An Eye Witness Report from the 6-2-2016 Trump Rally in San Jose

This is from Trump event attendee Karen Powers:

As a Trump supporter, I was there, in San Jose, attending the Trump event on June 2.
The Trump event attendees were forced to walk past the protesters afterward, after the event was over, to get to their cars. Broad areas of sidewalks and streets, that were not blockaded before the event started, were blockaded by barriers after the event ended, and standing in front of those barriers were lines of individual police officers telling Trump event attendees what route to follow to get to their vehicles.
I had parked in a parking garage right next door to the event. Before the event, an easy walk to the event, after event over, had to square 4 blocks of sidewalk lined with protesters who somehow knew the exact route that Trump supporters/event attendees had to walk, and were waiting for them.
Frankly, it was pretty obvious that either law enforcement personnel or the mayors office, someone in the know, had told the protesters where the Trump supporters would be forced to walk after the event. Attendees only went where law enforcement officers told them to go in order to get to our cars. We followed their instructions. The protesters knew, seemed well informed, of the direction where Trump supporters were going to be heading even before we exited the event, and protesters lined that walking route as a result, literally laying in wait where no law enforcement was present.
There was an intent to force the supporters and protesters together. There was no intent to keep them apart.
Trump supporters exiting the event were literally set up like rats in a maze, forced to follow a prescribed set of boundaries, which led directly to the protesters and not away from them.
The press got their story but the clash was completely avoidable. It was created by intention and by design.

Let’s be really clear about the implications of this report. These rioters were acting as an official arm of the Democratic Party controlled San Jose city government in suppressing the civil rights of Americans. The presidential election in November 2016 is no longer about “Trump” or “Hillary”.

It is about whether we will retain American political freedom.

29 thoughts on “An Eye Witness Report from the 6-2-2016 Trump Rally in San Jose”

  1. Electoral politics are only considered valid and legitimate when all parties involved agree to and follow the same rules. If one side or another is not bound by those rules, especially if they substitute force for eliciting the consent of the governed through previously agreed political means; electoral politics have failed and the social contract based on them is void.

    Electoral politics are not the only form of politics, and they will be replaced by more primitive forms until a balance is re-established.

    Der Krieg ist eine bloße Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln. — Karl von Clausewitz.

    Subotai Bahadur

  2. This was a setup. The Mayor is a Hillary supporter and has blamed Trump for the violence. I assume no protestors will be punished.

    I seem to remember that San Jose tried to either declare bankruptcy or modify pensions a few years ago.

    It didn’t work and they are stuck with fat unions salaries and benefits. The next downturn, which might be next year, will probably see bankruptcy.

    All of the contracts, which cover about 2,000 city employees, include 3 percent raises over a span of two or three years. The contracts include a one-time lump payment of 1 percent of an employee’s pay. The payout cannot be counted toward employee pensions.

    Earlier in the week, an agreement reached with IAFF San Jose Firefighters Local 230 will give firefighters more than 14 percent in ongoing raises over a span of three years. It’s the first raise for firefighters in seven years.

    Mayor Sam Liccardo said an improving economy has allowed the city to restore salaries of employees who took 10 percent pay cuts amid the recession in 2011.

    That is the Hillary Mayor.

    San Jose is weird anyway. It was the local newspaper that spread the story of the CIA creating the crack epidemic in the 80s.

  3. Why can’t, for example, the women cornered, egged, etc., bring suit against the City of San Jose, the mayor, the Police Department and its chief for violating her civil rights? After all, doesn’t the First Amendment guarantee the right of freedom of speech and PEACEABLE [emphasis mine] assembly? The action, or lack thereof, by the San Jose authorities seems to me would be grounds for such a legal action. I am not a lawyer, so I don’t know if what I suggest is feasible. If it is, I think it would be a political coup for Trump to contact the women and offer to fund her suit. Now wouldn’t that drive the liberal phonies crazy?

  4. >Life in a one party state. Regardless of which party.
    Right, right. This happens all the time in Texas, and it happens in Montana and Idaho, and it happened in California when it was a red state. Not. Spare us the world-weary ‘pox on all their houses’ line. It is an intellectual and moral cop-out.

    > It was the local newspaper that spread the story of the CIA creating the crack epidemic in the 80s.
    No, that was the San Jose Merc discovering the CIA using drug money from pot sales to fund its ops in Central America. Which it was.

  5. discovering the CIA using drug money from pot sales to fund its ops in Central America. Which it was.

    No, that was a sensational allegation from newspaper that makes such allegations fairly frequently, including the crack allegation.

    The facts are considerably less sensational.

    The Iran Contra thing was real and Reagan got the Saudis to help fund the Contras but the drug story is fake.

    Standard leftist BS.

  6. I absolutely agree this was orchestrated by the Democrat Party in California and the media were waiting to play the part in the charade. The unionized police – at least the leadership – were part of the planning for the setup.

  7. I have a friend who works in the pension industry, and he’s kept me informed about San Jose’s pension woes. Their benefit package is ridiculous.

    Police officers can retire with 90% pay starting at age 50 and 25 years of service. They have to pay two police forces. One with cops who actually work and a bigger one consisting of retirees they will have to pay for decades.

    The police union recruits and funnels its members to other cities to keep the staffing low. This preserves the higher pay for the pensioners and the few preferred members it chooses to stay. The result is a small force of political operatives. Crime rate is up, and so are political shenanigans apparently.

  8. The police union recruits and funnels its members to other cities to keep the staffing low.

    More details please.

  9. “San Jose’s pension woes. ”

    A previous Mayor about 2008 tried to break the pension contract and may have even gone to BK. I tried to find a link but Google, as usual with political topics they don’t like, buries it.

    No doubt the unions pushed this guy’s election and are being rewarded.

    Back scratching going on and Trump rally-goers are left out.

  10. Mike,

    You’re thinking of Mayor Chuck Reed. He served from 2007 to 2014. He took over after the previous corrupt mayor was caught kicking back city money to the Teamsters




    In an ad in Sunday’s Mercury News, the Austin Police Department announced it was hosting two recruiting sessions in San Jose. After stopping by The National Hispanic University on Tuesday morning, the Texans moseyed over to the POA shop to hold court for three afternoon hours. POA President Jim Unland isn’t shy about voicing his distaste for Mayor Chuck Reed and just about every other pay cut and pension reform advocate on the City Council, but helping facilitate the exodus of police officers from the ranks—34 retirements in 2012 and 141 resignations since January 2011—seems counterintuitive. “This just proves they care more about their paychecks than people’s safety in San Jose,” says one local political consultant.

  11. “You’re thinking of Mayor Chuck Reed.”

    Yup. He is a Democrat, too. USAF service in Vietnam or the era, at least.

  12. Anyone remember the “protesters” and the construction workers from the Vietnam era? This seems to be a replay of sorts. Deliberately expose the groups to each other until the “right wingers” fight back and assault the “labor and human rights” groups. DOJ steps in. Something had to be done.

  13. To say the least that story is very disturbing. When the police have no interest in keeping the peace….

    Some wagon made the observation today that these “protesters” had no interest in bothering the tens of thousands of bikers who were there for trumpet in DC.

    Wonder why?

  14. I apologize for the typos above. This voice transcription on the iPhone certainly has its pluses and minuses. It’s too bad that we can’t edit our posts for a few minutes once we’ve submitted it.


  15. What I don’t get is why the Democrats want a replay of ’68? Doesn’t any one with influence among the Democrats remember who won that election?

  16. Mike K Says:
    June 4th, 2016 at 2:59 pm

    The best place for facts about the CIA is of course the CIA. Ya. Right.

    Or you can try this: The Trillion Dollar A Year Scam

    Which hardly mentions the CIA. It instead looks at banks. And money laundering. The CIA connection? HSBC bank. You might want to look at the history of that one.

  17. The San Jose Police Department was not indifferent and incompetent here. As with the Chicago PD concerning a Trump rally earlier this year, it intentionally violated its standard procedures and gave orders about event setup so as to maximize the vulnerability of Trump supporters to physical attack. Then it provided those setup orders to anti-Trump organizers so they could exploit the vulnerabilities the San Jose PD orders had created.

    This is commonly called a “conspiracy to violate federal civil rights”.

  18. There was no riot. It was an organized ambush in which the San Jose Police Department planned and set up the ambush.

  19. Oops.

    Has anyone else noticed that Trent’s link is not actually to any comment whatever from “Karen Powers”, but only to someone who claims to be quoting what he saw “Karen Powers” write?

    I’ve submitted different phrases from the account to search engines, but I cannot find a source to a direct comment from “Karen Powers” — all I can find is “the following is from Karen Powers”.

    Some attribute “Karen Powers'” (detailed, horrifying) report to a comment left at the Mercury News website. I can’t find it.

    Particularly considering the gravity: where in the World Wide Web is the actual comment/report? And where is the substantiation from other witnesses?

    I would appreciate having a few more eyes on this issue.

  20. John K,

    E-mails are not available for free commercial internet search engines to find.

    As for the rest, the map of the route the SJPD forced the Trump rally attendees to use leaving the eveny is at the following tweet-link.^tfw

    It fits “Karen Powers” description of events, those of others whose tweets were posted up thread and Tom Holsinger’s description of the SJPD’s actions.

    American freedom is at stake at the hands of Democrat police unions, mayors and their “Klan with a Tan” rent-a-mobs.

    This will not end well.

  21. (1) How will Trump stop this horrific local-government abuse, if elected?

    (2) How is it that he is not talking about it in these terms?

  22. If Trump should be elected President it might not be a bad idea to zero out the federal funding that San Jose, Chicago and other cities where bad behavior of this sort was encouraged and let it be known that it was precisely because they could not or would not keep the bad behavior of the mobs in check that they are being punished in this regard. Limit it only to cities where the leftist mobs were a problem and I suspect that the mobs will no longer be encouraged. Mind you, this form of payback carries it’s own problems with it but I am still beginning to think it might not be a bad idea. >_>

Comments are closed.