types
*deletes*
types
*deletes*

So, I guess my only question is, which Bulwark employees were involved here?

For those who can't see the vid:

Guy loudly said "That guy's son killed himself because he was embarrassed by his dad" so that Eric Bolling could hear it. Bolling's son, if you've forgotten, died of an accidental overdose of fentanyl a couple of years ago, which was mistakenly reported as a suicide for a while.

Bolling follows this asshole outside, confronting him. Guy speed-walks away.

Second guy -- one of the leftwingers staked out around the Trump Hotel, I assume -- grins like a lunatic and sticks his grinning face into Bolling's while taping him with a phone, laughing when Bollling asks "You think it's funny he's talking about my dead kid?" Guy continues his hyena leering.

Link to the vid here, thanks to slowdown, or Twitter embedded video below.

Fighting Words: Publius writes:

The "Fighting Words" doctrine still exists. There are two forms of it. One, the problematic form, is when the govt. claims your "fighting words" justify abridging your right to speak. That is getting narrower and narrower.

The other form is a defense against assault charges. You were provoked. That still exists, and varies with state and local law.

If Bolling beat the shit of that guy, he could probably claim he was provoked. That might get him off, or a lighter sentence.

The standard seems to be, a) the fighting words would be considered a breach of the peace and b) a reasonable person would be provoked to violence by them.

I was thinking the same thing.

posted by Ace of Spades at 11:48 AM

| Access Comments