Patterico's Pontifications

8/9/2019

Fallout From Joaquin Castro’s Outing Of Trump Donors

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:06 am



[guest post by Dana]

I’ve posted a few times about Joaquin Castro’s risky stunt to shame Trump donors by releasing the names of 44 individuals who maxed out their contributions to the Trump campaign. While there have been no reports of anyone on the list having been physically harmed, there are reports that individuals on the list have indeed, been directly impacted by it. (Ed. Pre-emptive strike: Yes, I know that this is public information that anyone can access. However, Castro is an elected official who released the information to simultaneously advance his own political ambitions and agenda while shaming and intimidating donors. There is a built-in power imbalance to this, given Castro’s large platform and the vast number of people with whom he can share these names. It’s telling that he used his intimidation tactics on the vulnerable mom and pop donors and retirees, and not on the Big Money in politics.)

Harper Huddleston explained how his family has been impacted:

A San Antonio man was wrongly outed on Twitter as a donor to President Trump by Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro and said Friday the incident forced him to review emergency plans with his wife and three children.

Harper Huddleston said… that his name appeared on Castro’s list instead of the name of his retired father, who contributed to the Trump campaign. He said the mix-up was because they share the same first name, but have different middle names, though his father does not go by the name Harper.

Huddleston said he supports Trump and has contributed in the past to the mayoral campaign of Castro’s brother, Julian, who is now running for president. He said he was glad to have received the negative attention instead of his father, but… forced to go over emergency plans with his wife and children.

“We convened together as a family and talked about situational awareness, exit strategy, avoiding and exiting conflict, talked about staying low and close to home and just being at our very highest senses,” said Huddleston.

He also said that Castro’s stunt might backfire and end up motivating Trump supporters and “galvanize the interest and reinvigorate making America great again.”

Also, a business owner has been harassed and lost business as a result of being on the target list:

For many businesses, a sudden deluge of phone calls might signal an influx of new customers. But most of the 25 calls Justin Herricks received before noon on Thursday were from people who wanted to tell him he was a white supremacist for donating money to President Trump.

“I’ve had people say, ‘Hey, we were going to use you for business, but we found out you’re a racist,’” Mr. Herricks, the owner of Precision Pipe Rentals, an oil and gas services company in San Antonio, said in an interview. “‘We hope that you burn in hell and your business will go with you.’”

On the upside, Castro’s target list is indeed backfiring, given that some on the list are his, or his brother Julian Castro’s supporters. Uh, were their supporters:

In attempting to embarrass constituents who donated to President Trump, Texas congressman Joaquin Castro appears to have overlooked the fact that six of those he named also gave cash to him and his twin brother, 2020 Democrat Julián Castro.

[…]

A Washington Examiner review of Federal Elections Committee filings found three individuals on the list who gave $5,600 to Trump… and Joaquin Castro…

Another three individuals on the list told the Washington Examiner that they supported Julián Castro’s mayoral campaigns…

…“It is just amazing to me that he would do that,” said William Greehey, a philanthropist and former CEO of Valero Energy, who donated $5,000 to Joaquin Castro’s congressional campaign in 2013, covering the primary and general elections…Then he’s calling me a racist because I’m supporting Trump. I mean, this is just ridiculous.” said Greehey, who noted he started a $100 million homeless campus project that mostly serves Hispanic individuals. “There’s a lot of things you don’t like about the president and his tweeting, but here Castro is doing the same thing with his tweeting.”

Edward Steves, owner of a manufacturing firm that he said is the oldest company in San Antonio, told the Washington Examiner that he once hosted a fundraiser at his house that raised over $300,000 for Julián Castro’s mayoral campaign…

“He’s probably got 44 people that are going to contribute heavily to whoever might run against him in the primaries,” Steves said.

Donald Kuyrkendall, president of a San Antonio commercial real estate company, shared concern about his family’s safety and wondered what the Castro brothers hoped to gain by the Twitter outing of Trump donors.

“Were his intentions to incite people to picket Bill Miller’s barbecue or to come to Don Kuyrkendall’s house, you know, assault my wife, make nasty comments?” Kuyrkendall said.

Kuyrkendall said that in wake of the tweet, his lawyer reminded him that he once donated to Julián Castro’s mayoral campaign.

Wayne Harwell, who gave $1,000 Joaquin Castro in 2011, then a state representative who would win his House seat the next year, emphasized his enduring financial support for Trump.

“I sure will not give to Castro any more,” he said…

Ed Kelley, retired former president and CEO of USAA Real Estate, said that he supported Julián Castro’s mayoral campaign in the past and considers him a friend, though he does not know Joaquin that well. The tweet “did not leave a good taste in my mouth” and “was not something I appreciated,” Kelley said.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)

–Dana

64 Responses to “Fallout From Joaquin Castro’s Outing Of Trump Donors”

  1. My favorite part of this is, the backfiring is the direct result of lazy incompetence. If you’re going to publish a target list, you better make sure you know *who* it is you are targeting!

    Dana (fdf131)

  2. Julian Castro is defending his brother cuz he wanna be president:

    “What Donald Trump wants is for these donors to be secret, he doesn’t want you to know who’s donating to him,” Castro said at a news conference following his speech on the Des Moines Register Political Soapbox. “… Maybe he believes these people are embarrassed to be donating to him.”

    “I believe that people need to know what businesses in that city that are profiting off of the backs of Hispanic customers are turning around and putting that money into the pockets of a politician in Donald Trump that is actively making the lives of Hispanics in this country worse,” he said.

    […]

    Calling Joaquin Castro’s list “doxxing,” which means publishing private or identifying information about an individual on the Internet, is playing into Republicans’ hands, Julián Castro said. He does not agree with people targeting or harassing Trump donors, but said his brother did not encourage that.

    “Anybody who understands what doxxing is knows … he did not do that. He put forward publicly available information,” Castro said. “The right wing wants to make this a story because they want to pretend that, in some way, that’s equivalent to the hate and division that Trump is fostering in this country.”

    He is lying too because if he really believed people needed to know what *businesses* were profiting “off the backs of Hispanics,” why would he have included homemakers and retirees on the list?

    Of course it’s “doxxing,” and of course it’s “targeting” because he put identities out there with the very intent to identify them and make them known to the public.

    Dana (fdf131)

  3. Here is video of him denying that he doxxed anyone, and defending his brother’s target list. When confronted by a reporter who points out that people on the list are also donating to him, he continues to talk right over her.

    Dana (fdf131)

  4. I’ll just keep talking to myself here… if there was no intention of harassment or intimidation (as the Castro bros claim), then why publish the list in the first place? Why won’t they give an answer?

    Dana (fdf131)

  5. it strains credulity, if he were more honest and say I don’t think they should be able to speak, or donate money, that’s what 3/4 of the media believes anyways,

    narciso (d1f714)

  6. Shakespeare did write poems about it:

    Enter MARGARELON.
    Mar. Turn, slave, and fight.
    Ther. What art thou?
    Mar. A bastard son of Priam’s.
    Ther. I am a bastard too; I love bastards: I am a bastard begot, bastard instructed, bastard in mind, bastard in valour, in every thing illegitimate. One bear will not bite another, and wherefore should one bastard? Take heed, the quarrel’s most ominous to us: if the son of a wh**e fight for a wh**e, he tempts judgment. Farewell, bastard.

    Troilus and Cressida, Act V, Scene VII.

    nk (dbc370)

  7. Very respectfully and politely disagree.

    The signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their ‘lives, fortunes and sacred honor’ supporting their position opposing ‘the powers that be’ of their time– they did not add, ‘but hey, don’t print our names– we have businesses to run and properties to preserve.’

    NeverTrumpers and out-of-favor-conservatives should be allied and cheering this, given the character– or lack there of- of the showman-in-chief which is their core concern. For it is the ‘mom and pop’ types- the loyal followers who buy the MAGA hats; flock to Herr Trump’s rallies; wave those placards chanting ‘lock her up’ and ‘send them back’ in the call and response rhythm of his rants televised worldwide on TeeVee, who mail a billionaire their hard earned money and voted to put him in power. Not the mere handful of big donors. What’s to hide? It does not hurt to know who in your community– your neighbor, your barber, your banker, your grocer, doctor or lawyer- supports a suspected racist and bigot — even if they embrace his boastful pride in country and cherry pick elements of his policies to support as well, like an a-la-carte menu. Another fella in 1930’s Germany rode to power on a similar wave. He fostered prosperity, generated pride in country, gave everybody a radio to listen to him and build some swell autobahns too.

    The change in the character of the GOP base starts from the bottom up– and regardless of what point of the compass you come from, all Americans must be wary of it. The top dog does the act but it is the thuggish zealotry of the audience which has to be watched, not him. We’ve seen it simmering; from fist fights to assaulting a child. Next will come ‘why aren’t you wearing your MAGA armband to the school board meeting?!”

    Urge everyone to read Phyllis Bottome’s ‘The Mortal Storm’— or revisit the old film of the same title w/Jimmy Stewart. It depicts how a society turns fascist through small incidents and actions occurring in basic day-to-day life as it takes root and grows over time. It doesn’t happen overnight; it takes time–just at it did for Hitler in the Germany of the 1930’s. Even today many still ask how a country and their people could allow it to happen to themselves. We’re witnessing how it gets seeded– right now. History does rhyme.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  8. DCSCA 8/9/2019 @ 12:16 pm

    The signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged their ‘lives, fortunes and sacred honor’ supporting their position opposing ‘the powers that be’ of their time– they did not add, ‘but hey, don’t print our names– we have businesses to run and properties to preserve.’

    That’s only at that point – when the voted to declare independence, and mabe that was on;y so they could trust each other not to back out. And – that was indepedence.

    There was quite a lot of anonymous writing during that period (say 1763-1788 and a bit llater)

    The Federalist Papers were written by “Publius.”

    Sammy Finkelman (d542b2)

  9. Even today many still ask how a country and their people could allow it to happen to themselves

    A badly written constitution. There were other factirs, but that one was crucial.

    Sammy Finkelman (d542b2)

  10. Ice said they are not a social service ageny when asked about the parentless children. Ice said it followed the text book which is mien kampf.

    lany (628d34)

  11. ICE doesn’t say that. What they do is try to do is score points (deported people) with as little effort as possible.

    And they lie. You see, they are not allowed to go inside private property, unless they have a warrant from a judge, so they try to trick people into going outside so they can arrest them People are used to the idea that police can enter a dwelling to arrest someone. Not so ICE. So all the anti-deportation people are alerting the possible targets to the actual legal situation

    https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-allen-wernick-immigration-column-help-know-your-rights-ice-20190715-zn7gp5uf4feqfms3bypuh376um-story.html

    Sammy Finkelman (d542b2)

  12. Most donors know their names and donations are publicly available. My name would show up as a Ted Cruz donor and I’m fine with that. Further, the Castros have outgrown San Antonio politics so they don’t mind burning bridges with the GOP there. Republicans in San Antonio are already walking a tightrope, because the State is red but San Antonio is decidedly blue. But this is mean and I hate when politics makes people mean.

    DRJ (15874d)

  13. A San Antonio man was wrongly outed on Twitter as a donor to President Trump by Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro … name appeared on Castro’s list instead of the name of his retired father, who contributed to the Trump campaign.

    Sins of the father?

    Advocaat (2526e9)

  14. I think there is a distinction between being a Cruz donor and being a Trump donor, especially after El Paso. Otherwise, why didn’t Castro release the list before El Paso? I also think there is a distinction between politics making people act meanly versus intentionally choosing to do something to promote yourself and your politics, no matter if it may bring harm to others doing so.

    Dana (fdf131)

  15. Trying to be impartial here…
    Who here would, when choosing a business to patronize, avoid a business if they knew the owners/management contributed to or actively supported Planned Parenthood, or an anti-gun group, or Ilhan Omar, or some other politician or cause you are vehemently against? Who would avoid joining a church or a social group in which such a person was a prominent member?

    Kishnevi (83552a)

  16. I would ask, kishnevi, who here would take the time to look up every business before they patronize it? Do people actually do that?

    Dana (fdf131)

  17. If the cause is imprortant enough to them….but I am not asking about research. I am asking, if you happen to find out, would you?

    Kishnevi (83552a)

  18. it’s very hard to avoid donors to progressive causes, it’s virtuous to give to the left, if you’re on the right or even libertarian causes, you will be hounded, like david hogg’s die in, last year at publix, renaissance technologies was discouraged from supporting outlets like breitbart, tucker is subject to boycotts, they took mozilla away from eich,

    narciso (d1f714)

  19. I wouldn’t attend a church that supported Planned Parenthood. If individuals who attended the church did, I wouldn’t care. I don’t think I would a business unless they were brazen in their support. For example, when Target came out and made a big deal about changing their restroom policies. They faced a big backlash and lost big bucks. But they were the ones that made the announcement.

    With that, Castro clearly hoped businesses on the list would be impacted/boycotted, but why put the names of retirees and homemakers on the list? Can we then assume he wanted to see them shunned by their neighbors and friends? What other reason could there be, do you think?

    Dana (fdf131)

  20. Where’s Tucker’s next stop – OANN or Blaze? And is there a walkout of other talent if he doesnt return to Fox from his “vacation”?

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  21. Good question Kish. Let me tell you that I boycott Dairy Queen because cheese comes standard on all their burgers, so you pay for it whether you want it or not. So you can imagine how I would not patronize a business that advocates the breaking of any Commandment, say, a house of ill repute or a guild that trains pick-pockets.

    I will directly answer your questions:

    Who here would, when choosing a business to patronize, avoid a business if they knew the owners/management contributed to or actively supported Planned Parenthood,

    I would not patronize them.

    or an anti-gun group

    Avoid if they are a PAC, but would not care if it were a BBQ place that supported a PAC and was a “gun-free zone” as long as the BBQ was outstanding. What they do with their profits, in this instance, is licit.

    or Ilhan Omar,

    I would avoid her in all circumstances. Unless I came upon her ruin in the street, then I would give aid and comfort, and see to her safety.

    or some other politician or cause you are vehemently against?

    Same as Omar.

    Who would avoid joining a church or a social group in which such a person was a prominent member?
    Kishnevi (83552a) — 8/9/2019 @ 1:32 pm

    I am already a member of a Church (Catholic) that has/had/will have members far worse than this. I will always remain because these same people breathe the same air I do, drink the same water I do, and have been created by the same God Who created me. Such people are not a reason to avoid the good things in life.

    felipe (023cc9)

  22. consider the 80 million that skater punk johnny lee miller impersonator, Robert francis O’Rourke, received, no I’m all for futile exercise, but it tells you something, most of the money backing doug jones from hellboy came from Hollywood as well,

    narciso (d1f714)

  23. I would be more likely to stop associating with a Judas who told me “Don’t shop at such and such a place, it’s owned by such and suches”. Much more likely. If he betrays them, he’ll betray me too.

    BTW, membership in my Church is not a consumer choice.

    nk (dbc370)

  24. And I repeat my opinion that the entire Horsesh!t Federal Election Campaign Act and the Horsesh!t Federal Election Commission are unconstitutional. Thanks, Shrub!

    nk (dbc370)

  25. when has a major piece of legislation, like Sarbanes Oxley, McCain Feingold, dodd frank (Sutton dilliger is my more honest take) done us any good, they are often the ‘Serve Man’ recipe collection,

    narciso (d1f714)

  26. 25. All that goes back to 1970s. But then when was GHWB Chairman of the RNC?

    They created PACS at that time. PACs could always ive more money to candidates than individuals could. It was kind of organized bribery and they called it reform. But I blme Congress.

    Sammy Finkelman (d542b2)

  27. The Shrub is GNoHerbertWB, and he signed the latest iteration, McCain-Feingold.

    nk (dbc370)

  28. More unintended consequences for Castro:

    R. H. Bowman told the Washington Examiner his fellow members of “Texas 44,” as the San Antonio-based donors refer to themselves, have been on a fundraising frenzy since Castro tweeted about them on Monday…

    Bowman, an attorney, said that didn’t go down well with he and his fellow donors.

    “My phone’s been lit up for two days with calls from many of the Texas 44 and others of our friends here in Texas who are outraged by Castro’s comments,” Bowman said. “It looks like another million dollars is now headed to support the Trump 2020 campaign from those of us who were targeted, and other Texans, including Hispanics, incidentally, whose resolve to support [the president] is only strengthened by this personal attack.”

    Dana (fdf131)

  29. Kishnevi,

    What do you think Castro’s intentions were for releasing the list?

    Dana (fdf131)

  30. 31
    To get the public to condemn and humiliate them, obviously. Maxing donation limits is more than simply a difference of degree from wearing MAGA gear and posting semi-anonymous comments on conservative fora. They enable Trump, and if Trump is a corrupt demagogue who relies on bigotry, they are enabling corruption and bigotry. To be blunt, I see nothing wrong in what Castro did. Just like there would be nothing wrong in publishing the names of people who donate to Planned Parenthood.

    And if you truly believe in Trump’s proclaimed agenda, why would you be embarrassed for supporting him?

    Kishnevi (b1c03d)

  31. Because of the all garbage that has been associated, liberals are always virtuous even when they are monstrously wrong, what’s wrong with saving the planet, dont you want to stop nuclear war.

    Narciso (441918)

  32. I think he did it to get attention for the VP slot by showing the Democrats that:

    1. He is willing to take on powerful people in his own city/state who support to Trump so that proves he is a fighter, and

    2. He has ideas on how to stop the financial support for Trump in Texas, which I suspect Trump needs.

    DRJ (15874d)

  33. And if you truly believe in Trump’s proclaimed agenda, why would you be embarrassed for supporting him?

    Embarrassed? Is that what the people Dana quotes in the post said they were concerned about? Embarrassment? Is that why

    “We convened together as a family and talked about situational awareness, exit strategy, avoiding and exiting conflict, talked about staying low and close to home and just being at our very highest senses,” said Huddleston.

    To protect themselves from embarrassment?

    nk (dbc370)

  34. Five years later, they are still drumming up the same garbage about Ferguson, after they burned half the town down

    Narciso (441918)

  35. To protect themselves from embarrassment?
    If I thought there was real possibility of danger, I would think differently. But I don’t think there is. Unless you think of strangers in pink hats shouting at you as “danger”.

    What Castro’s list shows to a large degree is two types: people who fell for Trump’s con more deeply than most, and those who donated for the sake of having some political influence–iow, Swamp Dwellers. Especially suspect as members of the second group are those who also donated to Castro and other Democrats. Naturally they are upset at being shown to be Swamp Dwellers.

    Kishnevi (b1c03d)

  36. All it takes is one person with an agenda to be a danger.

    DRJ (15874d)

  37. Look at the jackalope in full stabby mode in Louisville, and then theres the one at mcturtles office. (See what I did there)

    Narciso (441918)

  38. This is from 740KRTH radio host Michael Berry:

    The mother to a friend of the show was one of the 44-private citizens who donated to the Trump campaign and had her name and employer tweeted out by Joaquin Castro. Here’s the vile voicemails she received.

    You can listen to voicemail at the link above.

    This is not about embarrassment.

    Dana (fdf131)

  39. @17. K, we will not patronize ‘Chic-fil-A’ because of their political positions and do make a conscious effort to try to avoid using Koch Bros., industries associated products, but that is much more difficult as they are into so many paper and petroleum products, but whenever a clear choice is available, we avoid using the KBI items.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  40. I’ve been called worse for refusing to let customers return their old worn smelly shoes.

    I agree the voicemail was vile, but the proper response would be to mutter the caller’s favorite curse word in his general direction, delete it, and turn to actual business.

    Kishnevi (b1c03d)

  41. @17.Back in the ’30’s, TWA advertised themselves as ‘The Lindbergh Line’ proud to associate themselves w/t famed aviator. But when his politics and public positions became more controversial – particularly his association w/t ‘America First’ cause and hints of Nazi sympathies, TWA disassociated itself from Lindbergh and dropped the use of the phrase from their advertising.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  42. Kishnevi,

    Having an angry customer chew you out in person over a purchase is not the same as a perfect stranger calling and making vile and threatening comments. Not remotely so. This is is straight up harassment and intimidation. The woman now has every reason to be fearful because she has no clue when, or where, or how the next contact from him will go. Also, the caller was a male, and that makes it worse and more frightening for a woman. It’s disappointing that you would sell short the level of fear such a call can instill. But hey, it’s all about embarrassing these people…

    Dana (fdf131)

  43. @32. Bingo!!!!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  44. “Five years later”

    But Chappaquiddick!

    Davethulhu (bc6fa6)

  45. Also, Kishnevi, if the caller is determined, he already knows her name, her place of employment and her phone number. How hard would it be to get her address too?

    Dana (fdf131)

  46. Very respectfully and politely disagree.

    Ditto, DCSCA.

    Dana (fdf131)

  47. Simply put, I think you are overestimating the danger.
    I also think a person who is as dangerous as you imagine would research name and address information no matter what Castro might do or not do.

    Kishnevi (15a549)

  48. Kishnevi,

    Does the person who makes that kind of phone call sound stable to you?

    Dana (fdf131)

  49. The person who made the call wouldn’t know to research her name and address. He was provided a name and place of employment, along with encouragement to harass.

    Dana (fdf131)

  50. It’s taking things to a new level, whether or not it’s dangerous. it could be those donors will be just fine (I hope so). But, I mean, do we really want politicians doing this? do we want this to be the new normal? Reps tweeting out donors names and the names of their businesses, in meme format, conveniently designed to go viral? Kinda seems like a no-brainer that this is an escalation we do not want. Leave the poor dunderheads you believe voted for the wrong person out of it.

    JRH (52aed3)

  51. believe *donated to the wrong person.

    JRH (52aed3)

  52. Compared to some people who have commented here over the years, quite stable.
    Again, I think you are overestimating the danger, and just leave it at that.

    Kishnevi (15a549)

  53. The person who made the call wouldn’t know to research her name and address.

    That’s just it. The truly dangerous person wouldn’t be hanging around waiting for someone else to provide the necessary info, wouldn’t vent their hostility on a phone call…

    Kishnevi (15a549)

  54. Kishnevi,

    You just can’t know that as a certainty. He could be the angry Trump hater just ready to act out on that anger with a little nudge. And that’s what Castro provided. A person in a powerful position ostensibly said, here you go, and handed him 44 names from which to choose. For whatever reason, he chose this woman. He wouldn’t have known anything about her, let alone be able to look up her phone number without Castro’s help. And that’s a scary thing. Ask yourself why he didn’t choose to leave that voicemail for one of the men on the list?
    Why did he choose a woman?

    Dana (fdf131)

  55. Dana, you are assuming a number of things, including assuming he has no connection to her or the business, and assuming he didn’t call anyone else. You have allowed yourself to become outraged, something that is better left to the SJW Twitter crowd.

    (Good night, it’s midnight here.)

    Kishnevi (15a549)

  56. That’s pretty insulting of you, Kishnevi. I think I’m done here.

    Dana (fdf131)

  57. If you want to couch this in more basic, partisan, ‘political party’ terms, seem to recall a Republican senator from Wisconsin who liked to make this kind of noise for political gain, publicize names- often showing up in Red Channels– and inferred guilt by association and managed to get powerful ‘donors’ on his side with no thought to the collateral damage and wrecking the livelihoods and careers of others.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  58. Simply put, I think you are overestimating the danger.
    I also think a person who is as dangerous as you imagine would research name and address information no matter what Castro might do or not do.

    Simply put, what a completely bizarre coincidence that the person chose to do this right after Castro’s tweet.

    You have no idea whether the person is dangerous or not, kishnevi. No idea.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  59. Dana, you are assuming a number of things, including assuming he has no connection to her or the business, and assuming he didn’t call anyone else. You have allowed yourself to become outraged, something that is better left to the SJW Twitter crowd.

    (Good night, it’s midnight here.)

    That’s a pretty stupid comparison.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  60. Kishnevi should have to publish his real name and address if he ever wants to comment again.
    I mean, it really is no big deal, right?

    kaf (0ff60d)

  61. @62. Why? He didn’t donate any $ to Trump.

    And if he did donate to another candidate, there is a record of it.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  62. Kishnevi said:

    I also think a person who is as dangerous as you imagine would research name and address information no matter what Castro might do or not do.

    How could he research her name/business if he didn’t know her name in the first place? He wouldn’t have been able to. But let’s assume he did know her name/employment, why call just days after Castro’s list comes out to chew her out specifically about supporting Trump? How is that not extremely coincidental? If he knew her beforehand and had concerns about her political affiliations, why not research that *before* the list came out? After all, it’s public information, right?

    Here is the text of the voicemail:

    “Hi! I see that you’ve donated the most allowable by federal law to Donald Trump. I think you’re a scumbag and I f***ing despise everything you stand for. I plan on calling you and filling up your voicemail with a bunch of bulls***, so enjoy that. I will make sure to post this number and extension all over the Internet. F*** you very much, f*** you for your racist bulls***, and f*** you for being scared of your fellow human beings. I think you’re a scumbag. It’s pretty apparent that all you do is make money off other people’s sales of their property because you have no f***ing worth of your own. So why don’t you go f*** yourself, and have a terrible day. Goodbye.”

    The fact that he said: I see that you’ve donated the most allowable by federal law to Donald Trump indicates that he was referencing something with her info on it. And if he called her because he had just learned via Castro’s list that she was a Trump donor, then that just shows that Castro’s target list accomplished what it was intended for: to provide individuals necessary information to act out on. Castro provided the nudge. How is that not risky? How does that not potentially put individuals in possible danger?

    If the caller didn’t know who she was beforehand, he learned of her somehow. That he was able to track down her phone number as a result of Castro’s list would demonstrate even further the potential dangers in publishing it.

    Also, it really doesn’t matter whether he called anyone else, does it? He called her and left her the threatening voicemail, and now she has to deal with the jarring aftermath. It’s almost as if that was the plan…

    Dana (fdf131)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3481 secs.