Rainford Pushes Flawed Arguments Against OccupySTL on Dana Loesch's Radio Show

First, Mayor Slay's Chief of Staff Jeff Rainford copied Dana Loesch's inflammatory rhetoric against OccupySTL, ridiculously claiming that the group was "unruly" and falsely suggesting that they were relieving themselves all over Kiener Plaza rather than in the port-o-potty's provided by local unions:

Jeff Rainford, Slay's chief of staff, said the camps are getting unruly, the plaza is beginning to smell like urine, and a few were recently arrested for public intoxication.

Then, Rainford mimicked Loesch again by seemingly suggesting that the OccupySTL group might want violence:

"All I'm trying to do is to keep this from becoming Oakland," he said. "I'm trying to get this solved with no violence."

Still, he said, he understood that the occupiers may not have the same plans

So I guess it really should be no surprise that Rainford decided to appear on Loesch's radio show today to explain why the city has decided they need to kick the Occupy group out of Kiener Plaza. After all, Loesch has been trying to portray the campers at Kiener as filthy, violent, parasite-infested, astroturf, drug-crazed, sexual deviants from the very beginning, so it makes perfect sense that Rainford would help provide validation to St. Louis's Queen of Hate Radio.

You can listen to the interview here:


Rainford claims the city originally felt that OccupySTL was not hurting anyone, but "what changed" was that they no longer believed this was the case. However, his justification for the claim that OccupySTL is now "doing harm" is that the city has received complaints from people who "work downtown, live downtown, and have businesses downtown." Combine this with the previous revelation from the Post-Dispatch that Rainford refused to answer whether the city was now planning on cracking down on OccupySTL only because the Downtown Partnership complained at a meeting last week, and it seems like we have the makings of a very shoddy argument.

Previously, Occupy STL wasn't hurting anyone. But now, because a group with Peabody and Bank of America representatives on their board is complaining about Occupy STL, Rainford suddenly thinks that they are "doing harm?" Being angry at someone you wish would go away does not mean that person harmed you. Occupy STL could just as credibly claim that Bank of America was harming them with the stink eye. Furthermore, the idea that they're monopolizing the space isn't true either, as the group has been willing in the past to move tents to accommodate events. The city's sudden reversal without any evidence to now claim that Occupy STL is harming people seems like an incredibly tacky move. I hope they reconsider.