VermontKevin
VermontKevin's JournalGlenn Greenwald kicks the Left and the ACLU after Charlottesville. (Please Forget His Nazi Clients)
Glenn Greenwald's new column at the Intercept is a rambling piece of junk where he ostensibly defends the ACLU against "misguided"leftist attacks because they defended the free speech rights of Nazis to organize a rally in Charlottesville. To prove that there are "attacks" he lists a whole bunch of tweets from people who are upset and are using the free speech afforded to Twitter users to express their outrage in 140 characters.
https://theintercept.com/2017/08/13/the-misguided-attacks-on-aclu-for-defending-neo-nazis-free-speech-rights-in-charlottesville/?comments=1#comments
Greenwald conflates two different things: speech, and the call to violence. Why? This serves two purposes:
1) In doing so Glenn fundamentally insults the ACLU and those on the Left who would rightfully question its actions. The ACLU didn't go to court and in fact would not go to court to protect the rights of the KKK to incite violence. They would protect the right of the KKK to march. And that's precisely what the ACLU did. It defended the right of these horrible people to protest, not to commit or incite crime.
Once Greenwald's done using the ACLU as a strawman, he proceeds to bash President Obama for killing Anwar Awlaki, the man who oversaw the attempted attacks on British Air and Chicago synagogues and many other terrorist attacks. He then bashes Hillary Clinton for proposed legislation over flag burning from 2005, because obviously he needed to bash Clinton and that was the only thing he could find. And then he finally works his way around to Donald Trump, and assures us that his speech is bad and hateful, BUT...
2) Then the true purpose of the article reveals itself. How do you hold Trump and his Klan and Nazi allies accountable not for their free speech, but for their calls to violence and the resultant acts of crime that occur? You don't. You can't. It would be a violation of the free speech rights of Trump, and the Klan, and the Nazi's to civilly sue and hold them accountable for the lunatics of their movements whom they inspired and exhorted.
In his column, Greenwald forgets to mention that he had a Nazi client who was sued for inciting murder. Greenwald lost.
Anderson v. Hale and World Church of the Creator is a civil rights case in which Reverend Stephen Anderson sued the World Church of the Creator, charging them with advocating a “Racial Holy War” that incited a man’s murderous rampage.
On April 4, 2000, CCR filed a civil rights suit on behalf of Reverend Stephen Anderson in Chicago federal court against Matthew Hale, the leader of the World Church of the Creator, and the estate of Benjamin Smith, who shot Reverend Anderson three times. The suit, which was filed under the federal Ku Klux Klan Act and the Illinois Hate Crimes Act, charged that Hale conspired with Smith to violate the civil rights of Reverend Anderson on the basis of his race.
On July 3, 1999, Reverend Anderson, who is Black, was shot three times while he was standing in the driveway of his home in Decatur, Illinois. The man who shot him, Benjamin Nathaniel Smith, was a complete stranger who went on a three-day-shooting spree that left two people dead and nine people wounded. Smith was an active member of the World Church of the Creator, a white supremacist hate group based in Peoria, Illinois that was led by Matthew Hale, its so-called “Pontifex Maximus.” The church advocated a “Racial Holy War,” which it defined as a “total war against the Jews and the rest of the goddamned mud races of the world.” Each of Smith’s targets was Black, Asian American, or Jewish, and several were shot near their synagogue or church. Smith’s murderous rampage came to an end when he took his own life as the police were about to apprehend him. Following Smith’s shooting spree, Hale failed to express compassion for Smith’s victims or their families. Rather, Hale stated that he was happy with Smith’s zealotry for the church’s cause and applauded Smith for dying a “martyr for free speech for white people.”
Rather than risk a court determination, defendants elected to discuss an out-of-court settlement.
Last modified: October 9, 2007
https://ccrjustice.org/home/what-we-do/our-cases/anderson-v-hale-and-world-church-creator
I hope the victims in Charlottesville sue the Nazi/Klan bastards into the ground. I hope they include Trump, and whoever else in the White House helped egg this on. Yeah, these assholes can say what they want, but they don't get to escape the consequences of their speech. The car that killed Heather Heyer had many co-pilots. Make them pay.
WaPo Mansplains Death "Mistress and muse of James Bonds creator, Ian Fleming, dies at 104"
Seriously WaPo? That's the headline of a woman's obituary?
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/896834519873056775
And this is after calling out NBC News for this bullshit:
https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/881812957822431232
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/883377849301954560
DON'T BE A SUCKER--Antifa video made in 1947 by US Military
https://twitter.com/OmanReagan/status/896563796071731201That's a clip, here's the full video:
https://twitter.com/OmanReagan/status/896709123462406145
Of course, this was made by The Deep State, so beware.
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11/the-deep-state-goes-to-war-with-president-elect-using-unverified-claims-as-dems-cheer/
I and my family are watching another radical antifa video as our after-Sunday dinner movie:
I Might Believe Orrin Hatch's "Wad" Explanation EXCEPT for History:
Let us not forget that this is a man who accused a respected African-American law professor of lying about one of his friends during Senate questioning by referring to pubic hair floating in a glass of gin.
Yes, my friends. Let us walk down memory lane and remember the salacious and ungentlemanly conduct of Orrin Hatch towards Professor Anita Hill when she had the temerity to accuse Clarence Thomas of sexual harrassment. Hatch had absolutely no problem speaking fluently about Long Dong Silver and pubic hair from his committee seat. (You've been warned. Do not google Long Dong Silver at work.) Remember his defense of Clarence Thomas? Hatch accused Professor Hill of making everything up, alleging she cobbled together her story from another sexual harassment case and from a passage from The Exorcist about a pubic hair in a glass of gin.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/187870/HATCH-SAYS-HILLS-ALLEGATIONS-ARE-TOO-CONTRIVED-TO-BE-BELIEVED-NO-DOUBT-SENATOR-SAYS-A-KANSAS.html
Does ANYONE actually believe this smarmy piece of Senatorial male privilege does not know the sexual connotation of "wad?" Orrin Hatch is no shrinking violet.
You know, someone smarter than me ought to do a mashup of how these white male Senators treated Professor Hill. Then run it side-by-side with how they've treated Kamala Harris. History, folks.
The White House is a Dump Because A Black Family Lived There.
That is what President Trump means. It's a dump because the family living space was lived in by Black people.
Let me tell you a little story. The first house my wife and I bought was in a section of NYC that was slowly turning into a gentrified neighborhood. We bought our home from a very nice couple with three kids who were moving to the Midwest because he got a job editing a major paper out there. We made a lot of New Yorker jokes, and moved in and began to paint. And paint, and paint.
My now deceased mother-in-law visits. She stays for three weeks and about midway, at dinner, she announces:
"You never told me they were Black!" I assumed she was having a stroke and went for the phone.
"The family was Black! Did you have the place cleaned before you moved in? They have hairs that go everywhere!"
I and my wife sat at the table, stunned. Then she told the kids to go upstairs and watch tv.
"They smell!"
My wife told her to shut up, but I really could not say anything. I should have. I did discuss it with my kids after she left but I know I didn't do the right thing at the time.
My mother in law told the entire family we lived "in a slum." In a house "that Black people moved out of." The other racists in the family knew what she meant. Another family member told me to make sure to change the toilet seats.
That's what a racist like Donald Trump means when he talks about the White House being a "dump." Fuck anyone who voted for him, and anyone who helped.
Jeff Session's DOJ uses the Racist Term "Illegal" to Describe People.
DOJ is Now Officially Using The ‘I-Word,’ and Advocates are Outraged
by Rachel Stockman | 11:00 am, July 31st, 2017
There has been shift in the language that the U.S. Department of Justice is using in its press releases, and it’s not sitting well with some. The DOJ, under the leadership of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, has now begun using the term “illegal aliens” to refer to immigrants who do not have the proper paperwork to be in the United States. Last week, in announcing stricter rules for so-called sanctuary cities, a DOJ announcement said, “So-called ‘sanctuary’ policies make all of us less safe because they intentionally undermine our laws and protect illegal aliens who have committed crimes.”
The DOJ also sent this press release out last month:
Attorney General Sessions Speaks with Families of Victims Killed by Illegal Aliens
06/29/2017 12:00 AM EDT
Today Attorney General Jeff Sessions met with families who have lost loved ones because of crimes committed by illegal aliens. In the meeting they discussed the progress being made by the Trump Administration to strengthen laws protecting Americans from crimes committed by illegal aliens and, the need to keep working to ensure that federal immigration laws are enforced.
Advocates for immigration reform contend that the term “illegal” is a “racial slur” and believe it is dehumanizing. Instead, they prefer if the term “undocumented immigrant” is used.
“They’re using a legally inaccurate term that’s deployed to unfairly label and scapegoat people who are out of status due to a variety of systemic circumstances,” Xakota Espinoza from the Center for Racial Justice Innovation, told LawNewz.com
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/sessions-doj-is-now-using-term-illegal-aliens-and-advocates-are-outraged/
I think anyone who uses the term "illegal" is a racist.
Why The Sanctions Bill Severely Checks and Restrains Trump
The bill takes Obama-era sanctions against Russia that are in place under executive orders — that is, directives that only the president has authority to enact and rescind — and officially enshrines them in the law. It also establishes a new congressional review process that would allow Congress to block the White House from taking steps to ease sanctions if it wanted to. And it imposes a fresh batch of sanctions on Russia, Iran, and North Korea.
Trump now faces an awkward dilemma: veto the legislation and endure the humiliation of seeing Congress — controlled by his own party — override him with ease, as lawmakers in both parties have pledged to do. Or sign the legislation and endure the humiliation of agreeing to a bill that his administration lobbied against in its bid to cling to a key bargaining chip in negotiations with Russia.
Trump wanted to keep sanctions under his control as he angles to turn things around in the rapidly souring US-Russian relationship. Moscow despises US sanctions, and their removal would be central to any kind of major reset between the two countries.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/28/16055630/congress-trump-russia-sanctions-veto
Methinks the Congress has intelligence that indicates that this step must be done.
The NYPD didn't come within a mile of that Shitshow!
The New York Police Department will not attend President Trump's major law enforcement and immigration policy speech in Long Island, N.Y. on Friday, where he plans to lay out the administration's plan to defeat the MS-13 gang.
“We have a lot to do, a lot of work to do in New York City,” said Police Commissioner James O’Neill on Friday.
The commissioner's jurisdiction of New York does not extend to all of Long Island, where the meeting on gang violence is taking place. It is not clear if the NYPD would have been expected to attend the event.
New York is a sanctuary city, and Trump's speech is expected to take a hard line on the link between immigration enforcement and the rise of gang-related crime.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/344350-nypd-will-not-attend-trump-speech-on-ms-13-gang-in-long-island
Good call.
Facing Twice The Hostility For Half The Credit.
I know these women are not Democrats. But they are patriots.
https://twitter.com/CharlotteAlter/status/890922582052044800
I would support them in an Independent run. But I hope they join us under the Big Tent.
I had a nap. What did I miss? Serious.
Seriously, we are going to be sleeping in shifts until this Presidency is over.
Profile Information
Name: KevinGender: Male
Hometown: Burlington
Home country: USA
Current location: Earth
Member since: Sat Jul 1, 2017, 01:55 PM
Number of posts: 1,473
