Care to explain that law that Obama had passed? I thought he couldn't get anything through Congress. Perhaps you have the details wrong, or just heard that phrase somewhere? My understanding is that the law was passed in 1971, Richard Nixon's first term. A minor change in wording was made by the GOP controlled Congress and signed by Obama. Nonetheless, I am fairly sure that the secret service is not in charge of highways in Arizona, so that law does not seem to apply.

the immaturity and ridiculous replies in this forum by people who refuse to see that liberal troublemakers are acting illegally and immorally is beyond me. all Trump's rally's are protected by secret service, yet they enter and cause trouble...am sure his motorcade is also protected by secret service. there is no doubt whatsoever that no one has a right to stop traffic on a state highway. yet the silly replies continue....senseless to argue.

This might help explain it to you.
Obama Criminalize Free Speech?

Love it! :bigbow:

That seems to have silenced the conservatives!!!!!

Ya you southerners are real bad asses alright. I guess "you all" are still feeling a bit insecure over that ass whooping you received from the North. Get over it.

You sure know a lot. You sound like George Wallace. Typical wingnut wanting to go back 60 years.

Trump is protected by the not so Secret Service, and not his rallies. The people in the rallies are protected by local police If you can't tell the difference between the Secret Service, and the police, you aren't looking.

Whose rallies are being targeted? Just one, Trump! Whose rhetoric is inflaming people to protest? Trump! Who is accusing other campaigns of paying protesters? Trump. Which candidate is the gold standard for not believing a damn word that is coming out of his mouth? Trump! Immaturity? Trump is a five year old, who cries every time he doesn't get his own way. Immoral? He is the crown prince of immorality, who wants to be king of immorality like a person he use to love, Bill Clinton.

"liberal troublemakers are acting illegally, and immorally." Freedom of the press is one of our cornerstones. When you deny the press access to your political rallies, that isn't immoral? The press is free to question Trump just so long as they don't say anything bad about him. This is a man that entire campaign is feeding free press. There is an estimate that he has received over 1.5 billion dollars of free press, but the press is the problem. At Trump rallies, they are herded like cattle in roped off areas, and are not allowed to ask any of the public questions.

When you talk about immoral, be careful, because Trump is the poster boy for it.
Voters need to weigh in on Trump media tactics | Chicago Sun-Times

So you agree with the message, but disparage the messenger. You have nothing to use as a retort other than a typical liberal insult. That's OK, we know how impotent you are. Feel free to come back when you have something valid to add to the debate. You failed.

You might as well get used to Trump because with a choice between him and Hilllary, his "immoral" behavior looks like a choir boy in comparison. I don't like the guy, but if he is the GOP nominee, he'll get my vote. When you only have two options, between him and a criminal traitor, the choice is obvious.

Personally, I like America more back then and would love to go back. Wasn't as 3rd world back then. That's what happens when the minorities start taking over.

My God! Just put your tail between your legs and whimper away! You have more than two options, they've just brainwashed you into believing there's ONLY "their two candidates". Wake up, stop being an idiot, one of the sheep. Change things with your vote.

I guess its okay when trump incites violence. I believe that is against the law. But you would never admit to that!

:mademyday:

Why do they disrupt inside the building?

If the venue can hold 10,000 people, and contempt for the candidate, why not gather outside the building with 20,000 people. A Gandhi type protest.

Wouldn't it be a more effective non-violent strategy that sends a more accurate message that they are not the party of hate?

As a result even more protesters would show up knowing there was a reasonable amount of certainty there wouldn't be violence. Just like a lot of people wanted to see the Stones for free at Altamont but not if the Hell's Angels are security.

As far as who should arrest who, one would think mayors, police, security guards and secret service know their job and roles better then anyone else.

ok--I'm going to put on my flak jacket now. OK, I'm ready.

Prove it. You already have a president that incites violence by endorsing Occupy Wall St and Black Lives Matter, as well as other radicals.

You liberals are cowards, hiding behind a perversion of words taken out of context. Besides, if you think violence is bad then you probably should condemn our patriots that cut ties with Brittan by means of violence.

If you can't take the violence, then tell your little liberal protesters to find another job.