“F*** the troops” Kokesh interviews Raub

| August 21, 2012

You may remember that we discussed Brandon Raub and the fact that he was tossed into a hospital, supposedly for his Facebook posts. Personally, I think there’s more to this than what’s been in the press. According to Raub, in an interview in Business Insider;

“They were concerned about me calling for the arrest of government officials.”

Yeah, I really don’t believe that because all of Veterans For Peace, Code Pink and most of IVAW would be locked up if that were the case. According to an FBI Richmond spokeswoman;

“We went out to interview him because of complaints that our office had received about people coming across his posts and perceiving them as threatening so our office along with Chesterfield County Police Department on Thursday…”

I think someone was disturbed by more than his Facebook posts, and the FBI wasn’t trolling his FB page – it was part of their investigation. What I saw on his FB page was a bit twisted, but nothing worth getting thrown in the hospital.

Anyway, if I was trying to convince everyone that I’m not crazy, Adam Kokesh is probably the last person I’d talk to. You know the Adam Kokesh who was leading a “F*** the Troops” campaign a scant few weeks ago. But Old Trooper sent us this video of Adam interviewing Raub by phone. It’s interesting, to me, that “F*** the Troops” Kokesh is wearing his IVAW T-shirt again. Anyway, here’s the interview.

Again, all we’re hearing is Raub’s side of the story. It’s also interesting that the Rutherford Institute, the same folks who led charge against the Stolen Valor Act in the 9th Circuit appeal of Xavier Alvarez are taking up the mantle for Raub.

This will shake out one of two ways; 1) Raub did some nutty shit that frightened someone somewhere, or 2) The SPLC and DHS has convinced the local PDs that veterans are really a bunch of nuts who should all be locked up.

I’m betting on #1.

Category: Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans Issues

Comments (20)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Sites That Link to this Post

  1. Perspectives | August 21, 2012
  1. JP says:

    Jonn, I’m gonna have to disagree on this one. I read the entire Facebook. The reference to “sharpen axes, sever heads” was lyrics from a rap song. Rap sucks, but posting lyrics isn’t a crime.

    The rest of the posts were truth bullshit and calls for revolution, though much tamer calls than we hear from the NBPP and the Occupy crowd. Seems we only stamp down on speech that the current regime disagrees with these days.

    I disagree with his views, but I’ll be damned if I’m gonna stand by silently while the govt infringes on one’s right to free speech, especially someone who fought for it. When we let shit like this happen…it’s a slippery slope. Just my view here.

  2. Yat Yas 1833 says:

    JP, you’re going to recite a “rap song” as your citation for your hypothesis for defending these ‘a$$hats’??? Yeah.

  3. JP says:

    Yat Yas,

    I’m defending their right to be asshats. Yeah, the shit about axes and heads was lyrics from a rap song. I had a hunch and googled it when I noticed he posted many rap videos.

    The truther bullshit and Alex Jonesery posts are fucking retarded, but not a crime, either. I don’t feel that warrants the FBI and SS coming to visit. I disagree with the tin foil hat brigade, but what the fuck is going on when the govt comes after this guy (who served honorably and is fairly decorated) but not left leaning groups that talk way more shit?

    I’m sorry guys, hate me all you want but on this one I feel we have to stick up for the rights of the douchebags, as much as we disagree with their views.

  4. ARoberts says:

    Ok, when this story first started circulating I went and looked at what this ass hat posted. I dont see anything that even remotely looks like a threat however, I did see a whole lot of stuff that would lead me to wonder about his mental stability. That being said, I dont think that he should have been arrested but I could go with a mental health evaluation.

    There is some mumbling on the internet though that might suggest that there were things posted that have since been deleted. Considering the fact that someone else is updating his profile it is possible but in all reality if there was anything serious on his page it would be locked down and no one would be able to use it.

    Im going to agree with JP on this. Until someone can prove that he made threats Im going to have to say that, even though I think hes a moron, this dude has every right to post all this idiotic shit to his page.

  5. rb325th says:

    I am with Jonn on this, something tells me it was a bit more than his facebook postings. I have a feeling there were conversations/actions that took place offline that got the attention of the FBI and Secret Service (were they(SS) in fact involved? as I have seen accounts saying they were and others with no mention of them being there.) Secret Service does not typically get involved unless someone made threats against the executive branch.
    I think we can all agree that there are some from the left who have done or said some pretty outrageous shit… New Black Panther Party for one.. Still though, I am betting that there is more to this than his facebook.

  6. CombatCAsh says:

    Is it me or does Raub sound more sane than Kokesh?

  7. Twist says:

    I’m with 3 and 4 on this one. While I think that truthers are batshit crazy, they still have the right to express their messed up conspiriacy theories. If this guy didn’t post any threats then he shouldn’t be arrested. To be honest though, I didn’t go to his facebook and am going off of what was posted here.

  8. Old Tanker says:


    I don’t think you’re disagreeing with Jonn, he said from what he saw there was no reason for SS to get involved. He only surmised that there is more going on than what meets the eye. Although Tedly VonNugentBurger got a visit from the SS for “free speech” too…..

  9. TSO says:

    I have to demur to whatever the LEOs on teh ground thought. I’m assuming if they showed up, or even took the guy in, and he was like “look, those are lyrics, not threats” then he *should* have been released. But we’re still only getting one side of the story, and that side strikes me as troublesome, albeit not illegal. So, I think I will remand this case for more info.

  10. Jonn Lilyea says:

    I know there’s someone besides him updating his FB page, so I’m pretty sure there’s less now than there was before the whole thing started. Based on what Raub says, and what’s on his FB page now, I’ve seen much worse that hasn’t resulted in hospitalization or involved the FBI, so that’s why I think there’s more to this than what we’re reading.

    Please don’t expect me to Google for rap lyrics – how does that make the words more innocuous anyway just because it was first recited while set to music?

    Yeah, given what we know at this point, I’m on Raub’s side, but I just think there’s more to the story. And having Footloose Kokesh in his corner doesn’t make me any more comfortable.

  11. Loach says:

    He did not get put away because of Facebook. He was put away because of crazy shit he said when they interviewed him. Nothing follows.

  12. JP says:


    @10, Jonn,I agree, with Kokesh pulling for him, he’s fucked. But Kokesh only shows up when there’s attention, to stroke that ego of his. and apparently the Marine’s mom has been posting on his page.

    Perhaps I’m just jumping to conclusions because I strongly dislike and distrust the current regime. Who knows. But from the info I have now, the whole thing stinks.

  13. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    I don’t know what all this is yet, I agree there is not enough info on the story.

    Raub was a contributor to Don’t Tread On Me, it is entirely possible he was sidetracked into something “interesting” from there which caused the Feds to be taking a peek, which ironically would play directly into the DTOM mantra of the “Elites” controlling everything.

    It smells all kinds of odd so far. Add the FBI and SS claiming they didn’t arrest him but the local PD took him for evaluation, it’s all still pretty sketchy as it were. I am hoping law enforcement is onto something they can’t discuss, instead of this being suppression of outlandish speech.

  14. UpNorth says:

    Raub supposedly went to court yesterday, and the Rutherford Institute’s lawyer said, “In a hearing before a special justice on August 20, government officials again pointed to Raub’s Facebook posts as the sole reason for their concern and for his continued incarceration.” @#11, still want to stand by your post?
    There were a couple of nuggets at PuffHo’s, first, “Raub’s supporters characterized the detention as an arrest, complaining he was handcuffed and whisked away in a police cruiser without being served a warrant or read his rights”. Then, there was this, “Col. Thierry Dupuis, the county police chief, said Raub was taken into custody upon the recommendation of mental health crisis intervention workers. He said the action was taken under the state’s emergency custody statute, which allows a magistrate to order the civil detention and psychiatric evaluation of a person who is considered potentially dangerous”.
    Unfortunately, the author of the article, Larry O’Dell, didn’t bother to try to find out what the reasons were that the “recommendation” was made, and by whom.

  15. Adam_S says:

    Jeez Kokesh looks like he’s stoned to the umpteenth degree.

  16. Fred says:

    Maybe there is more to this than is being said.

    However, I have to question why the Black Panthers didn’t get scooped up for voter intimidation or putting out public bounties on people.

    For that matter, it would appear as if Nidal Hassan’s stated beliefs and positions were largely ignored.

    Barring future developments, I would say that this is discrimination against combat veterans.

  17. Squid Wiz says:

    I agree with Jonn’s assessment wholeheartedly. Theres always something more than what we’re hearing when it comes to these types of situations.

    At my old duty station, we had a few patients that alleged wrong doing on the part of some of the staff (not myself, but others I worked with). They wrote the local newspaper, etc, gave their side of the story, and in my opinion, at times slandered medical personnel. There was little the staff could do to defend themselves because of HIPPA (exonerating themselves would have required the release of protected health information) and so the general public got a severely skewed picture, informed only by the patient, of the situation.

    As a result of that experience, I’m always hesitant to jump to too many conclusions when a medical issue is potentially involved because its rare that you are going to hear the full story. What I can say is that the community services board, the group that does the emergency assessments, is notoriously conservative when it comes to forcing involuntary admission so I find it very difficult to be believe that there weren’t additional comments or actions that raised legitimate concern. Also, remember that the family and media jumped all over this being an “arrest.” Yes, he was put in handcuffs but thats not all that unusual when you have someone you are transporting that is unpredictable or potentially a danger to himself or someone else. In the end, there was no arrest, no charges and the guy was taken directly to a hospital for evaluation. They blew this into some libertarian crisis from moment one so I am a little reluctant to take their word as gospel.

    We can speculate about this being discrimination all we want but even if it is, who do you propose we point the finger at? Law enforcement? I think their explanation for why they felt they needed to investigate, after they received multiple complaints and ran it by the CSB, seemed reasonable. All that is left then are the people who made the complaints themselves and who knows what aspect of this whole thing concerned them (veteran status, owning weapons, etc). Its just speculation.

    One last thought. One of the articles I read mentioned the Marine was concerned about involuntary medication. Every facility has a very strict involuntary medication protocol. Barring emergencies (where the person is actively trying to hurt themselves or others) you cannot involuntarily medicate someone unless you go through a protocol which always requires medical justification and usually an independent review by doctors not directly involved in the case. In the places that I’ve worked, it was rare that we had to use the protocol. Either the patient was offered meds, didn’t want them and it was reasonable to refuse or they were offered meds and accepted them. For involuntary medication to even be brought up at this point raises all kinds of flags for me that theres way more to this story than we’re getting.

  18. NHSparky says:

    To put a little more spin on Squid Wiz’s last paragraph, also consider that it took a court order for Laughner (Tucson shooter) to get medicated, which his lawyers fought every step of the way.

  19. Squid Wiz says:

    Well Loughner’s situation was a little more complicated because his attorneys thought they were doing him a favor by delaying a move that they believed would prevent him from achieving competency and facing trial, a trial which could have resulted in the death penalty. They failed to appreciate the fact that he was an imminent danger to himself or others and needed to be medicated for strictly medical reasons independent of what the outcome would be for his trial. But still, your point that it required more than just some needle happy doctor with a wild hair to medicate someone indiscriminately is well taken. Those days are long gone, if they ever existed at all. I’m not saying we should go back to institutionalization but we have now gone so far to the other extreme of placing the person’s “rights” before looking out for those that are too ill in some cases to even realize they are ill. Personally, when I see someone’s child, sibling or parent undernourished, filthy, and babbling to themselves while they sleep on a street corner I find it difficult to stomach that we are preserving their “rights” and dignity by not getting them help.