Senior Delaware GOP Official Recieves Death Threat
I have just received an email sent to a Senior GOP Official (unnamed). The individual who sent the email signed his own name and used his own email account. The email is posted below:
“Subject: You deserve a bullet in the head!
Dear [Senior GOP Official],
It is one thing to have your country screwed over by socialists, it is far worse to be backstabbed by people pretending to be your friends.Political ass-kissing RINO’s like you deserve a bullet in the head.We will either rid the GOP of pieces of shit like you, or we will start a new ‘Common Sense Conservative’ party and render you all useless.”
The police are investigating this individual, and are taking the threat seriously.
Have we really come to this? I want my country back.
Isn’t that what the GOP calls a “2nd amendment solution?”
I wish that I were surprised, but I’m sure that it’s just a lone wolf or that the tree of liberty needs watering or something…
I wonder how many people have to die for Christine O’Donnell to be a Senator.
This ‘unhinged’ radical is probably a Tea-Party Express or O’Donnell operative. The reference in the e-mail to “Common Sense Conservative” Party gives it away. Besides, every 20th phrase that comes out of Sarah Palin’s mouth is “we need more ‘common-sense conservative solutions.'” Don’t believe me: the next time you hear Palin speak and utilize ‘conservative’ talking points, you’ll hear it. Ironically, you hear this phrase in the Tea Party Express TV ad that has been running lately bashing Castle.
Funny it happens the day after the Palin endorsement. There was always the aura of death threats hanging around the 2008 Palin rallies, remember?
This sounds about as realistic as the “death threats” that Markos Moulitsas gets emailed to him several times every week. I guess the police have to take it seriously if it’s reported to them, but it’s not something I would have reported, I don’t think.
Armed, angry, immature, and unhinged. That is the 9/12 “Patriots”. If you believe O’Donnell is the savior of America, and that you are on a Crusade to save America from traitors and communists who are “stealing” “your” country, involved in the Second American Revolution, then is it really much of a leap to real violence?
The words these folks used are filled with talk of violence and guns and revolution. For 99.9% of them it’s just talk, just hot air. but it only takes one or two that don’t get that, that want to play Lexington and Concord for real. And those people are out there, and the worst part is, they are intentionally getting them even more riled up.
I don’t agree Bill. Markos receives a lot of whacked-out emails but this one sounds like a direct threat – “you deserve a bullet to the head.”
Not to get into semantics, but that’s part of my point. “You deserve a bullet to the head” is an indirect statement. I’m not a psychology expert, but my (limited) understanding is that it would be a more serious threat if they were directly saying they were going to kill him. Somebody else might do it, and the sender could very well believe the target deserves that, but the sender doesn’t sound likely to do it him or herself. I especially think that because of the declaration of intent to start a rival party that renders the GOP useless. That’s not exactly a threatening statement of intent. To me, this sounds like pretty much the same hyperbole as Markos gets in his inbox. I don’t condone it, obviously, and I think the rhetoric is dangerous but I don’t think the sender would be planning to try to kill him. Again, I’m not an expert.
I would not laugh this off. These guys take pride in being violent lunatics
BTW this is the GOP is Mike Castle’s creation. His silence on the growing extremism abetted it.
I’m not laughing at anything. It’s bad, and I think people shouldn’t say stuff like that, but there are “death threats” and then there are death threats.
I realize you’re not laughing, Bill.
Here’s what worries me: O’Donnell supporters are 100% convinced she will win. If she doesn’t… they won’t believe it was a fair election – and they will identify who is to blame for “rigging” the election. Buckle up, I expect more of these sorts of letters.
Add to this all the video we’ve seen of O’Donnell supporters bad, bullying behavior. If I was the person who received this email I’d call the police ASAP!
True in every election these days: “Here’s what worries me: O’Donnell supporters are 100% convinced she will win. If she doesn’t… they won’t believe it was a fair election – and they will identify who is to blame for “rigging” the election. Buckle up, I expect more of these sorts of letters.”
Just part of the broader trend. When you live in a media-supported bubble/alternate universe, you think everyone shares your views (or at least a vast majority), so when you lose an election, it *must* have been rigged! See ACORN “scandal” etc. etc.
Also, I can see why the person might have called the police. Publicizing that fact, however, is trying to use the threats for political gain, in this context.
I wonder why a senior GOP person wants to make known to the liberal blogosphere, death threats directed to him?
That is hardly a threat. I do think the police need to investigate to see if the person has intentions to carry out that option. To say that it is unseemly, corrosive, and just plain wrong is to say the obvious. There is no place for that.
I wonder what would you guys say about some of the trash said about or sent to Christine. In the past, I have been subjected to harassment by the hard left. I have deleted jokes about rape. There are people who are wacked at least moment. They let their emotions get out of hand. There are some that are evil. Let the authorities determine which is which.
Here is a quick primer for you in hate speech and what qualifies:
from Virginia V Black:SCOTUS 2003
“‘True threats’ encompass those statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals. The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat. Rather, a prohibition on true threats protect(s) individuals from the fear of violence and from the disruption that fear engenders, in addition to protecting people from the possibility that the threatened violence will occur.”
so- just so we are clear – this is NOT protected 1st Ammendment speech – so David – you have a lot of nerve leaving a post about 5 guys in pickups with shotgums rounding up illegals in Georgetown – then defending Christine’s long lost honor
but Hypocracy is your stock in trade.
David, stuff about COD’s finances, habitual lying, delusions about being followed, etc., are fair game. Quite frankly, she makes it too easy. However, I don’t recall anyone here advocating her demise, nor would they encourage that kind of talk.
Oh and David:
here is yet another primer :
Bradenburg v Ohio SCOTUS 1969
“True threats are a category of speech that is not protected by the First Amendment.
an objective test asks whether a reasonable person would construe the defendant’s speech or statement as a threat, given the context in which it was made
The first is to ask whether a reasonable hearer of the statement who was not the intended target would interpret the statement as a threat
The second is to ask whether a reasonable speaker should have foreseen that his statement would be interpreted as a threat.
The third is to ask whether a reasonable recipient of the statement would interpret it as a threat.”
just a quick education………
Thanks, but I already know that. You prove my point. This obviously fails all 3 tests on its face. There is no threat of action even a veiled one. It is not matched with any action that could be threatening such as menecing or harassment. It is just borish. That is why I made my statement.
Nonetheless, as I said, the police should investigate to see if there is more to the story. Sometimes it is deeper than the surface statement. The context could be deeper.
As for your so called shotgun thing. That was roundly condemned. TW and I couldn’t condemn it by deleting it. There was no threat there either. The commenter wanted to go back to the posse days and claimed it would be under law enforcement. I thought it was way off, but that is the only way the toss them all out crowd can achieve that objective. There are not enough law enforcement officials to deport 12 million people.
I wanted people to think about the chaos that would develop and possible civil rights violations. So when I actually agree with you and confront in two different threads something I find disturbing, I am wrong. When I disagree, I am wrong.
You people are not serious debate opponents when you get silly.
Even with this, I agree that the comment merits investigation. I do not agree with blowing it up into a threat without the slightest evidence for political gamesmanship.
1. yup – you are an asshat with zero ability to read or interpert court decisions.
read the entire decisions – those where only the high points – but you were never one to do your homework.As evidenced by your love for O’Donnell.
2. the “so called shotgun thing?” so called?? that it happened is a fact – that you left it there, by default condoning vigilantisim is a fact – that comment was posted, screen shotted and put in the News Journal… so called?? really – that mistake will follow you forever
you however first put you head in the sand- I believe your post after it was about not wanting to know what Rick really meant by it – when that dumb-ass then fully explained it you still left it up
ONLY after that did you realise you where in deep dodo and tried to “walk it back”
the correct move would have been to immiediately delete it – just like you delete nasty (not threatening) posts about O’donnell – but you didn;t
you condoned violence against a specific ethnic group by allowing the post to remain on your site
but you delete immiediately uncomplementary posts about O’Donnell
your true colors and agenda are out there – you made a fatal mistake
game, set, match
Oh and the 3 prong test:
1. discusses the belief of a reasonable person – I would not characterize you as that
2. you are not the speaker as outlined in point 2 of the 3 prong test – therefore your opinion has no standing
3. you are not the intended target as outined in point 3 – therefore you opinion has no standing here either.
Obviously – the intended target reported it to the police – validating point 3
the speaker stated “You deserve a bullet in the head! and then “Political ass-kissing RINO’s like you deserve a bullet in the head.
We will either rid the GOP of pieces of shit like you….”
I am a reasonable person ( at least in my mind) and Pandora obviously saw it as a threat too as have others here – so there is the validation in point 1
until the sender is investigated point 2 is an open question…
but 2 out of 3 this early in the game is pretty good – and again for a final salvo remember:
“True threats’ encompass those statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals. The speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat. Rather, a prohibition on true threats protect(s) individuals from the fear of violence and from the disruption that fear engenders, in addition to protecting people from the possibility that the threatened violence will occur.”
game,set, match – again
This is a threat. The language is quite similar to the language that the American Nazi Hal Turner used in threatening Federal Judges when he wrote that they “deserve to be killed.” He was found guilty of threatening the judges in Federal Court.
in the 25 years I lived and was politically active as a liberal Dem in Sussex I never had any sort of an issue like this around me or anybody I can recall. I went into the lions den of WGOP every Friday for six years to do my schtick with Ron Letterman and while heated the debate was generally civil I have good friends who stood by me in my troubles who were and are rabid right wing R’s. I lament the loss of our ability to disagree agreeably.
When you say Senior Delaware official…that could mean one of the old fucks that run the party, no?