[Williams]

And just made up that every type of minority is being assaulted by “your supporters”.

[RummyChick]

Meanwhile..Packetsled has to deal with this

[Steve_Seattle]

"And just made up that every type of minority is being assaulted by “your supporters”."

For the sake of argument, let's say that 200 Trump supporters have committed some act of harassment or intimidation since the election. (I'm not conceding that: the actual, documented reports have been very few, fewer than 20 that I'm aware of, and there have been a couple of proven hoaxes.)

During that same time, there have been numerous PUBLIC demonstrations by ANTI-Trump people, involving graffiti, throwing rocks at police, breaking windows, shutting down public roads, setting fires, and dozens - perhaps hundreds - of death threats on Twitter and other social media. All of this has resulted in dozens of arrests, more than 100 in Portland alone. I have also seen three or four verified reports of Trump supporters being beaten up by anti-Trump thugs (since the election).

The media's response to this is that the anti-Trump activity has been "mostly peaceful." So, if "only" 40 of 1000 anti-Trump supporters during a particular demonstration cause trouble, the event is deemed "mostly peaceful."

Meanwhile, if 200 of 62 million Trump supporters cause trouble (.000003, or three hundred thousandths of one percent) of Trump voters), it is treated like a reign of terror. (Again, the 200 figure is made up just for purposes of argument.) The media have learned nothing from this election. They are evil, corrupt people.

Amidst all of the conflicting reports, there is one objective way to get a handle on who has been acting up the most: compare arrest statistics for anti-Trump and pro-Trump factions. Why won't the media do THAT analysis? Because it would show several hundred Dem arrests, and few if any arrests of Trump supporters? Would the facts "trump" the narrative?