Posts

VIDEO: Pro-Trump Mother Speaks Out After Women Rip Up Signs, Steal MAGA Hat From Son

WATCH:

Abbey Wigton and Taylor Cisinski, two individuals who were say they were attacked by Joe Biden supporters, spoke with the Daily Caller’s Samantha Renck about the incident, if they plan to press charges and more.

“This altercation was completely unprovoked. My son and I were standing outside of a restaurant,” Wigton said, whose son Riley is 7 years old. “We weren’t even paying attention to the women until they walked out of the doors and immediately started antagonizing my son.”

Abbey alleged that the two women “started saying things like ‘you should be ashamed for having a mother like yours. She’s a Trump supporter. You should just be ashamed of yourself.’”

“As soon as I hit record, that’s when they ripped the sign away so it was almost instantly.”

Conservatives like Donald Trump, Jr. posted that the two women allegedly attacking Wigton, her son and Cisinski were Joe Biden supporters. According to an original statement by Wigton, which has since been deleted, she said, “The Joe Biden supporters laid hands on my child and ripped his ‘Make America Great Again’ hat from his head while cursing at him and pushing him over.”

When asked how she knew they were Biden supporters, Wigton said, “I didn’t necessarily know they were Joe Biden supporters. I just kind of assumed since they were so vehemently against me with the red hat on backward. They couldn’t even see what the lettering was on my hat. They just saw the red hat.”

Cisinski, who was also allegedly attacked, said he believes the incident was premeditated.

“How this whole situation started is, we were all sign-waving on a sidewalk,” he said, “peacefully protesting Joe Biden’s nomination speech. This group of people drove by in a car where they started to yell profanities and cussing at us.”

According to Cisinski, Riley was crying so “he picked him up and brought him away from” the situation, but “the video does not show that.”

Wignot and Cisinski also discussed whether they will press charges, how Riley is doing and more.

COLUMN BY

SAMANTHA RENCK

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Mother And Son Allegedly Assaulted Over Pro-Trump Gear

Ted Cruz Calls Out Democrats Ignoring Antifa Anarchy In Portland

Seattle Business Owners Blast City Leaders After Latest Vote To Defund SPD

Democrats Block Coronavirus Relief, Police Legislation After Pelosi Calls House Back For Postal Service Bill

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Fear of Accountability

“If you’re 25 and you’re not a liberal, you have no heart. If you’re 35 and not a conservative, you have no brain.”

In a world where accountability is becoming increasingly more obsolete, it is far from surprising that people are more outraged by harsh words than they are heinous actions. More likely than not, at one point in your life or another, your parents uttered to you the age old adage, “Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you.” So my question to you is, when did this change? At what point did we begin to care more about the things people said to us rather than what they did to us? If I say I’d like to punch someone square in the mouth and the person next to me actually throws a punch in silence, who should be held accountable? Should I? Or should they? Now, why can’t we apply this simple logic to what is going on in our country today?

I’m not going to sit here and act like I’ve never been hurt or offended by someone’s words before, because I have—everyone has. The difference, however, is the ability to see the bigger picture. I’ll give it to you, if you are on any form of social media today, it is extremely difficult to take a step back and see the big picture. Things get so petty and so twisted as a result of the convenience and ease of the Internet; I am constantly guilty of this. Nevertheless, we have to start taking a step back and examining what really matters for the good of the country rather than winning a pointless argument on a Facebook post. What is the most important issue facing us right now? Is it national security or is it political correctness? Is it immigration or is it political correctness? Is it the economy or is it political correctness? Is it health care or political correctness? Is it ISIS or political correctness? See my point?

I, for the longest time, couldn’t figure out why people opposed Trump so strongly. Yes, I understand, he’s hurt a lot of people’s feelings. But I cannot help but believe that it goes beyond that. I think it comes down to idea of accountability. In the society we live in today, accountability is vanishing faster than a Clinton e-mail. Today, if we don’t want to do something, more likely than not, we don’t have to. People are petrified at the thought of being held accountable for anything and I believe that Donald Trump personifies accountability, which is the antithesis of who we have now and who we’ll have if Hillary wins.

In Obama’s America if you don’t want to work and contribute to society, you don’t have to—you’re not held accountable. In Obama’s America, if a county wants to take advantage of our country and pay nothing for our trade, services, our protection, they can—they’re not held accountable. In Obama’s America, if you want to go out and have sex with whoever you want and you don’t want to have a child, you don’t have to—you’re not held accountable. In Obama’s America, if an immigrant wants to come and live here illegally and take advantage of our education, our healthcare, and our social programs, they can—they’re not held accountable. If a radical Islamic terrorist, practicing a 9th or 10th century form of Islam, want to come here and declare Jihad on our soil, take the lives and sense of security of our citizens, they can—they’re not held accountable so long as they do so in the name of Allah. In Donald Trump’s America, these things will not be so. In Donald Trump’s America, we will be accountable, each and every one of us.

For those of you who are on the fence and are leaning away from Trump because the GOP establishment are distancing themselves from him, remember this: Neither John McCain, nor Paul Ryan, nor Glenn Beck, nor John Kasich got Donald Trump to where he is today. If they had been doing their jobs then not only would there have been no need for Donald Trump to run, but there would have been no way for him to have gotten this far. The establishment is comprised of politicians who are afraid of being held accountable themselves. Donald Trump has them scared to death. What scares them? Accountability. These politicians are wolves in sheep’s clothing and Donald Trump is dangerously close to exposing them for what they are and they are running scared.

We live in a country that invalidates and belittles the importance of a strong male role. Turn on a television at anytime of the day and see how every show or sitcom portrays the father as dumb and incompetent, so much so that it is pouring over into our societal expectations. A society that can no longer recognize the fact that as a leader, Donald Trump is much like a strong and stern father who expects and demands the most of his children, not because he hates them but because he loves them. The worst parents are the ones who let their children run rampant and give them whatever they want, whenever they want it. The best parents say and do the things that their children don’t necessarily like at the time, but are thankful for in the long run—they hold them accountable. A demagogue like Hillary Clinton will, without a doubt, be the nail in the coffin for this country. This November, vote for the long term, for the bigger picture. Vote for accountability, not for what has been disguised to you as cool or accepting or progressive, in order to make you feel good in the moment.

Republican Primary Lesson: It’s Not About You!

The existential threat to America today is not communism but colonization by illegal aliens and Muslim “refugees.” Political correctness subverts our First Amendment rights and shuts down even discussions about the threats to the middle class.

On the day Donald Trump resoundingly won primaries in West Virginia and Nebraska, the same day that Ted Cruz gave one last, desperate call-out to voters by indicating that he would consider reentering the race if Nebraska voters decided he should, a Quinnipiac poll provided yet one more shock to the pundit class.  It showed Trump even with Hillary Clinton in three key states.  He was beating her on leadership abilities, economic issues, and security issues.

Voters also thought that Trump was more “honest and trustworthy” than Clinton.

Trump had a lower rating on “moral standards” probably because of his playboy past.

The question remains: why would people trust someone who has low moral standards?  How did Trump earn this trust?

He certainly did not do it the way Ted Cruz did by speaking in front of a large banner with “TrusTed” on it.  He did not do it by telling his parents’ hard-scrabble stories the way Cruz and Marco Rubio did.  He did not by simply presenting his name with an exclamation point the way “Jeb!” did.  He did not do it with a phony “aw shucks” act like John Kasich’s.

Oddly, the man who is cast by the pundit class as being the supreme narcissist used the old Reagan slogan, “Make America Great Again.”  He tapped into the patriotic desires of Americans suffering two terms of an anti-American Obama presidency.

As voters rejected the other candidates’ appeals, commentators upped the rhetoric and aimed it at Trump’s supporters. The libertarians and millennial conservatives pulled out their thesauruses for new terms of insult.  Erick Erickson alternated between references to Scripture and casting Satanic aspersions on Trump supporters.  National Review’s Kevin Williamson likened them to Hitler supporters, and said their communities “deserved to die.”  The ominous meme about “angry white working class voters” was circulated by pundits who had studiously avoided any parallel categorization of Michelle Obama.

Adopting a new more conciliatory tone, David Brooks acknowledged the “pain” of “declinism” and called for a New Deal-like effort to change the “national story” from the old model of rugged individualism.  He suggested a “new definition of masculinity” for the new economy that rewards “emotional connection and verbal expressiveness.”  (Brooks is detail oriented, as his praise of the creases in then-candidate Obama’s pants showed.)

These commentators who attended elite schools and had connections were initially confident that the champion Princeton debater, praised by his former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz as “off the charts brilliant,” would win out over the buffoon who spoke in sentence fragments.  Cruz’s campaign, as the Washington Post described it, “reflected its candidate: methodical, strategic and data-driven.”  It “deployed a sophisticated data strategy that used psychographic information to appeal to the fears or hopes of potential voters.”

On the day of the do-or-die primary, Cruz decided to talk to a man holding a Trump sign at his event in Marion, Indiana.  With cameras trailing, Cruz walked up to a guy who would probably not react favorably to Brooks’ “new definition of masculinity.”  He was from Ohio, a “pole-climber,” as he put it — someone Brooks, sitting in an office admiring the creases in his own pants, might espy, from a distance repairing the lines.

The effort was clearly intended to present Cruz as patient and charitable towards someone holding minimal “verbal expressiveness.”  Sure enough, in grammatically incorrect phrases, the man said that he supported Trump because of “the wall” and the Second Amendment.  He told him, “You are the problem, politician,” and asked where his Goldman-Sachs jacket was.  Cruz, with evident exasperation, repeated the well-known charges against Trump.  He asked him if he knew that he had argued a Second Amendment case before the Supreme Court.

Clips from the exchange were played on Fox on May 7, with Greg Gutfeld’s facial contortions and comments interspersed to show how impenetrable Trump supporters are to Cruz’s debating points.

While those in the #NeverTrump camp probably found Gutfeld’s mockery funny, others, such as other pole-climbers who are already disgusted with the sneering at their kind, probably did not.

Nor did they miss the announced “deal” with rival John Kasich, or fall for the slogan of used car salesmen and consumer advocates (“trust me”).

Do the candidates not understand that the hard-luck stories about immigrant parents bring only a “so what?” from children of immigrants who did not go Princeton or Harvard?  Do they understand that abstractions about “free enterprise” mean little when your job has been sent abroad?  Do they understand that bantering in Spanish on the debate stage doesn’t win any points if you have to compete for work with Mexicans hanging out at Home Depot?

Do they understand that talk about the Constitution inspires very little confidence if it comes from someone like Marco Rubio, who betrayed his supporters on immigration?  Do they understand that when you say “when I am president,” as Rubio did, that it comes off as presumptuous?  All three of the candidates who blamed Trump’s “rhetoric” for the rioters who closed down the rally in Chicago on March 11 lost credibility—and votes.

Did the Big Brains who kept invoking Ronald Reagan not listen to “the speech” on behalf of presidential candidate Barry Goldwater?  Reagan, calling himself a “former Democrat,” addressed middle-Americans’ concerns, then arising from the existential threat of communism and growth of government: an administration that sought to imprison farmers for improper bookkeeping, that built public housing, and that harassed businessmen.  Reagan told stories, about an Arkansas farmer who lost his 960-acre farm for over-planting his rice allotment.  He related a story about a young woman pregnant with her seventh child seeking a divorce so that she could qualify for Aid to Dependent Children, which provided more money than her husband, a laborer, could earn.

The existential threat today is not communism but colonization by illegal aliens and Muslim “refugees.”  Political correctness subverts our First Amendment rights and shuts down even discussions about the threats to the middle class.

As I described at this site, Trump at his rally on April 10, in Rochester, New York, connected with voters by talking about their concerns, such as the recent closing of SentrySafe, which followed Carrier Air Conditioning’s exit from Indiana to Mexico.

The day after the Indiana primaries, CNN invited a number of #NeverTrump-ers — over-glossed, quick-tongued politicos – who were contemplating a third party.

The #NeverTrump-ers ominously imply that if Trump is the nominee, “it will be a long, hot summer — and fall,” — continuing the idea that any violence will be Trump’s fault.  Erick Erickson, on the morning after the Nebraska win, predicting that the “Schadenfreudenfuhrer” will “beclown” himself over the next two months, advised delegates to the national convention to reject the will of the voters.  Otherwise, “We will see a party fail to unite. It’s [sic] standard bearers will flee.”

These “standard-bearers,” not looking beyond their own reflections, continue in the same self-destructive path.  As they accelerate the insults, they show that they may have “psychographic information,” but not much empathy or common sense.