Woman suing Trump for blocking her on Twitter blocks conservatives who never heard of her — Video

It seems that liberalism has truly devolved into a mental disorder, especially since the election of Donald Trump.  Lawyers for a woman who goes by the name of Holly O’Reilly has sent the president a letter demanding that he unblock her on Twitter, no doubt so that she can continue to harass him with profane and possibly threatening tweets.  Media analyst Mark Dice decided to check out O’Reilly’s Twitter feed and noticed that she had blocked him.  Others did as well:


take our poll - story continues below

Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

  • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Conservative Firing Line updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Naturally, we were also blocked, even though we had never heard of this creature.


Here’s Dice’s video:

Dice noted:



According to a post at TakeCareBlog:

Lawyers for two Twitter users, who President Trump blocked from his Twitter account after they criticized him online, sent the President a letter last Tuesday asking him to unblock them—or else face legal action.

The letter argues that the First Amendment bars the President from excluding users from engaging with posts on the President’s most-followed Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump, because he disagrees with views they expressed.

More specifically, the blocked users argue that the President’s Twitter account is a “designated public forum” and that the President cannot constitutionally exclude voices from that forum based on their critical viewpoints.  In a statement, Jameel Jaffer—executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which is representing the blocked users—said, “[t]hough the architects of the Constitution surely didn’t contemplate presidential Twitter accounts, they understood that the President must not be allowed to banish views from public discourse simply because he finds them objectionable.”

The Knight Institute’s letter states that the President blocked Holly O’Reilly (@AynRandPaulRyan) from following the President’s account on May 28—shortly after she posted a picture of Pope Francis appearing incredulous and uncomfortable in a meeting with the President, with the caption, “This is pretty much how the whole world sees you.”  That tweet was part of a series of anti-Trump statements O’Reilly posted that day, including ones stating, “God, you’re embarrassing,” and calling Trump a “LEAKER” and a “bloody idiot.”  O’Reilly also identified herself as an organizer of the June 3 “March for Truth” rally.

The blog adds:

A “designated public forum” is created when the government intentionally opens up “a place or channel of communication for use by the public at large for assembly and speech.” Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., 473 U.S. 788, 802 (1985).  To identify whether the government has created a designated public forum, courts generally “look[] to the policy and practice of the government” and to “the nature of the property and its compatibility with expressive activity.”

But it should be noted here that the @realDonaldTrump account is a personal account the president uses to bypass the biased media and is separate from his official presidential Twitter account.  In other words, the president’s personal account was not opened by the government. But now we’re supposed to believe that liberals have a First Amendment right to harass someone’s private account.

Dice wryly asked:


Good question, but don’t hold your breath.

Maybe conservatives should get together and consider a class action suit against this Twitter user for viewpoint discrimination…

On the other hand, why bother.  Who needs to read the insane rantings of someone like this?

Nevertheless, it does serve to show the utter hypocrisy of the increasingly-insane left.


If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.

And if you’re as concerned about Facebook censorship as we are, go here and order this new book:

Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad
Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad – Source: Author (used with permission)

Joe Newby

A 10-year veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps, Joe ran for a city council position in Riverside, Calif., in 1991 and managed successful campaigns for the Idaho state legislature. Co-author of "Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad," Joe wrote for Examiner.com from 2010 until it closed in 2016 and his work has been published at Newsbusters, Spokane Faith and Values and other sites. He now runs the Conservative Firing Line.

Related Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×