A couple of hundred protestors massed and chanted on the Ruth Steinkraus Cohen Bridge this morning.
It’s been a Saturday ritual for months. Today’s crowd was larger than usual. As always, passing drivers honked often, in solidarity.
(Photo/Claudia Sherwood Servidio)
An hour later, 1,500 people gathered at Jesup Green. Westport was one of more than 3,000 communities nationwide, participating in the third “No Kings” rally. Previous protests were held in June and October.
As before, the Westport Police and Fire Departments, and Emergency Medical Services, ensured safety and order. They received a rousing hand.
A small part of the large crowd.
Music ranged from Bob Marley’s “Stand Up For Your Rights” to “America the Beautiful.”
Speakers included Governor Ned Lamont, Senator Richard Blumenthal and Congressman Jim Himes.
Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas noted, “Every right — human, civil, women’s, LGBTQ, disability — came about because of people just like us. It is not partisan to believe in the rule of law, in the Constitution, in ‘we the people.'”
She then led the crowd in the Pledge of Allegiance, emphasizing, “with liberty and justice for all.”
1st Selectman Kevin Christie was at a funeral, but sent a message that “our democracy matters.”
(Photo/Pippa Bell Ader)
102-year-old Virginia Auster was an avid rally-goer. A longtime Westporter, she now lives in Norwalk.
Senator Richard Blumenthal said, “This is what America and democracy look like.”
Inklings paper editor Nate Gerber interviews Representative Jim Himes. In his speech, the congressman said, “The realm of the mad king is as insidious as ever. He has his courtiers, his sycophants, his lickspittles. But we are the stewards of the ideals that made this country great.” (All photos Dan Woog unless otherwise noted)
Governor Ned Lamont (Photo/Pippa Bell Ader)
(Photo/Ted Horowitz)
First responders are ready. (Photo/Jonathan Alloy)
(Photo/Pippa Bell Ader)
Meanwhile, back on the bridge … (Photo/Susan Garment)
Thank God I missed it…
Yeah, everyone was asking where you were.
T.D.S. 😢
Uninformed and unsurprising comment from a known MAGAT.
An anti war rally? Of course not.
Those protesting are on the right side of history.
All I can say for the No Kings crowd is to study the long arc of history – particularly the incontrovertible history of REPUBLICS, and what always happens to them as they age to 200-250 years. Then couple that with the study of the Frankfurt school of Marxists and trace them from their arrival in the U.S. in the early 1940s to the present day. The “agenda-setters” funding No-Kings do not have the interests of a free people at heart. If our citizenry does not wake up to the inevitable march of history we will most assuredly be doomed to repeat it…………
PS: And why so much profanity on the signs……
If You’re Not Angry You’re Not Paying Attention!!!
In regards to the history of Republics, “In summary, the 200-350 year mark is often a “mid-life crisis” where republican systems must innovate to survive or succumb to internal power concentration, often resulting in a transition from a democratic form of government to an authoritarian one.”
This is exactly the reason we need to cancel out the current authoritarian ruler with less corruption and put up really great candidates for the midterms and for the next presidential election to avoid our republic failing and falling into the hands of the most corrupt and narcissistic politicians we have running the country currently.
Glad to see CT’s two senators have their hearts in the right place (while browning their noses on the posteriors of Westport). Meanwhile, if you happen to work for the TSA…..
What happened to protesting illegal wars pushed by Israel? They demand the release of the files, but won’t stand up for the rights of unborn children. What a bunch of hypocrites.
It seems to me- President Trump has said, multiple times, that Iran will never get a nuclear weapon to threaten the USA or the missiles to send them here. It seem s to me President Trump said multiple times that the Obama administration deal wasn’t good enough! He would do what had to be done to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons.
Are you saying President Trump was dragged into this war by Israel?
(Do you think Ukraine could use the same tactics to end Russia aggresion- get President Trump dragged into the war with Russia?
Your religious belief about abortion are your religious beliefs.
The Epstein files are not about your religious beliefs but about a pedophilia ring of super rich men lead by Jeffery Epstein who statutorily raped thousands of under aged girls for years. I think that should be investigated and exposed- no matter how your religion tells you to feel about abortion and abortion rights of the mother!
Signing off for the evening!
I do believe President Trump has been heavily pressured and dragged into this conflict by Israel and its supporters. Trump has repeatedly said Iran should never get a nuclear weapon and criticized the Obama deal, but that doesn’t erase the reality that the U.S. is once again being pulled into another Middle East war.
That’s exactly why the left’s sudden silence is so glaring. For years they protested “illegal wars”. Now that it’s happening, that same energy has vanished. They still scream for releasing the Epstein files and I agree 100%: those files should be fully released and investigated. But last time I checked, no Palestinians or Iranians were named in the Epstein files. At the same time, these same protesters claim to champion “human rights” and protecting the vulnerable, yet they refuse to fight for the rights of unborn children. That contradiction is glaring. My view on abortion isn’t just a private religious belief it’s about whether human rights begin before birth. The left (and honestly the right too) should be out protesting this war if they truly believed their past rhetoric. Their selective outrage exposes the hypocrisy.
Ah, yet another thing to blame Israel and its supporters for. JFK’s assassination? Check. Iran war? Of course! Never mind the fact that public opinion has (rightly or wrongly) turned against Israel on both the right and the left over the past two years, making any “pressure” (real or imagined) from Israel to attack Iran a loser politically…or the fact that Donald Trump has acted confidently and decisively (again, rightly or wrongly) with virtually everything he’s done while in office. When it comes to Israel, poor little Donald cowers in fear of the big bad Israelis and their all-powerful supporters in the U.S!
In past rallies, people have protested against Trump’s military action in places like Venezuela. But instead of commending that, you attacked them for being out-of-touch liberals. Hmm, wonder why the difference? Perhaps it’s the involvement of your favorite U.S. ally in this one?
That’s a serious case whataboutism. But as long as we’re playing, what happened to arresting fake “law enforcement” agents who feel at liberty to terrorize communities, violently detain American citizens, break down doors without judicial warrant and murder american citizens in broad daylight on Main Street USA? What happened to conducting investigations into these murders? What happened to an Attorney General who works for the American people? Maybe that’s all ok with you because as Pam Bondi said, “the Dow is over 50,000”?
If our president is so weak and feeble-minded that he can be coerced by a far-right leader of a country on the other side of the world reliant on the U.S. for a good portion of its weapons into an ill-conceived war with no real strategy, then boy do I not want that person as our president. Add yet another reason to protest for No Kings 4.
And I suppose we should all move to Idaho where “real freedom” means being able to own an assault weapon or large-capacity magazine but preventing women from controlling their own bodies from literally the moment of conception. Right. That’s not hypocritical at all.
If Trump is so “weak and feeble-minded” that a “far-right” Israeli leader can coerce him into an ill-conceived war (even though the U.S. supplies much of Israel’s weapons and healthcare) then why did the left previously paint Trump as some uncontrollable dictator too close to Putin? You can’t have it both ways.
I’m against Trump on this. I believe he’s been heavily pressured and dragged into this war with Iran, and I oppose the conflict. But I’m deeply disappointed in these “No Kings” protesters. For the last 10 years they’ve recycled the same tired rhetoric against “illegal wars,” yet now that one is actually happening, their energy has completely vanished. Its just the same selective outrage they’ve been pushing for a decade.
You seem perfectly fine with American soldiers dying for Israel’s interests. In our past conversations, you had no issue with Americans sacrificing their lives for Israel and even brushing off atrocities like the USS Liberty. Yet here you are, staying silent on this war.
If your comeback is that “real freedom” means owning assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, but “preventing women from controlling their own bodies from the moment of conception” is hilarious, because you clearly don’t know me at all. Probably think I’m some redneck in the mountains. That lazy stereotype reveals more about your contempt for ordinary Americans than it does about my views. My position on abortion stands and has nothing to do with restricting women. It’s about recognizing that human rights begin before birth and protecting the most vulnerable among us. The real hypocrisy is pretending to champion “human rights” while fighting tooth and nail against any legal protections for unborn children.
You clearly missed my point: Trump is not actually being “dragged into this war” by Israel – he’s acting on his own accord. He thought regime change would be a walk in the park after Venezuela and badly miscalculated. I think he also very much likes the idea of being remembered for something “big” that no other president has done, as a narcissist would.
“Staying silent on this war” – one of several falsehoods you’re pushing. I am firmly against this war as my previous post pretty clearly states, but I know that’s not convenient for you to acknowledge.
You say you’re with the protestors on releasing the Epstein files, but instead of standing with them on that, you’re berating them for not taking up your preferred cause. Talk about selective outrage.
Another falsehood: nowhere did I ever say I “support American soldiers dying for Israel’s interests.” And calling out your exploitation of a single unfortunate incident as an excuse to vilify an entire nation and latch onto bullshit conspiracy theories (e.g. Israel AIPAC being responsible for JFK’s assassination, Israel intentionally firing on the USS Liberty) is just a touch different from “brushing off” an atrocity.
You love to point out the hypocrisy on the left, which certainly exists, but fail to acknowledge similar hypocrisy on the right. You previously stated you used to live in Westport but moved to Idaho for “real freedom.” If you actually disagree with either the state’s very lax gun laws but extremely strict abortion laws, I’m happy to hear it. But then your hypocrisy rears its ugly head again: You accuse the left of it when it comes to human rights but have the arrogance to push your belief of when life begins (which is clearly disputed in this country) onto others and then claim that this somehow is not “restricting women” and their rights.
Matt, you’re still dodging the core inconsistency. You claim Trump is acting entirely on his own accord out of narcissism and miscalculation, yet the left spent years painting him as a weak, easily manipulated puppet; first of Putin, now supposedly of a “far-right” Israeli leader. You can’t have it both ways: either he’s an uncontrollable dictator or he’s helplessly dragged into wars. Which is it?
I’ve been clear: I oppose this war with Iran and believe Trump has been heavily pressured into it. That doesn’t require believing wild conspiracy theories. It’s observable that the U.S. has long supplied Israel with significant military aid, and strong alliances influence policy, something both parties have supported for decades.
My disappointment with the “No Kings” protesters stands. For years they’ve railed against “illegal wars” and “endless Middle East conflicts.” Now that one is actually underway, their outrage has mysteriously vanished. That’s textbook selective outrage, not a “falsehood.”
On American soldiers: I never claimed you personally cheer their deaths. But in our past exchanges, you’ve downplayed concerns about U.S. entanglement in Israel’s conflicts and dismissed incidents like the USS Liberty as irrelevant or conspiratorial. If you’re now firmly against this war, that’s a welcome shift…better late than never.
As for hypocrisy: Yes, the left has plenty (demanding “release the Epstein files” while ignoring the rights of the unborn is a glaring example). But pointing that out doesn’t require me to ignore inconsistencies on the right. My move from Westport, CT, to Idaho wasn’t about imposing my views on anyone. I support strong Second Amendment rights because they protect individual liberty. I also believe human rights begin at conception and that society has a duty to protect the most vulnerable which is the unborn. That’s not “forcing my belief” on women any more than laws against murder “force” beliefs about when life begins. It’s a legitimate moral and philosophical position held by millions, and it’s been fiercely debated, not settled by fiat.
You accuse me of exploiting incidents to “vilify an entire nation.” I’m not vilifying Israel as a people. I’m questioning the extent of U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts that may not serve core American interests. That’s a policy debate, not antisemitism or conspiracy-mongering.
If you truly oppose this war, great! Join the call for restraint. But lecturing about selective outrage while ignoring the protesters’ own glaring inconsistencies doesn’t strengthen your case.
Since I guess I still haven’t been clear: Uncontrollable dictator. (This may come as a surprise to you, but I don’t represent the entire American liberal establishment, so I can’t speak to your “Putin’s puppet” comment). While I’m sure Netanyahu made a compelling pitch for U.S. involvement in Iran, at the end of the day Trump has had no problems pissing off allies (mostly in Europe) and I don’t believe for a second that he’d break a campaign promise not to engage in unprovoked foreign wars if he didn’t really believe in what he was doing, even if for the wrong reasons. Despite your claims to the contrary, there has been virtually zero direct U.S. military participation in “Israel’s wars” historically (outside of military aid, intelligence sharing, resupplying and the occasional non-combat presence of U.S. forces in the region). Given this history and Trump’s clear “strong man” leadership style, it’s ludicrous to think he was somehow bullied into this war by anyone. I think he’s actually pretty pro-Israel at heart and frankly, there are a number of things he’s done to support Israel that I agree with.
However, I don’t agree with this war. Iran posed no imminent threat to the U.S. or Israel that I’m aware of, and the miscalculation around regime change and now this Hormuz disaster means there’s no real way out other than a significant escalation (e.g. ground war) or, more likely, a negotiated ceasefire in which Trump will disingenuously declare a victory but will instead result in significant concessions to Iran that would not have been necessary had we not gotten involved in the first place.
I think you also underestimate the number of Pro-Israel, center-left Americans that are against this war, and most U.S. military conflict in general. Many American Jews in particular have a long history of opposing U.S. wars dating back to at least the Vietnam war, and it’s frankly a more consistent track record than the right which has been all over the place over the last 25+ years. Note that opposing direct U.S. military involvement does not mean opposing military aid, intelligence sharing, etc. to allies like Israel, which I believe benefits this country, and I suspect that’s where you and I start to diverge.
Regarding the unborn / abortion: This country is sharply divided on the issue, no question. Given this, I think it’s reasonable to respect both sides of the argument. So conservatives could still claim to support individual freedoms while being anti-abortion, because in their view, the unborn deserve to have the same rights as a person outside of the womb. On the other side, liberals can claim to be pro-choice and still support human rights, because in their view, a fetus should not have the same rights as the human carrying the fetus. But you decided to impose your view on the other side by calling them hypocrites. So I returned the favor.
“Can’t have it both ways”
I think we’ve both laid out our views clearly at this point. I remain against this war with Iran and still believe Trump got pulled in under significant pressure, and I’m disappointed he broke his campaign promises on avoiding new foreign wars. The Hormuz situation has made the miscalculation even more apparent.
My main disappointment is still with the “No Kings” protesters. After years of strong rhetoric against “illegal wars” and Middle East entanglements, their energy on this actual conflict has been noticeably absent. That selective outrage continues to stand out to me. You see Trump acting more independently as a strong leader with pro-Israel instincts, while I see heavier alliance influence at play. We also differ on how much direct weight decades of massive U.S. military aid and support carries in these decisions.
On abortion, my views still stands both morally and religiously.
At this point, it seems we’ve each made our positions clear, and we’re not likely to convince each other and its going nowhere. We can agree to disagree on the degree of pressure Trump faced, the consistency of the protesters, and a few other points. If nothing else, I’m glad we’re both against further escalation in this war and hoping for a responsible off-ramp.
Just a couple of points/questions:
1. Who are these all-powerful forces who can drag the leader of the free world into a war? Can you give me one or two specific names? (Do you think Marco Rubio was lying when he said that Israel was going to start a war with Iran anyway, so we went it on day one to make it more effective? He seemed pretty unequivocal.)
2. Trump 2 is very different from Trump 1. This is primarily because SCOTUS endorsed his view that POTUS can do what he wants without fear of facing the legal system.
While Trump 1 was as narcissistic and self-serving as Trump 2, Trump 2 has no legal restraints. It is why you saw him fill the Trump 2 cabinet with yes-men and assorted idiots. While the Trump 1 cabinet was… a little weird, there were some members who seemed unusual but still serious. (Rex Tillerson.)
3. The idea that the No Kings protesters largely support US actions in Iran seems absolutely preposterous to me. It seems as if you don’t want to support the War but are loathe to blame Trump (or the feckless Republicans in Congress) for starting it. Sorry, but “you break, you buy.”
4. If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one. Pretty easy.
Chris – not sure if your questions are directed at Ryan or me but since Ryan’s at 5 and I have one comment left I’ll chime in.
You and I don’t agree on much when it comes to the middle east but I think we’re actually pretty aligned here.
“All-powerful forces:” Exactly. The idea that one of the most independent and decisive (view from the right) or authoritarian and despotic (view from the left) leaders is somehow pulled in “under significant pressure” to a major middle east conflict is ridiculous, and reads to me as a) Trump supporters like Ryan giving their favored politicians a pass when it comes to actions they don’t like and b) lending credence to the old tropes around (primarily Jewish) supporters of Israel somehow controlling everything from policy, finance, the media, etc.
Completely agree that your average No Kings supporter is likely against the war. First, from Dan’s photos post of the rally, there was at least one protestor with a sign that reads “Regime Change Starts at Home.” And from reading about rallies across the country, it’s clear the Iran war was definitely a part of the protests. I can’t speak to the degree the Westport rally featured anti-war protests (maybe someone who was there can?) but frankly, with so many legitimate points to protest, it simply may have been drowned out by other things (e.g. Epstein files).
Calling the protestors hypocrites for their views on an issue like abortion in which the nation is sharply divided belittles their sincerely held belief that life begins at birth, not conception. If you want people to respect the opposite view on the issue, then don’t come out of the gates attacking people for theirs.
Sadly, the comments here quickly turn divisive and irksome — as this kind of thing often does. Here’s an idea: let’s resolve the discussion on November 3rd….
Jeff, are you related to Tom?
I think your post on letting the election decide the issue is by far the best way to resolve the issues (in a “no-Kings” environment).
I just wanted to shed a little light on “No Kings.”
The mass protests this past weekend, were supposedly expressing their POVs about executive power. And maybe, here in Westport, you think you were. But, I believe in challenging the premise. And.. that’s not what people were chanting all over the US in this coordinated opposition.
They were chanting:
“Death to America.”
“Death to the Zionist entity.”
“Long live the Intifada.”
At the same protests…there were communist flags.
Calls for communist revolution.
Calls to overthrow the American system.
This isn’t random and it’s not just activism.
Researchers say the activists operate within a $2.9 billion network of mostly tax-exempt organizations, including some funded by billionaire George Soros—that may violate nonprofit laws by linking anti-Israel messaging to domestic opposition through partisan political work.
A new database launched by the Pearl Project reveals 265 organizations behind the “No Kings” protests, including 79 charitable 501(c)(3) groups ($750 million), 100 social-welfare 501(c)(4) nonprofits ($722 million), 24 labor unions ($1.4 billion), and 24 Democratic PACs ($29 million).
None of the nonprofit entities pays federal taxes despite engaging in explicitly partisan work.
Organizing for what activists have dubbed the “Palestine Contingent” has emerged in major US cities. New York’s “UAW Labor for Palestine” called for participants to demand
an end to arming Israel. Oakland’s “Bay Area Labor
4 Palestine” instructed followers
to bring flags and keffiyehs, and Seattle added anti-Israel activist Tariq Ra’ouf to the official speaker lineup.
George Soros has given millions to Indivisible,
the central architect of protest mapping, toolkits and turnout since 2017.
Indivisible received hundreds of thousands from the Tides Foundation which has been accused of funding anti-Israel campus protests.
President Trump has directed the Justice Department to investigate.
The network encompasses groups like PSL, Democratic Socialists of America(DSA), and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP)
that promote support of U.S.-designated terror groups and seek to transform America into a socialist state.
Combining anti-Israel activism with anti-Trump organizing raises questions about tax-exempt revenue being weaponized for partisan political goals.
Taken together, the chants for “Intifada,” the cries of “Death to America” and “Death to the Zionist Entity,” and the open calls for communist revolution did not appear as isolated or unrelated outbursts, but as overlapping expressions of the same radical political energy present at these No Kings protests. Rather than reflecting a narrow, peaceful objection to executive power, the demonstrations revealed a broader ideological coalition in which anti-Americanism, revolutionary leftism, and extremist pro-Intifada rhetoric existed side by side—and, in some cases, appeared to reinforce one another.
What happens in cities like Philadelphia, New York, Los Angeles, Seattle, etc.. etc… may not look exactly like Westport, but before you show up with your pom poms, you might want to take a good look at what’s behind the mission.
Don’t believe me? Do the research yourself. It’s all out there and available.
Hi Again-
Since you posted this in two places on 06880DanWoog.com, I will respond in both places.
“And again taking your advice I started looking up the big three funders you cited.
Arabella- is a progressive supporting entity doing what is legally allowed. And backed by the Gates Foundation
“Key Aspects of Arabella Advisors:
Operations & Transition: Following years of conservative criticism, the firm announced in late 2025 that its operations team would move to a new entity, Sunflower Services, according to Chronicle of Philanthropy.
Nonprofit Management: Arabella provided administrative, legal, and operational support to four major nonprofit funds that serve as fiscal sponsors, managing roughly $1- 2 billion in revenue for them in 2023, according to Ballotpedia.
These include:
New Venture Fund
Sixteen Thirty Fund
Hopewell Fund
Windward Fund
Services: They helped clients with grantmaking, impact investing, advocacy, and managing complex campaigns.
Political Role: The firm has been heavily criticized by Republican lawmakers for its role in directing money to liberal causes and for its lack of donor transparency, say Chronicle of Philanthropy and The New York Times. However, the D.C. Attorney General closed a probe in 2024 without finding improper business conduct, reports Politico.
Clients/Backers: Major donors and organizations, including the Gates Foundation, have used Arabella’s services to distribute funds, say The New York Times and Wikipedia”
The Hansjorg Wyss’ Foundation- founded in 1998
” Opening paths to discovery and opportunity
The Wyss Foundation is a private, charitable foundation dedicated to supporting innovative, lasting solutions that improve lives, empower communities, and strengthen connections to the land. To confront the global conservation crisis, the Wyss Foundation launched a $1.5 billion campaign, called the Wyss Campaign for Nature.”
And about George Soros- a frequent target of the Right-
The Open Society Foundations (OSF), founded by investor George Soros in 1979, are a global network of philanthropic funds aimed at fostering democracy, human rights, and accountability.
With over $32 billion in total donations, OSF supports justice, education, and progressive causes worldwide, largely focusing on creating “open societies” that reject authoritarianism.
Key Details About the Open Society Foundations:
Founder: George Soros, a Hungarian-born philanthropist and hedge fund manager who began his philanthropy by funding scholarships for Black students in South Africa in 1979.
Mission: To promote justice, democratic practice, and human rights, especially in areas facing authoritarian influence.
Activities: OSF works in over 60 countries and focuses on issues like racial justice, drug policy reform, the climate crisis, and protecting civil liberties.
Funding: The OSF is one of the world’s largest private philanthropic networks, with significant funding from Soros’s personal fortune.
Structure: Originally, it operated as a decentralized network, but it has shifted toward a more integrated global structure between 2022 and 2024, including regional offices.
Focus Areas and Impact:
Democracy and Law: Funding advocacy and initiatives that strengthen democratic participation, accountability, and the rule of law.
Equality and Inclusion: Supporting marginalized communities, including extensive funding for Europe’s Roma communities.
Education and Human Rights: Promoting open debate and academic freedom, including supporting the Central European University.
Economic Opportunity: Investing in initiatives like the Soros Economic Development Fund (SEDF) to create positive social impact.
Criticism and Controversy:
Soros’s philanthropic activities, particularly in promoting progressive causes, have made him a frequent target of conservative politicians, nationalists, and right-wing theorists, especially in Europe and the U.S..
Some critics have perpetuated conspiracy theories, which have often been deemed antisemitic, targeting Soros as a “puppet master”.
Wikipedia”
I am not sure what you are trying to prove by just saying there are well established foundations on the left willing to give money to liberal/ progressive causes – just as there are many foundations backing conservative causes that have right wing white supremecists, Neo nazis, and Proud boy antisemites tagging along for the exposure.
What is missing from your post is the fact that 99.99% of the folks demonstrating were protesting for NO KINGS- directly addressing POTUS and the way he he is running roughshod over our duly elected congress and the system of justice under the constiution that has been in place for 250th year.
I have enumerated all the authoritarian actions of Potus – you can reread my previous posts to remind yourself what I am pointing out.
Thank you for continuing to discuss this very important topic and allowing me to respond with my points of view on NO KINGS”