Iowa Rally Chants “Lock Her Up” After Trump Taunts Diane Feinstein

225px-dianne_feinstein_official_senate_photoI have been critical of President Donald Trump’s rhetoric on social media and the campaign trail.  The attacks are often personal and, in my view, often unsettling.  That was the case yesterday at an Iowa rally where the crowd chanted “Lock her up, lock her up” after Trump taunted ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) over the leaking of a letter from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.  It is a chilling development in a mass rally to have supporters calling for the jailing of Trump’s political opponents.  That is not what this country represents and should be condemned by Democratic and Republican leaders alike.Trump’s taunt was modest by past standards in joining those who have mocked Feinstein over her denial in the hearing as the source of the leak. (Feinstein turned to staffers and asked them if they leaked the letter and then treated the matter as closed).  However, he should have rejected the chant as highly inappropriate and unfounded.

Trump asked “How about Senator Feinstein? That’s another beauty . . . Did you leak the documents?”

Having hundreds of people chanting “Lock her up” about Feinstein both absurd and deeply troubling.  Republican senators like Lindsey Graham have publicly stated that they do not believe that Feinstein would intentionally leak such information.


69 thoughts on “Iowa Rally Chants “Lock Her Up” After Trump Taunts Diane Feinstein”

  1. So the current complaint is that the confidentiality of the identity of the survivor of an alleged sexual assault was violated by a leaker whose own identity must be investigated, discovered, disclosed and the leaker punished for revealing the existence of the confidential letter written by the survivor of an alleged sexual assault. Huh?

    Did the leaker reveal the identity of the survivor of the alleged sexual assault who wrote the confidential letter? No. Well who revealed the identity of the survivor of the alleged sexual assault who wrote the confidential letter?

    Um, the survivor of the alleged sexual assault who wrote the confidential letter disclosed her own identity to the Washington Post after the press started showing up at her home and at her workplace. Ah-ha! Whoever leaked the confidential letter is responsible for unleashing the running dogs of the press who then set upon the survivor of the alleged sexual assault who had written the letter and who then revealed her own identity to WaPo for the sake of calling off the running dogs of the press who were closing in on her.

    Okay, then. But if we’re going to lock the leaker up, then for what crime shall we lock the leaker up? Violating a rape shield law? Are we sure about that? What does the survivor of the alleged sexual assault who wrote the letter that the leaker leaked have to say about this supposed violation of a rape shield law? Well, she says that she revealed her own identity to WaPo because the press was hounding her. So, the running dogs of the press violated a rape shield law? But doesn’t the press have First Amendment protection even for violating rape shield laws? How should I know?

    There’s something even far curiouser, though: The very same people demanding an investigation and jailing of the leaker of the confidential letter also claim that the allegation of sexual assault was supposedly a fabricated hoax designed to smear an innocent man who had supposedly done nothing wrong. Some of those people (not all of them) further claim that the survivor of the alleged sexual assault is supposedly a proven liar who purportedly concocted the supposedly false accusation at the behest of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

    Isn’t that also what Kavanaugh said in his opening statement at the SJC hearing on the allegation?

    1. Excerpted from Kavanaugh’s opening statement at the SJC hearing:

      This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about president trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record. Revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups. This is a circus.

    2. Correction: Ford is an alleged survivor of an alleged sexual assault. The only survivor of the allegation is Brett Kavanaugh.

      1. Trump has publicly mocked Dr. Ford. Now Trump is publicly accusing Feinstein of violating the “confidentiality” of Dr. Ford. Chances are that nothing is too twisted for Trump. But it really ought to be too twisted for Chief Olly.

        1. But it really ought to be too twisted for Chief Olly.

          Why? Didn’t you get the memo? The beatings will continue until morale improves. Oops, wrong one. Punch violence in the face! No, not that one, darn it. Oh, here it is. That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength. My new favorite though is this line from The Hunt for Red October as I watched the entire Democrat party take the safeties off in their attack on Kavanaugh: Torpedo dead ahead! – You arrogant ass. You’ve killed us.

          If it’s unconventional (twisted) warfare the Left wants, that’s what they will get.

          1. So be it, Chief. Here’s the thing, though: If Dr. Christine Blasey Ford is a lying liar whom The Clintons hired to conduct a political hit on Kavanaugh, then how, exactly, would the leaking of Ford’s confidential letter be a violation of the confidentiality of the alleged survivor of an alleged sexual assault? And what law was supposed to protect Dr. Ford’s confidentiality, anyhow? And since the leak of the confidential letter did not directly disclose Dr. Ford’s name and identity, how else did the leak of that confidential letter violate the confidentiality of the alleged survivor of an alleged sexual assault? And given that Dr. Ford disclosed her own name and identity to The WaPo, how can the leaker of the confidential letter be locked up for . . . what crime, exactly?

            I get that the donnybrook over the allegation against Kavanaugh would not have ensued had Dr. Ford’s confidential letter not been leaked. But I don’t get how the leaking of the letter was a crime that needs to be investigated and the leaker punished. If the alleged survivor of an alleged sexual assault publicly discloses her own name and identity, then why should her self-forsaken confidentiality protect her alleged assailant?

            1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – whoever released that letter did so in violation of Senate rules and that needs to be investigated. Rumor has it that the FBI says that Chuckie Schumer and/or his office leaked it. Remember Booker’s Spartacus moment? He had an Ethic violation filed against him for that.

  2. CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN HOST: Last night, President Trump had a sort of ceremony for now Justice Kavanaugh at the White House, and he apologized on behalf the American people for the immense amount of pain and harm that he said that the judge had been put through by this system. What do you make of that?
    HILLARY CLINTON: White women. All women went for me.”


    All women?!?!? 53% of women voted for Trump.

    CNN’s Amanpour didnt bat an eye at Shillary’s “all women” response irrespective of the disngenious question she asked Shill.

    Heck, LOCK THEM ALL UP! Save America from the commies

    1. “Heck, LOCK THEM ALL UP! Save America from the commies” -Raquel

      “Commies”? “Lock them all up”??

      Get a grip, Raquel.

      (And I’m not a Hillary supporter.)

  3. “At a time when Republicans are being shot, stabbed, doxxed, beaten, mailed powder, run out of restaurants, and sent death threats, Hillary Clinton urges Democrats to be even more uncivil. What an irresponsible statement. Every Democrat should denounce.” US Senator Bill Cassidy, MD

    Trump is doing the right thing. None on the Left will decry Hillary’s insane comments. The Left have been using violence against Republicans for years with blessings from the MSM. Reps need to up their game immediately.

  4. Maybe Diane F. and RBG can hang with each other at the assisted living center.

  5. Hilary, “The time for civility is over”. Isn’t she a little late on this one.

  6. “Republican senators like Lindsey Graham have publicly stated that they do not believe that Feinstein would intentionally leak such information.”

    This from a tenured professor. You arent gullible, JT, so youre probably pretending to be clueless which we all know you are not

  7. It is ingenious and a testimony of how driven Trump is that he holds national rallies prior to elections to do what neither Hillary, Obama, Schumer, Pelosi nor the news media can do: draw thousands of prospective voters. He is far more popular than all of those eunuchs combined

    I hated Trump prior to the presidential election up until the Kavanaugh hearings but now, as an immigrant, dark skinned, lesbian, I think he is the instrument our nation needs to lock them all up, though that would cost taxpayers money. A rope and tree would be more cost effective 🧑🏽 🏳️‍🌈

  8. At least lock her up still implies some due process. She would have to go through the system first.
    It is more unseemly that it is worrisome.
    Lindsey Graham’s opinion notwithstanding, it is highly plausible that DiFi was behind the leak. Bear in mind that Sebate rules forbid besmirching the character of a fellow Senator. Absent proof, Graham has no choice but to give her the benefit of the doubt.

    1. Is it fair to verbally attack a mentally dysfunctional person if they inherited $400 million + and managed to become the US President? Professor Turley said, “I have been critical of President Donald Trump’s rhetoric.” Is it fair to say that about a mentally dysfunctional person?

      Using derogatory language about a mentally dysfunctional person seems to give that person credibility. He needs to be removed from public office, but not demeaned for his lack of normal brain function.

      1. Sam – if Trump has ADD, then you are screwing with the Americans with Disabilities Act. It would be illegal to remove him from office for something that fell under his disability.

        1. Would it, then, also be illegal under The ADA to remove a paraplegic from the starting QB position of an NFL foobaw team?

          (See reduction ad absurdum straw-man variety.)

          1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – if you made a quad a quarterback on a NFL team and then was “surprised” he couldn’t pass the ball, and tried to fire him then yes, the ADA would kick in.

  9. Are you sure that wasn’t Feinsteins own leftist lefty’s chanting “lock her up” for not wearing a black hoodie and mask at the confirmation and setting Kavanaughs truck on fire in the Supreme Court parking garage afterwards?

    1. Kavanaugh doesn’t drive a truck. He drives a yellow convertible with “Rehobeth Beach” and “Party Like it’s 1984” bumperstickers; puke stains on the carpet and empty beer cans rattling around on the back seat. 🤮

  10. Trump’s a populist at a campaign rally. It’s what populists do. Rattle the establishment cages. And he’s right, Feinstein’s body language and disengenuous questioning of her staff in front of the committee was farcical. “I never asked my staff, but see I just did and they said ‘no.’ And oops I did ask them earlier but I had forgotten (silly old me) and they know best. See people put on the spot never lie or work behind my back in what they think are my best interests but really just further their power grabbing agenda. Where’s my Geritol?”

    See the lie in gorgeous technicolor::

        1. Woopi – from what I understand from SS reports, Hillary is the physical abuser in that relationship. Bill would have to pay to have someone else beat her. 😉

  11. JT writes that “( Feinstein turned to staffers and asked them if they leaked the letter and then treated the matter as closed)”.
    It made me wonder if she had previously asked her staff if any of them were Chinese spys, then treated the matter as closed when they all said “no”.

  12. Once again, the President’s his own worst enemy at these rallies and on Twitter by dropping to the level of his detractors. I understand why he does it – it’s got to be frustrating to have your enemies exploit a captive electronic media and film celebrities against you. But it’s a losing game. You can’t out-fart a skunk.

  13. Bizarre to have a president having rallies every week! How much is that costing the tax payers? Don the Con is still resonating with his most stupid base. Feinschwein should be investigated for her Chinese spy chauffeur.

    1. Spiked – depending on the number of rallies Trump goes to, he costs us the same money that Obama cost for two midterms while he was President. Obama was very mobile during the election season. BTW, there is a formula for what to charge the campaign and what the taxpayers’ pay. The President is required to take Air Force One because of the communications connections and Secret Service, etc., so there is that.

    1. I wouldn’t call anyone “stupid” when it is obvious that they are missing important brain function. He would not be a danger to himself or others if he were removed from the public stage. We need to have compassion for those who are mentally dysfunctional.

      1. Chris P. Bacon / Sam can’t help himself from demonstrating the Dunning-Kruger effect every time he posts.

        1. It took you too long to figure that one out, Tabarrok.

          Did you know that Late4Dinner is one of Tabarrok’s sock-puppets? It’s true. I swear. Squeeky Fromm Girl Reporter told me so. And she ought to know. Because she’s one of Tabarrok’s sock-puppets, too. OMG. What’s it mean? A=B; B=C; C=A. What’s it mean? Somebody make it stop. Please!

              1. That’s so true. And yet, some socks just won’t fit. Take a look at the “Anonymous” immediately below. That can’t be our beloved Elaine anonymous.

  14. Feinstein had the letter and not Trump, therefore is not a personal attack. The Democrats attack Trump with Impeachment & fake news. The Democrats attack Trump’s supporters with violence, vulgar & offensive language and you do not condone their violent behavior😖😤😵

  15. It’s more chilling especially for a former professional soldier to hear those on the left openly chanting for a revolt or a coup by any means especially knowing it’s people like me now on active duty that will have to fix bayonets.

    If a little chanting works to send a psychological message I have no problem with that. Those who have never had to engage in the real world often tend to forget someone has to sort out your little messes on a world wide basis.

    But only one carries the importance of the one and only one mentioned in our Oath of Office. I have the advantage of being trained for those eventualities. But if the (primarily) left can send us out to kill don’t expect us to be shy about engaging the same type of enemies where ever they me be found.

    That little bit of chanting from our side and the sounds of weapons being loaded and the hiss of gas being released more often than not replaces the use of a bullet. We don’t need another Kent State with untrained reservists. Better a few anti fadas etc. than a few misguided unprincipled but still citizens.

    Sorry I can’t agree with inexperienced comments That level was reached and ran over a long time ago. By people who other people think of as leaders but in actuality are only legislators. And generally without the support of the citizens.

  16. Rumors are that Chuckie Schumer leaked the letter, but who gave the letter to Chuckie? DiFi!!! Payback is a b*tch!

    1. Only if DiFi gave it to Schumer with the understanding or expectation that he would release it. If she gave it to him for informational purposes only, then he burned her.

      1. Kitty Wampus – my understanding is that only the Democrats saw or had copies of the letter prior to the confrontation hearing.

    2. What law did the leaker of the confidential letter violate? Did the leaker of the confidential letter publicly disclose the name and identity of the letter’s author? The author of the confidential letter testified that she disclosed her name and identity to the Washington Post because press reporters had started showing up outside her home and at her workplace. If the author of the confidential letter is also, as some claim (but not me), a lying liar whose allegation is false and a fabricated hoax, then how would any rape shield law or other such claim of confidentiality have been violated by whoever leaked the confidential letter? Are The Republicans sure–really sure–that they want to exploit the specter of rape shield laws supposedly having been violated so as to pursue a vendetta against a supposedly false accuser for the sake restoring the reputation and good name of the supposedly innocent man against whom that supposedly false accusation had been alleged?

      1. The last I heard, rape shield laws were supposed to protect the survivors of sexual assault against their alleged assailant. The idea that Republicans want to exploit rape shield laws to settle scores with the survivors of sexual assault is fundamentally FUBAR. But then, that is the way Trump rolls–fundamentally FUBAR.

      2. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – you would have to ask the SJC what rule(s) were broken. As has been stated by many, this was a “job interview” not a court case, so I do not see any shield law kicking in. BTW, I do not remember Chrissy saying he even got to first base, much less that he raped her.

        1. Senate rules were broken? A woman sends a letter to her own U. S. Representative, who forwards that woman’s letter to the woman’s own U. S. Senator, who forwards that woman’s letter to the FBI. Someone (“?”) leaks the woman’s letter setting the press hounds on the trail of the woman’s confidential identity. The press hounds show up at the woman’s workplace. The press hounds show up outside the woman’s home. The woman decides publicly to disclose her own identity to The WaPo and . . . Senate rules were broken?

          Out of curiosity, are the Senate rules whatever Trump says the Senate rules are? Are the Senate rules whatever McConnell says the Senate rules are? Are the Senate Judiciary Committee rules whatever Grassley says they are?

          You do understand that the confidentiality of the survivor of a sexual assault is her own confidentiality to do with as she pleases. Don’t you?

          Do you really want Trump running around the country telling the survivors of sexual assault that their very own “confidentiality” is really, actually “his own confidentiality”? Where was the Non-Disclosure Agreement that Kavanaugh had with Dr. Christine Blasey Ford? Where was Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s signature on that NDA with Kavanaugh? Are both of those non-existent things in the rules of the U. S. Senate? Or are they merely so many more figments of Trump’s and his supporters’ febrile imaginations? How the bejesus are you going to keep control of The Senate campaigning on such farcical phantasms? Pshaw!

          1. L4Yoga enables David Benson, R. Lien and Marky Mark Mark – Chrissy may or may not have been a “survivor” of a sexual attack, however, Brett Kavanaugh was not involved. She lied and prevaricated her way through that whole hearing. She perjured herself a couple of times. PERJURED!!!! And she manipulated her entire opening statement with her pretend little girl voice. See Mandy at Body Language Ghost for a body language dissection of her opening statement. See Rachel Mitchell’s report for a legal dissection of her entire performance. And as someone from the theatre “performance” is the word I use because that is what it was, a performance. Now, on the small screen she fooled some of the people, but I have a 70″ screen, so when you try to cry and no tears appears, it really shows up.

            I also have a theory about why her glasses were so cloudy. You could just barely see her eyes, but not clearly. Hence, when she supposedly cried, we would not notice that there were not real tears or even fake tears.

Comments are closed.