Liberal Media Continues To Turn Against 'AntiFa': "This Is Food For The Adversary"

Yesterday, the Washington Post surprised readers by turning against black-clad “Antifa” protesters who violently assaulted no fewer than five conservative demonstrators at a rally in Berkeley, Calif. on Sunday. Previously, the US capital’s paper of record and its mainstream media cohorts had focused their scorn on violence committed by conservative protesters, particularly in the aftermath of the tragic car-attack in Charlottesville, Va. earlier this month.

But as it turns out, WaPo was ahead of the curve. Because today, both the Los Angeles Times AND The Atlantic published similarly scathing attacks on the black-clad demonstrators, portraying members of Antifa as brutal thugs who routinely gang up on overmatched supporters of President Donald Trump at events like Sunday’s anti-Marxist rally in Berkeley. Violent confrontations instigated by AntiFa have also occurred at rallies and events stretching from Portland, Ore. to Washington D.C. However, before this week, accounts like these were mostly confined to “conservative” media like the Daily Caller and Washington Times.

The LATimes' report focuses on how Antifa has alienated other leftist groups, who object to its violent tactics. One of the individuals quoted in the story, Todd Gitlin, founder of Students for a Democratic Society, one of the original anti-Vietnam War groups, blamed Antifa for sullying the left’s reputation and accused them of being “food for the adversary.”

…first, the headline…

…now, the story...

“But as the protest got underway, some of those in masks would resort to mob violence, attacking a small showing of supporters of President Trump and others they accused, sometimes inaccurately, of being white supremacists or Nazis.


The graphic videos of those attacks have spurred soul-searching within the leftist activist movement in the Bay Area and beyond. Emotions remain raw in the wake of this month’s white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., which left one woman dead and dozens injured.”




‘This is food for the adversary,’ said sociologist Todd Gitlin, a founder of Students for a Democratic Society, which organized the first national protests against the Vietnam War. He pointed out that violent acts committed by a few will almost always hijack the narrative of the entire protest, and that it is happening now should be no surprise.”

The Atlantic continued with a more comprehensive accounting of Antifa’s sins, beginning with the protester who famously punched Richard Spencer in the face on inauguration day…

“In Washington, D.C., the response to that question centers on how members of Congress can oppose Trump’s agenda, on how Democrats can retake the House of Representatives, and on how and when to push for impeachment. But in the country at large, some militant leftists are offering a very different answer. On Inauguration Day, a masked activist punched the white-supremacist leader Richard Spencer. In February, protesters violently disrupted UC Berkeley’s plans to host a speech by Milo Yiannopoulos, a former editor. In March, protesters pushed and shoved the controversial conservative political scientist Charles Murray when he spoke at Middlebury College, in Vermont.”


...responses sometimes spill blood. Since antifa is heavily composed of anarchists, its activists place little faith in the state, which they consider complicit in fascism and racism. They prefer direct action: They pressure venues to deny white supremacists space to meet. They pressure employers to fire them and landlords to evict them. And when people they deem racists and fascists manage to assemble, antifa’s partisans try to break up their gatherings, including by force.

Such tactics have elicited substantial support from the mainstream left.




Antifa believes it is pursuing the opposite of authoritarianism. Many of its activists oppose the very notion of a centralized state. But in the name of protecting the vulnerable, antifascists have granted themselves the authority to decide which Americans may publicly assemble and which may not. That authority rests on no democratic foundation. Unlike the politicians they revile, the men and women of antifa cannot be voted out of office. Generally, they don’t even disclose their names.




Revulsion, fear, and rage are understandable. But one thing is clear. The people preventing Republicans from safely assembling on the streets of Portland may consider themselves fierce opponents of the authoritarianism growing on the American right. In truth, however, they are its unlikeliest allies.

Antifa has until now effectively enjoyed immunity from criticism in the mainstream press.

But the first inklings of a sea-change in public opinion emerged over the weekend, when one local reporter shared his story about being harassed and attacked by members of Antifa at Sunday’s rally. His remarks appear to have struck a chord...

KTVU anchor Frank Somerville, a well-known Bay Area TV personality, took to Facebook this weekend to share what happened to him when he took a day trip to Berkeley on Sunday. Somerville – hardly a conservative – explained how the Antifa protesters threatened to destroy his phone and needlessly demeaned and attacked him for the simple act of trying to document a rally taking place on public property.

In response, Somerville declared that he “experienced hate first hand today... It came from these people dressed in all black at a protest in Berkeley.”

“Ironically they were all chanting about NO hate.


Some had shields and gloves. Some had helmets. Some had gas masks.”

Anyone who’s been paying attention has been presented with many examples of Antifa’s violent thuggery. Now, it’s almost encouraging to hear that the MSM at least has enough sense not to fall on its sword protecting a bunch of violent, embittered hoodlums.

Like they say, three’s a trend…


MarsInScorpio MisterMousePotato Wed, 08/30/2017 - 00:30 Permalink

RESEARCH MEMO SENT TO NY DAILY NEWS Virginia and New York, as do many other states and localities, have a statute against wearing a mask in public except under certain precise circumstances.  Breaking the Virginia statute is a Class 6 Felony. These laws were passed to end the practice of the KKK wearing its hoods.The Antifa Black Shirts committed a Class 6 Felony by wearing masks in Charlottesville. Because this is a felony violation, police are obligated to order them to remove the masks, or begin making arrests immediately. Law enforcement officers do not have the choice to stand down in the witness of a felony. Except for special circumstances that do not apply in the Charlottesville incident (drug stings, infiltrating criminal organizations, and so on), it is illegal for LEOs to witness a felony and do nothing to stop the felony and arrest the perpetrator of the felony.Had the Virginia statute been vigorously enforced, it's reasonable to believe there would've been no violence in Charlottesville because so many Antifa would have either disbursed, or been arrested - unable to commit their violence.Just as with the Klan, the mask empowers the Antifas to commit violent crimes without concern about being identified and prosecuted.In addition , it's likely the mayor committed two felonies in ordering the police to stand down: 1) He facilitated the commission of a felony by allowing the Antifas to wear their masks in violation of the statute, and 2) he obstructed justice by interfering in the execution of the statute. His order was never an option; he made himself criminally liable by issuing his illegal order - which, because it is an illegal order, the police are legally obligated to ignore. It's time for a national law modeled on the Virginia and New York statutes. Take away the masks, and you'll see a tremendous reduction in violence, just as it did to the Klan-violence when the laws were enacted.BTW, these laws have been tested and were found constitutional because they address ending violence, terror, fear, and anarchy in society.-30-Here is a copy and citation of the Virginia statute; reference to the NY statute from the National Lawyers Guild NYC Chapter follows. The still-standing SCOTUS decision on teh constitutionality of Criminal Anarchy, and Florida's model statute follows after the legal citations for anti-mask laws:VIRGINIA Section 18.2-422: Prohibition of wearing of masks in certain places; exceptions.It shall be unlawful for any person over sixteen years of age while wearing any mask, hood or other device whereby a substantial portion of the face is hidden or covered so as to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in any public place, or upon any private property in this Commonwealth without first having obtained from the owner or tenant thereof consent to do so in writing. However, the provisions of this section shall not apply to persons (i) wearing traditional holiday costumes; (ii) engaged in professions, trades, employment or other activities and wearing protective masks which are deemed necessary for the physical safety of the wearer or other persons; (iii) engaged in any bona fide theatrical production or masquerade ball; or (iv) wearing a mask, hood or other device for bona fide medical reasons upon the advice of a licensed physician or osteopath and carrying on his person an affidavit from the physician or osteopath specifying the medical necessity for wearing the device and the date on which the wearing of the device will no longer be necessary and providing a brief description of the device. The violation of any provisions of this section shall constitute a Class 6 felony.NEW YORK Penal Law 240.35 (4):Being masked or in any manner disguised by unusual or unnatural attire or facial alteration, loiters, remains or congregates in a public place with other persons so masked or disguised, or knowingly permits or aids persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place; except that such conduct is not unlawful when it occurs in connection with a masquerade party or like entertainment if, when such entertainment is held in a city which has promulgated regulations in connection with such affairs, permission is first obtained from the police or other appropriate authorities; (National Lawyers Guild NYC Chapter paper on the anti-mask law)FLORIDA STATUTES876.11 Public place defined.—For the purpose of ss. 876.11-876.21 the term “public place” includes all walks, alleys, streets, boulevards, avenues, lanes, roads, highways, or other ways or thoroughfares dedicated to public use or owned or maintained by public authority; and all grounds and buildings owned, leased by, operated, or maintained by public authority.History.—s. 1, ch. 26542, 1951.876.12 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on public way.—No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, enter upon, or be or appear upon any lane, walk, alley, street, road, highway, or other public way in this state.History.—s. 2, ch. 26542, 1951.876.13 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on public property.—No person or persons shall in this state, while wearing any mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, enter upon, or be, or appear upon or within the public property of any municipality or county of the state.History.—s. 3, ch. 26542, 1951.876.14 Wearing mask, hood, or other device on property of another.—No person or persons over 16 years of age shall, while wearing a mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, demand entrance or admission or enter or come upon or into the premises, enclosure, or house of any other person in any municipality or county of this state.History.—s. 4, ch. 26542, 1951.876.15 Wearing mask, hood, or other device at demonstration or meeting.—No person or persons over 16 years of age, shall, while wearing a mask, hood, or device whereby any portion of the face is so hidden, concealed, or covered as to conceal the identity of the wearer, hold any manner of meeting, make any demonstration upon the private property of another unless such person or persons shall have first obtained from the owner or occupier of the property his or her written permission to so do.History.—s. 5, ch. 26542, 1951.876.155 Applicability; ss. 876.12-876.15.—The provisions of ss. 876.12-876.15 apply only if the person was wearing the mask, hood, or other device:(1) With the intent to deprive any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws or for the purpose of preventing the constituted authorities of this state or any subdivision thereof from, or hindering them in, giving or securing to all persons within this state the equal protection of the laws;(2) With the intent, by force or threat of force, to injure, intimidate, or interfere with any person because of the person’s exercise of any right secured by federal, state, or local law or to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from exercising any right secured by federal, state, or local law;(3) With the intent to intimidate, threaten, abuse, or harass any other person; or(4) While she or he was engaged in conduct that could reasonably lead to the institution of a civil or criminal proceeding against her or him, with the intent of avoiding identification in such a proceeding.History.—s. 1, ch. 81-249; s. 1416, ch. 97-102.876.16 Sections 876.11-876.15; exemptions.—The following persons are exempted from the provisions of ss. 876.11-876.15:(1) Any person or persons wearing traditional holiday costumes;(2) Any person or persons engaged in trades and employment where a mask is worn for the purpose of ensuring the physical safety of the wearer, or because of the nature of the occupation, trade, or profession;(3) Any person or persons using masks in theatrical productions, including use in Gasparilla celebrations and masquerade balls;(4) Persons wearing gas masks prescribed in emergency management drills and exercises.History.—s. 6, ch. 26542, 1951; s. 46, ch. 83-334.876.21 Sections 876.11-876.20; penalty.—Any person or persons violating ss. 876.11-876.20, except as provided in s. 876.18, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.History.—s. 11, ch. 26542, 1951; s. 1142, ch. 71-136; s. 4, ch. 91-83.SCOTUS DECISION ON CRIMINAL ANARCHY; FLORIDA STATUTE1) 876.02 Criminal anarchy, Communism, and other specified doctrines; prohibitions.—Any person who:(1) By word of mouth or writing advocates, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, or propriety of overthrowing or overturning existing forms of constitutional government by force or violence; of disobeying or sabotaging or hindering the carrying out of the laws, orders, or decrees of duly constituted civil, naval, or military authorities; or by the assassination of officials of the Government of the United States or of the state, or by any unlawful means or under the guidance of, or in collaboration with, officials, agents, or representatives of a foreign state or an international revolutionary party or group; or(2) Prints, publishes, edits, issues, or knowingly circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any book, paper, document, or written or printed matter in any form, containing or advocating, advising, or teaching the doctrine that constitutional government should be overthrown by force, violence, or any unlawful means; or(3) Openly, willfully and deliberately urges, advocates, or justifies by word of mouth or writing the assassination or unlawful killing or assaulting of any official of the Government of the United States or of this state because of his or her official character, or any other crime, with intent to teach, spread, or advocate the propriety of the doctrines of criminal anarchy, criminal Communism, criminal Naziism, or criminal Fascism; or(4) Organizes or helps to organize or becomes a member of any society, group, or assembly of persons formed to teach or advocate such doctrines; or(5) Becomes a member of, associated with or promotes the interest of any criminal anarchistic, Communistic, Naziistic or Fascistic organization, or helps to organize or becomes a member of or affiliated with any subsidiary organization or associated group of persons who advocates, teaches, or advises the principles of criminal anarchy, criminal Communism, criminal Naziism or criminal Fascism; shall be guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

In reply to by MisterMousePotato

Cardinal Fang MarsInScorpio Wed, 08/30/2017 - 07:16 Permalink

There are many laws and circumstances that prohibit masks. I remember when I was in Fairbanks, Alaska in the winter (-50•) and every public establishment had signs about removing your face mask upon entering. I had the distinct feeling in some locations that if you persisted too long in wearing a mask, you might not live too long.

Another scenario is I wonder what would happen if these Antifa thugs went towards a police station wearing those masks. Not sure a stand down order from the mayor would stop the cops from flipping out.

I really think the turn away from Antifa is rooted in some info that this was a set up and the media wants to distance themselves from the legal aspect when this shit winds up in court over violence, bodily injury and property damage.

In reply to by MarsInScorpio

Theosebes Goodfellow overbet Tue, 08/29/2017 - 21:44 Permalink

Missing from this suddenly wonderfully insightful reportage by the leftist MSM is the investigation into who or what drives these fascist "antifas". They are delightfully incurious as to the forces and instigators behind these terrorists. None of these "prestigious" news organizations have interviewed any of the 13 Berkeley thugs arrested for their savage, unprovoked attacks on conservatives.
Oh, the hypocrisy!

In reply to by overbet

gammab0y WTFRLY Tue, 08/29/2017 - 21:44 Permalink

If they're clever in a Trumpian fashion, they can actually use Antifa as the foil for a color revolution.  Ask for the same things from a new organization,  but dress it with "and we reject the violence and tactics of Antifa".  All of a sudden the new org can ask for the same fringe things  as Antifa but look moderate at the same time.Its the kind of optics Trump favors...make your first offer bold (Antifa) so your real offer later seems mild in comparison.    

In reply to by WTFRLY

PrezTrump PrezTrump Tue, 08/29/2017 - 22:40 Permalink

Just a few weeks ago I was trolling wapo and they were all about antifa being the good guys.  People on board calling them freedom fighters.  No answers as to why they "support" free speech yet deny it for others.  No answers as to why they "don't hate" yet show up with sticks and bats.  Total hypocrites, every single one.

In reply to by PrezTrump

chubbar VWAndy Tue, 08/29/2017 - 21:28 Permalink

They figured out that it is making the left look like the fucking assholes that they are. To be clear, the leftys could give a shit about the violence or the shutting down of free speech. They only care about themselves and attempting to keep some semblance legitimacy, this is what the new move towards condemning antifa is about. It has nothing to do with the left all of a sudden discovering that antifa is denying free speech to nonviolent groups or anything of that nature. It's completely transparent and in my opinion, no one is going to buy it.

In reply to by VWAndy

overbet PrezTrump Tue, 08/29/2017 - 21:46 Permalink

Make sure you post like youre one of them, but extreme left. Make them question their own beliefs with your post by showing the liberal extreme point of view. I like to post something they all upvote and then later change the entire post to something completely different.  original post:Racist Trump is going to get us all killed.   edit after 50 upvotes: Isnt is clear to anyone who looks at IQ by race statistics that black poverty will never be fixed. 

In reply to by PrezTrump