[stjames1_53]

You have never seen video of Clinton preaching violence or condoning violence. But Trump has done it numerous times. He has done it for months egging on this kind of behavior. You can say what you may but don't preach to us about violence unless you are attributing to it's source, one Donald J. Trump.
http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000004269364/trump-and-violence.html

There are many such videos. Trump is the initiator and promoter of violence. Remember "violence begets violence".

uh huh.....sure thing az

[Bethere]

uh huh.....sure thing az
Jim is an outstanding American.

[texan]

I was wondering when you guys were going to stumble across this. I watched it last night and figured there would be a thread about it here immediately.

What do you find more disgusting? Paying trolls to be trolls, or mouth breathers punching out those trolls because they have a Planned Parenthood shirt and tell his supporters that Trump is a nazi?

The naivete of some about the nature of politics is really astounding. If you think these kinds of tactics haven't been commonplace for two hundred plus years, I don't know what to tell you.

Are you making an excuse for this as in justifying it? Just want to know what kind of person we are dealing with here. No one seemed to mind Trump's being held and released at the most appropriate time. Of course it is all a coincidence....

[exploited]

Are you making an excuse for this as in justifying it? Just want to know what kind of person we are dealing with here. No one seemed to mind Trump's being held and released at the most appropriate time. Of course it is all a coincidence....

Justifying what? Trump fans punching people in the face because somebody is wearing an offensive shirt or called them a name? Of course not. I can't justify violence like that.

[stjames1_53]

Jim is an outstanding American.

define, in your words, just what a "good American" is

[nic34]

someone is to blame, but I'd bet it wasn't Trump supporters. So in your opinion, just who is responsible?

O'Keefe...

[Cigar]

You're ok with this?

Of course not, but you realize we're not dealing with Adults in Congress. :laugh:

If they can't get their way, they take their ball and go home crying.

[nic34]

James O'keefe, a criminal, talking about "criminality" from the Clinton camp.

STING OF MYSELFAmateurish spies like James O’Keefe III attempt to sway the 2016 campaign.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/30/james-okeefe-accidentally-stings-himself

[decedent]

STING OF MYSELF

Amateurish spies like James O’Keefe III attempt to sway the 2016 campaign.



http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/30/james-okeefe-accidentally-stings-himself

They can't win honestly. Soros should sue his skinny ass.

[Bethere]

define, in your words, just what a "good American" is

Jim.

[stjames1_53]

Jim.
wrong again.................the problem is that you don't know what a real American is....a name is not a definition. Try again noodge, or did you repeatedly fail English in grade school?

[Bethere]

wrong again.................the problem is that you don't know what a real American is....a name is not a definition. Try again noodge, or did you repeatedly fail English in grade school?

You couldn't tie Jim's shoes.

[stjames1_53]

You couldn't tie Jim's shoes.

woot!! hahahahahahahaha....but you may continue babysitting him and tying his shoes....
That's what I like about you. you couldn't answer a straight question even if you wanted to.
So, what is a good American?

[Green Arrow]

The guy in the vid -- Foval -- has reportedly been fired from his position.

I find violence as a means to a political end to be disgusting all the way around.

However, it's a bit worse when the violence is intentionally started by one entity who then tries to frame another entity for it.

So what you're saying is Trump supporters are immature, prone to violent outbursts, and have no self-control.

[FindersKeepers]

So what you're saying is Trump supporters are immature, prone to violent outbursts, and have no self-control.

They probably are, but I was pointing out the ones who started the violence in the majority of cases and then blamed it on other -- the anti-Trumpeters.

[exploited]

They probably are, but I was pointing out the ones who started the violence in the majority of cases and then blamed it on other -- the anti-Trumpeters.

You have literally zero evidence of that. We've talked about this.

[FindersKeepers]

You have literally zero evidence of that. We've talked about this.

Yes we talked about it. You're just unwilling to accept that the protestors, who showed up for the express purpose of inciting violence, are the ones at fault.

You keep making excuses for them but their goal was to agitate and create chaos. When they succeeded, you blamed the ones who were rightfully there to see a rally for the candidate of their choice.

As the campaign trail grew, we heard stories of potential rally-goers who stayed away out of fear of violence. That puts the DNC guys squarely in the realm of undermining democracy.

[Green Arrow]

They probably are, but I was pointing out the ones who started the violence in the majority of cases and then blamed it on other -- the anti-Trumpeters.

They are awful people for trying to incite shit but the people that reacted with violence are just as responsible.

[ripmeister]

This is disgusting but not really surprising.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

Your thread title is disingenuous as well. Neither the DNC or the Campaign had anything to do with this as far as one can tell at the moment. If you come up with that connection let us know.

[ripmeister]

The guy in the vid -- Foval -- has reportedly been fired from his position.

I find violence as a means to a political end to be disgusting all the way around.

However, it's a bit worse when the violence is intentionally started by one entity who then tries to frame another entity for it.

While this is distasteful its probably SOP to a certain degree. The violence however has been on the part of the Trumpians. Yea, these bozos are talking about stoking that but in the end its the Trump dude at a rally who threw the punch. Not unlike Hillary having Donald take the bait. Its a question of self control. One of the funny things about this election has been the rights seeming denial of responsibility for these things. That coming from the party who for years has talked about taking personal responsibility.

[ripmeister]

Firebombing political HQs?

I'm going to pull one from the Breitbart/Trump playbook on this one. Certainly a heinous act but as of now I don't think the authorities have anything. Whos to say it wasn't a pro-Trump group that did this in order to engender sympathy. Just sayin.

[ripmeister]

we are a an impasse...you cannot prove they weren't...............I never claimed they were paid, that's a "you" thing

Oh boy. That proving a negative thing rears its ugly head once again.

[exploited]

Yes we talked about it. You're just unwilling to accept that the protestors, who showed up for the express purpose of inciting violence, are the ones at fault.

You keep making excuses for them but their goal was to agitate and create chaos. When they succeeded, you blamed the ones who were rightfully there to see a rally for the candidate of their choice.

As the campaign trail grew, we heard stories of potential rally-goers who stayed away out of fear of violence. That puts the DNC guys squarely in the realm of undermining democracy.

Of course I blame the people who use physical violence to silence speech they don't like. Why wouldn't I?

All that is needed to negate this tactic is refusing to punch people.

[Private Pickle]

I'm going to pull one from the Breitbart/Trump playbook on this one. Certainly a heinous act but as of now I don't think the authorities have anything. Whos to say it wasn't a pro-Trump group that did this in order to engender sympathy. Just sayin.

Yawn.

[valley ranch]

This video will only be seen by a few hundred people, half of them will take it like these are!

[ripmeister]

Yawn.

Go to bed too late last night? :grin:

[Private Pickle]

Go to bed too late last night? :grin:

Not especially... Just tired of bullshit.

[ripmeister]

Not especially... Just tired of bull$#@!.

If so, why Trump? He's the biggest BS artist there is. He's a salesman.

[Private Pickle]

If so, why Trump? He's the biggest BS artist there is. He's a salesman.

Probably why I won't be voting for Trump...

[ripmeister]

Probably why I won't be voting for Trump...

Good for you. You are a wise person.

[Private Pickle]

Good for you. You are a wise person.

Won't be voting for Hillary either...

[FindersKeepers]

Of course I blame the people who use physical violence to silence speech they don't like. Why wouldn't I?

All that is needed to negate this tactic is refusing to punch people.


That "tactic" got that specific campaign manager fired.

There's a reason for that.

[FindersKeepers]

They are awful people for trying to incite $#@! but the people that reacted with violence are just as responsible.

True. Both are despicable.

But, while the latter was reactionary -- the former was an intentional plot.

[exploited]

That "tactic" got that specific campaign manager fired.

There's a reason for that.

There is. People be hating on trolls, and not violent criminals.

[FindersKeepers]

Your thread title is disingenuous as well. Neither the DNC or the Campaign had anything to do with this as far as one can tell at the moment. If you come up with that connection let us know.

Both of the guys who were fired were DNC contractors. The DNC lost some of its own members for underhanded tactics -- including Wasserman -- and the DNC is stumping for Hillary. You can't get any closer than that.

Liars and cheaters, all.

[FindersKeepers]

The violence however has been on the part of the Trumpians.


http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/violence-breaks-trump-rally-protesters-arrested-39580670

[FindersKeepers]

There is. People be hating on trolls, and not violent criminals.

Right. See the video link I posted above.

[exploited]

Right. See the video link I posted above.

I condemn such behaviour. Now link it to the DNC.

[FindersKeepers]

I condemn such behaviour. Now link it to the DNC.

No need -- we already have the DNC contractors admitting what they did and we have anti-Trumpeters inciting violence.

Whether or not that specific violence was related is a moot point. The DNC contractors set the stage - and the protesters started swinging.

Your hair-splitting isn't changing anything.