Yes....hilary the loser wanted to punish flag burners before Trump did...of course she did...

[2aguy]

Yep......morons who are attacking Trump.......forgot this little thing called the internet.....

Hey… remember when Hillary wanted to ban flag burning? - Hot Air


In 2005, Clinton co-sponsored the Flag Protection Act which, while it did not call for the stripping of citizenship, made flag burning with the intent to incite violence or disturb the peace punishable by a year in jail and a $100,000 fine.

The bipartisan bill, introduced by Clinton and then-Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, never made it out of the Judiciary Committee, but was floated as a compromise to a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban flag burning.

Clinton was criticized for her stance then, although the criticisms leveled at her targeted Clinton’s perceived political slipperiness, rather than her representing a threat to constitutional liberty. A New York Times piece accused the senator of being “in pander mode.”

 

[Pete7469]

She is the sort of sociopath who cloaks themselves in the symbolism of a nation in order to accumulate power and undermine the national interest for their own self aggrandizement.

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Yep, she was all for punishing flag burners.

Senator Clinton and Liberals Split Over Flag Desecration
By ANNE E. KORNBLUTJUNE 28, 2006

WASHINGTON, June 27 — Perhaps even more than her stance on the war in Iraq, it is Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's position on flag desecration that has drawn the scorn of the liberal Democratic base.

When Mrs. Clinton took a stand on the matter last year — co-sponsoring legislation that would have criminalized the desecration of the American flag even as she opposed a constitutional amendment that sought to achieve the same end — she was pilloried from the left. Editorial boards criticized her for political maneuvering, the political commentator Arianna Huffington attacked her for "stars, stripes and triangulation" and even some of her supporters quietly wondered why she had gone out on a limb on such a controversial issue.

On Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton played a leading role in the flag-burning debate once again, co-sponsoring a measure similar to her previous one as an alternative to the constitutional amendment that was about to come up for a vote in the Senate.

Senator Clinton and Liberals Split Over Flag Desecration

 

[jon_berzerk]

trump loves to punk the media

 

[blackhawk]

Well this should end the liberal rant over Trump on this subject.

 

[blastoff]

Yep......morons who are attacking Trump.......forgot this little thing called the internet.....

Hey… remember when Hillary wanted to ban flag burning? - Hot Air


In 2005, Clinton co-sponsored the Flag Protection Act which, while it did not call for the stripping of citizenship, made flag burning with the intent to incite violence or disturb the peace punishable by a year in jail and a $100,000 fine.

The bipartisan bill, introduced by Clinton and then-Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, never made it out of the Judiciary Committee, but was floated as a compromise to a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban flag burning.

Clinton was criticized for her stance then, although the criticisms leveled at her targeted Clinton’s perceived political slipperiness, rather than her representing a threat to constitutional liberty. A New York Times piece accused the senator of being “in pander mode.”

Yeah, but that was then. It's now, now.