National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch fired back Friday after Houston’s police chief sent her a veiled threat that the police “will be watching” her.
“I want confirmation if taxpayer dollars are being used to surveil citizens who criticize political appointees’ public remarks,” she tweeted, after Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo sent a tweet Loesch believed crossed a line.
Acevedo instigated the controversy when, on his Facebook page, he slammed gun rights advocates.
“I know some have strong feelings about gun rights but I want you to know I’ve hit rock bottom and I am not interested in your views as it pertains to this issue. Please do not post anything about guns aren’t the problem and there’s little we can do,” he wrote.
“My feelings won’t be hurt if you de-friend me and I hope yours won’t be if you decide to post about your views and I de-friend you.”
“I will continue to speak up and will stand up for what my heart and my God commands me to do, and I assure you he hasn’t instructed me to believe that gun-rights are bestowed by him,” Acevedo added.
Acevedo cast a wide net of blame for the rise of shootings in America.
“The hatred being spewed in our country and the new norms we, so-called people of faith are accepting, is as much to blame for so much of the violence in our once pragmatic Nation,” he wrote. “This isn’t a time for prayers, and study and Inaction, it’s a time for prayers, action and the asking of God’s forgiveness for our inaction (especially the elected officials that ran to the cameras today, acted in a solemn manner, called for prayers, and will once again do absolutely nothing).”
He later told The New York Times that he had received “overwhelming positive feedback” to the post.
Loesch and NRATV were not among those with positive responses. Rather, they called Acevedo out for his remarks on guns, including those he made about penalizing individuals over how they store firearms, according to The Washington Post.
The battle raged back and forth on Twitter.
Like I was saying, blah, blah, blah. Stop misrepresenting &/or lying about my views. Your action is leading to harassment by your minions. You may just make testing the limits of your dishonesty & cyber bullying worthwhile in Court. Many top-notch firms would do so pro-bono. pic.twitter.com/KirUT42u5P
— Chief Art Acevedo (@ArtAcevedo) May 23, 2018
.@DLoesch tells @ArtAcevedo: “I will always, as a free citizen, use my free speech right to call to account any elected or nominated official … And if those elected or appointed officials dislike this, then perhaps the office isn’t best suited for them.” #Relentless pic.twitter.com/9TXcyk5uJz
— NRATV (@NRATV) May 24, 2018
Acevedo then ended the debate, but sent Loesch a warning.
Lastly, I will not respond any further to you on any platform outside of a legal process. Be on notice that we will be watching and will do our talking in a court of Law if the need arises. Good day. https://t.co/xGKhMfaDqq
— Chief Art Acevedo (@ArtAcevedo) May 23, 2018
“Lastly, I will not respond any further to you on any platform outside of a legal process. Be on notice that we will be watching and will do our talking in a court of Law if the need arises. Good day,” he tweeted.
Loesch then issued a series of tweets highlighting her concerns over how far Acevedo would go to watch her and the NRA.
I forgot to ask this last night @ArtAcevedo : when you told me that “we will be watching” (as a result of you disliking my remarks on your reported-on support of sanctuary city policies), are you using the resources of the Houston PD to watch me? AM I under surveillance? https://t.co/VG5U2M5rdu
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) May 23, 2018
In one, she asked the chief, “are you using the resources of the Houston PD to watch me? AM I under surveillance?”
She also challenged the Houston Police Department.
As it relates to Acevedo’s promise to “watch me,” I’m particularly curious how his behavior squares with Texas Penal Code 39.03. https://t.co/kMMXv8WDYp
— Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) May 24, 2018
“Your chief said he was ‘watching me’ after my criticism of his reported-on sanctuary city support. I’m just curious what your SOP is on monitoring speech and whether these thoughts are shared. Thank you for your time,” she tweeted.
“I want confirmation if taxpayer dollars are being used to surveil citizens who criticize political appointees’ public remarks,” she wrote, later adding, “I’m particularly curious how his behavior squares with Texas Penal Code 39.03.”
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.