|February 12th, 2019||#901|
|February 27th, 2019||#903|
EMJ on Irish show, it's a very good, concise rundown of all his arguments. Some of which are correct, some are wrong.
I post in this thread because he mentions appearing on Richard Spencer's show, and he talks Whiteness and how it's not real and bad and govt wants you to be white rather than ethnic.
Catholicism is a serious competitor with white nationalism, and it needs to be understood, refuted and defeated - in the minds of our people.
(despite hosts' location and ostensible subject, ireland isnt really the subject, it's one of several examples - his usual stuff, but really covers the whole area - usury, sodomy, germanics chasing pigs, sexualization as political control, Charlottesville and racialism, ireland and abortion and homosexuality in the vatican and elsewhere)
|March 7th, 2019||#904|
|March 27th, 2019||#905|
Grace Poole says:
March 20, 2019 at 11:00 pm GMT • 900 Words
However flawed, men came together in Charlottesville to declare that:
1. the monuments to men of significance in American history should stay put
2. Neither “Jews” nor anybody else should be permitted to replace their culture
3. I for one (probably the only One) have no problem with the use of National Socialist imagery — certainly not the Tiki torches that so terrify big-mouth Jewish female lawyers from NYCity, and not even swastika: Germans and National Socialism have not yet been given an equitable hearing. If all are equal under the law, then even evil Nazis have a right to be heard.
3a. Regarding that swastika: Who among you knows how it became a “symbol of hate?” (tune in tomorrow)
4. Those men who protested in Charlottesville — in a situation that became violent through unplanned circumstances — are being prosecuted by loud-mouth Jewish women from New York City. https://www.c-span.org/video/?457758...ism-xenophobia The intent of “Integrity First for America,” the tax-dodge ‘charity’ they created for their assault on free speech, is to “crush” and “financially destroy” the “men” who organized the protest in Charlottesville.
5. IF the loud-mouth Jewish women from NY City are successful, they will have cut off one, important, quintessentially American form of democratic participation and means of avoiding violence.
It sure looks like it is the intent of Integrity First for America — the loud-mouth Jewish women, to foment violence, because that is the only remaining recourse if the right to protest and to speak out is shut off.
5a. Rabbi David bar-Hayim discoursed at length about how the “massacre” in Pittsburgh came about because European-Americans are confronted with the eradication of their culture, and perceive — correctly, in bar-Hayim’s assessment, that Jews are responsible for that situation.
6. The defendants in the civil case in Charlottesville have had a difficult time obtaining legal counsel in Virginia.
That is a shame, and a huge mistake for the legal community in Charlottesville.
What is at stake in Charlottesville is not so much the fate of those 24 men, with whom, undoubtedly, most lawyers in Charlottesville do not wish to be associated.
They are not the issue.
7. In Charlottesville, Blacks and Whites have lived together in peace for decades, even centuries.
In a conversation on C Span this morning, Arthur Brooks discussed his book, “Love Your Enemies.” https://www.c-span.org/video/?458903...k-love-enemies
He began the conversation by recounting how a Black man interrupted a rally of “White nationalists” — a biker gang, if I recall correctly. The encounter ended with the Bikers and the Black man discovering that they Agree! They want the same things! They do NOT hate each other, never did, never seek to; they just want to live their lives.
The same thing could have happened in Charlottesville.
Why did that NOT happen in Charlottesville?
Blacks and Whites did not come to the mutual realization that they did not hate each other because ADL was there.
ADL was the toxic ingredient in Charlottesville.
ADL stirred hate into the mix.
Before ADL in Charlottesville?
Blacks and Whites get along.
ADL comes to Charlottesville, and all hell breaks loose. People die.
The agenda of ADL is to foment hate and division.
8. The big-mouth Jewish women from New York City claim that they are bringing this lawsuit “in the name of the people of Charlottesville.”
“With this lawsuit, Charlottesville is fighting back. This case sends a message to every hate group in the country: Americans will not give in to violence and hate. We will defend the dignity and equality of all people. And we will ensure this never happens again.” https://www.integrityfirstforamerica...%20Hearing.pdf
Well, my big mouth Jewish sweetie pies from New York City, this never happened BEFORE in Charlottesville, and if you really want to ensure that it will never happen AGAIN, tell ADL to stay out of Charlottesville’s business: the people of Charlottesville got along just fine without you for a hundred years and more.
8. Therefore, the challenge to the legal community in Charlottesville is to represent the people of Charlottesville; the reputation of Charlottesville — which was a “best place to live” when I lived there a dozen or so years ago, but “Charlottesville” has now become synonymous with “raciss KKK Nazi” hate.
The Legal Community in Charlottesville owes it to their city, their pride, their own “integrity” to defend their city against the hate-mongers from ADL and New York City.
The legal community of Charlottesville, and especially the law school at University of Virginia, owes it to their institution, its founder, Thomas Jefferson, and to all that Thomas Jefferson stands for, to defend the right of free speech.
Charlottesville’s reputation, and the tradition and guarantee of Free Speech: THOSE are the issues at stake in Charlottesville.
If the big mouth Jewish women from New York city want to make a name for themselves, let them do so in New York City. They can start by investigating ADL and how and why it came to insinuate hate into a protest in an otherwise well-mannered and genteel Southern town.
|March 27th, 2019||#906|
Join Date: Aug 2005
James Fields changes plea to guilty to federal hate crimes
Strictly a move to avoid the death penalty. I still believe he is innocent of all charges.
The man accused of running his car into a crowd of counter protesters during a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville has now changed his plea in a move that is seen to be an effort to avoid the death penalty.
James Alex Fields Jr., 21, appeared in federal court Wednesday for a change of plea hearing where he changed his plea from not guilty to guilty.
By changing his plea to guilty, it takes the possibility of receiving the death penalty off the table, according ABC affiliate station WHSV.
Fields admitted during the hearing that he violated federal hate crime laws when he targeted the group.
This comes in connection to 29 federal hate crimes charges that Fields faces, which he initially pleaded not guilty to in July 2018.
Of those 29 charges, one is a count of a hate crime act that resulted in the death of Heather Heyer and the other 28 are hate crime acts that caused bodily injury and an attempt to kill people within a crowd. Each count carries a maximum penalty of life in prison and a fine of up to $250,000, according to a statement from the Department of Justice.
"In the aftermath of the mass murder in New Zealand earlier this month, we are reminded that a diverse and pluralistic community such as ours can have zero tolerance for violence on the basis of race, religion, or association with people of other races and religions," Attorney General William Barr said in the Department of Justice statement.
"Prosecuting hate crimes is a priority for me as Attorney General. The defendant in this case has pled guilty to 29 hate crimes which he committed by driving his car into a crowd of protesters. These hate crimes are also acts of domestic terrorism," Barr said in the statement.
U.S. Attorney Thomas Cullen also called Field's actions a "hate-inspired act of domestic terrorism."
In addition to the federal charges, Fields was found guilty in state court in connection to the death of Heyer, a counter protester who was killed after Fields drove his car into the crowd, as well as injuring dozens of others at the scene of the Aug. 12, 2017, rally.
Heyer's mother, Susan Bro, told The Associated Press that she planned to attend the hearing and she hoped that he would be changing his plea to guilty so that there wouldn't be another trial wherein she would have to listen to "more of the hateful rhetoric."
"I'm hoping this can be the end of it," Bro said to the AP.
In the state trial, jurors recommended a life sentence plus 419 years in prison, but the official sentencing will be determined by a judge, the AP reported. That sentencing is slated for July 15.
At the time of the protest, a group of white nationalists, which included neo-Nazis and Ku Klux Klan members, descended onto Charlottesville, spurred by the city's plans to remove a Confederate statue from a downtown park. Violence broke out as counterprotesters clashed with white nationalists, prompting Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe to declare a state of emergency.
If ZOG's antifa foot soldiers had not started the violence in the first fucking place, there would not have been anyone hurt or killed. Antifa killed the commie tub of lard.
|April 29th, 2019||#907|
Join Date: Nov 2004
Charlottesville: The Last Stand of American Freedom
The extreme left and politicized elements of the government are using Charlottesville to crush your rights and solidify their power
|April 30th, 2019||#908|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Judge Moore comes through!
The judge has now ruled that both the Lee and Jackson statues are War Memorials and thus are protected by state law. The basic idea of the law is that those statues may not be "disturbed" which includes relocating them without the express permission of the state government (i.e. the General Assembly).
An interesting comment in the media coverage is that the September trial will now be to determine if the statues can be relocated. I tend to doubt this somewhat, since "removal" is included in the statute as kind of "disturbance":
In any event the judge has previously ruled that the members of the City Council who voted to remove the statues knew or should have known that their actions were/would be in violation of the Code and prohibited. As such they can be found personally as well as in their official capacities responsible for (among many other things) the legal costs of the plaintiffs incurred in protecting the memorials. This issue has not been separated (so far) from the main case, and so the September trial [hey, itz getting lotz closer now!] should also include the matter of responsibility for legal expenses.
The Charlottesville politburo has already spent millions of their taxpayers samoleons, and of course the appeals haven't even started yet. Many, many levels of appeals...
No way out but through the jews.
|April 30th, 2019||#909|
Join Date: Aug 2005
The judge took his time but ruled correct
It's about time Judge Moore ruled on this. Virginia State law is crystal clear on this. There is a huge debate going on in Norfolk, VA over their Confederate Monument as well.
More good news-someone defaced the dead fat ass commie's memorial and filmed himself doing it.
|June 17th, 2019||#910|
Join Date: May 2018
|June 24th, 2019||#911|
Join Date: Apr 2019
"the argument goes, the expressions are speech protected under the First Amendment."
what a kike swine. The freedom of speech is a fucking LAW, not an argument. But to Yids, it's merely a little argument to be defeated.
“I think it is important for Americans to hear what these men and groups did, what they intended to do, how they celebrated and what a grave threat to our system they are.”
Indeed, this is a true statement if you're talking about jews. The Jews celebrating Gaza murders, the Purim murder celebration...
|4 Weeks Ago||#912|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Three RAM members sentenced in CharlottesvilleSSR
Three members of the white supremacist group Rise Above Movement received prison sentences of more than two years each on Friday for crimes stemming from the 2017 Unite the Right rally.
Benjamin Drake Daley, Thomas Gillen and Michael Paul Miselis were among four RAM members indicted in October on one count each of conspiracy to violate the federal riots act and one count each of traveling from California to Charlottesville with the intent to “incite a riot, organize, promote, encourage, participate in, and carry on in a riot, to commit an act of violence in furtherance of a riot, or aid or abet any person inciting and participating in or carrying on in a riot.”
After a U.S. district judge in Virginia ruled that the three could be prosecuted under the riot statute and that it did not violate their First Amendment rights, the three accepted plea agreements last spring. However, in California federal courts, a similar case against other RAM defendants was thrown out because the judge there said the riot statute was overbroad. The Virginia defendants will still be able to appeal their convictions on constitutional grounds, and have 14 days to do so.
A fourth RAM member indicted at the same time — Cole Evan White — accepted a plea agreement in November and is currently out on bond.
On Friday, the prosecution attempted to argue that a hate crime enhancement was appropriate for Daley, Gillen and Miselis, citing months of similar behavior at protests in California and a litany of anti-Semitic and misogynistic rhetoric.
Dino Paul Cappuzzo, a former FBI investigator, testified to an investigation he had conducted on the defendants.
According to Cappuzzo, the three defendants had participated in rallies in Huntington Beach, California, and Berkeley, California, prior to attending the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville. At both California rallies, the defendants engaged in violent behavior, he said.
“They showed a propensity for violence and mayhem prior to Charlottesville,” he said.
Additionally, the defendants participated in a book burning of works such as “The Diary of Anne Frank” and “Schindler’s List.”
The courtroom was shown video evidence depicting the defendants in Charlottesville at the Aug. 11, 2017, torch rally on University of Virginia Grounds and Aug. 12, 2017, footage at the UTR rally.
In harrowing footage from Aug. 12, Daley and Miselis can be seen punching, kicking and choking counter-protesters on Second Street in downtown Charlottesville while attempting to gain access to what is now called Market Street Park.
Still images that depict the victims of the attacks were later edited and found on the defendant’s phones, one bearing the phrase “THOT STATUS: PATROLLED,” using a sometimes misogynistic acronym. Another image of Miselis kicking a man was edited to insert a Star of David over the victim’s head.
Capuzzo said over the course of his investigation he determined that the RAM defendants had started the violence on Second Street.
Chris Kavanaugh, an assistant U.S. attorney representing the prosecution, argued that a hate crime enhancement was appropriate for sentencing the defendants due to their well-established anti-Semitism and anti-woman views. Whether the victims of their violence at the UTR rally were chosen because they were a protected class isn’t necessary, he said, because they were perceived to be Jewish or aligned with those the RAM members disliked.
“[The defendants] were protesting against them because they stand alongside the people they despise,” he said. “Call it political if you want — it’s still race-based violence, and the hate crime enhancement applies.”
Lisa Lorish, a federal public defender representing Daley, disagreed with this argument, pointing out that none of the victims from the Second Street attacks was interviewed to determine if they were a protected class. Regardless, the RAM defendants’ speech was protected, she said.
“The things they’ve said are reprehensible,” she said. “They’re reprehensible to me, they’re reprehensible to many people, but they’re constitutionally protected.”
Lorish went on to describe the prosecution’s argument that the counter-protesters were attacked by the RAM defendants because of their perceived class or class alignment as “circular.”
“They government is arguing that, because [Daley] assaulted them, they must be Jewish, instead of arguing that he assaulted them because they are Jewish,” she said.
U.S. District Judge Norman K. Moon sided with the defendants’ argument and said the government’s argument did not do enough to establish that the victims were chosen because of their racial or religious background and thus a hate crime enhancement was not warranted.
Daley, because he was a co-leader of RAM, received higher sentencing guidelines than the other two defendants. He received a 37-month sentence and two years of supervised probation upon release.
Miselis’ attorney argued that his client had received significant social and financial punishment already, having lost his lucrative job as a defense contractor for the U.S. government. Moon guffawed at the implication he should take leniency on Miselis because he had been an accomplished member of society prior to his crimes.
“It’s like when a bank president embezzles money and then says ‘I can’t be a bank president anymore because no one trust me,’” Moon said. “Good, that’s how it should be.”
Miselis was sentenced to 27 months in prison and two years of supervised probation upon release.
Gillen, despite not being depicted harming anyone at the UTR rally, received a 33-month sentence due to past criminal conduct, mostly revolving around marijuana. He will also be under two years of supervised probation upon release.
All three defendants will still be allowed to appeal their arguments that the charges be dismissed on constitutional grounds, which bears significance after a similar case was thrown out in California last month.
Robert Rundo, the other co-leader of RAM, was one of three charged with conspiracy to riot under the same statute as the Virginia case. A California U.S. District Judge dismissed the charges in June, writing in a memorandum opinion that, though hateful and violent, the defendant’s speech was constitutionally protected.
The Virginia RAM defendants have 14 days to appeal.
White, the last RAM defendant, is expected to be sentenced this fall.
|1 Week Ago||#913|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Released state police rally operations plan accused of being over-redacted
Nearly two years after the deadly Unite the Right rally, Virginia State Police have been spurred to release their operations plan by a lawsuit. However, the plaintiffs feel the redactions are over-broad.
Soon after the UTR rally, reporters Natalie Jacobsen and Jackson Landers — represented pro bono by attorneys from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press — sued the city of Charlottesville, state police and the Office of the Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security in October 2017 for access to city and state police plans from the Unite the Right rally.
The police had been criticized for their response to the white supremacist rally, which ended with the deaths of counter-protester Heather Heyer and two VSP officers.
In the complaint, Jacobsen and Landers said they were told their Freedom of Information Act requests were denied because the records contained tactical plans and could endanger law enforcement personnel if they were made public.
In March 2018, the city agreed to give Jacobsen a redacted copy of the city police plan, but state authorities fought to keep their plan under wraps.
At an April 2018 hearing, Judge Richard E. Moore ordered VSP to provide a redacted copy of the plan within 30 days, but he issued a stay on the order. VSP appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Virginia a few days prior to the order’s issuance.
Because the order was not final when the appeal was filed, the Supreme Court of Virginia declined to hear the state’s case.
In May, the case returned to Charlottesville Circuit Court and Moore removed his stay, ordering VSP to again provide a redacted version of the plan. Against the petitioner’s wishes, Moore said that redaction via deletion of material believed by the VSP to be exempt could be done, rather than the more common black-out line redaction.
It could be appropriate, Moore said, so that the length of redacted materials could not be revealed to the public by Jacobsen, and perhaps create a public safety risk.
Moore’s order was finalized on June 10, and a redacted copy of VSP’s operations plan was submitted to Jacobsen late that month.
However, in a filing last month, Jacobsen, by counsel, argued that the submitted plan violated FOIA guidelines and did not meet Moore’s order.
“By indiscriminately over-redacting, Respondents fail to highlight for Petitioner or the Court those portions of the Operations Plan, if any, they contend would in fact ‘constitute a risk to the safety or security of law-enforcement personnel or the general public’ if disclosed,” the filing reads. “And, by failing to point out which of their newfound exemptions they now claim apply to which portions of the Operations Plan, Respondents leave the Court (and Petitioner) to guess at which exemptions Respondents might be attempting to rely on for particular redactions.”
Additionally, the plaintiffs again took issue with redaction method, which whited out entire pages instead of the more common blacking out.
“Instead of utilizing the typical redaction practice of blacking out withheld portions, Respondents — for no stated or apparent reason — whited out sections and, in some cases, entire pages of the Operations Plan, making it unnecessarily difficult to discern where and to what extent material has been withheld,” the filing reads.
The response goes on to highlight a variety of issues with the submission, arguing that information already released via CPD, the Governor’s Task Force report and the Hunton & Williams report has also been redacted, going against Moore’s decision.
In its own response, the state argues that no portion of the plan was improperly redacted, in part because the court granted “wide latitude” for the redactions. Additionally, the response claims the state reviewed the publicly reviewed reports for accuracy.
“In numerous instances the Reports attributed purported facts as contained in the VSP Operational Plan that are not in the plan,” the response reads. “Actual references to the Plan that were disclosed in the two reports were disclosed in redacted form released by Respondents, as were other portions of the Plan.”
Following the May hearing, Deputy Attorney General Victoria Pearson — who is representing the VSP — said she did not take issue with the accuracy of the Hunton & Williams report.
The court has not ruled on either response, and a hearing has yet to be set.
Last year, hundreds of police officials descended on Charlottesville, fencing in the Downtown Mall and conducting searches at controlled entrances. In the aftermath of the first anniversary weekend, area residents criticized the police response, characterizing it as “overblown”.
Though police officials have been tight-lipped about how many officers to expect, CPD Chief RaShall Brackney said the approach to policing this year will be “a very nimble, very soft presence,” similar to what was done while the University of Virginia men’s basketball team won the NCAA Tournament in Minneapolis this past spring.
Officials will operate under a unified command, Brackney said, as they did in 2018.
VSP spokeswoman Corinne Geller said Friday that the city police department would again be the lead agency for security during the rally’s second anniversary and directed questions to CPD. Geller also said the number of VSP personnel working in Charlottesville would not be released for operational and tactical reasons.
|1 Week Ago||#914|
Join Date: Aug 2005
WN forced to comply with lawsuit or pay legal fees
Only WNs are forced to comply with horseshit like this.
A white supremacist avoided sanctions Thursday by beginning to comply with long-outstanding discovery requests in a lawsuit against key organizers of the deadly Unite the Right rally.
Elliott Kline, aka Eli Mosley, an organizer of the 2017 rally and former leader of the now-defunct Identity Evropa, is one of more than a dozen defendants in a lawsuit filed by area residents nearly two years ago.
The lawsuit has moved at a snail’s pace since its initial filing, which attorneys for the plaintiffs have attributed to a lack of cooperation from the defendants. In particular, some defendants have been slow to comply with discovery requests, causing U.S. Magistrate Judge Joel C. Hoppe to threaten financial sanctions.
Last month, Kline was ordered to comply with discovery requests or face sanctions. During a telephonic hearing Thursday in Charlottesville’s federal court, attorneys for the plaintiffs said Kline complied with some of the discovery requests at his deposition the day prior but clarified there was still a “long way to go.”
“During the deposition, [Kline] made a number of representations that will require additional discovery inquiries,” said Michael Bloch, an attorney for the plaintiffs.
Kline’s phone had yet to be turned over to the third-party vendor for imaging, something the defendant said he planned to do Friday. In a telephonic hearing last month, Kline said the only device he had kept from the time of the UTR rally was an old cellphone, and added that he no longer had access to his social media accounts.
While in-roads have been made in Kline’s discovery requests, fellow defendant Matthew Heimbach — the former leader of the Traditionalist Worker Party — does not appear to have taken steps to meet his discovery requirements and has cited personal problems at a prior hearing.
Heimbach currently is embroiled in a complicated familial and legal drama that started after he allegedly was caught having sex with his wife’s stepmother. Heimbach spent some time in jail for assaulting his wife’s father, Matt Parrott, who reportedly caught the defendant engaging in coitus with his wife.
While Heimbach was in jail, his estranged wife lost his computer during a move, he said. She has signed an affidavit confirming that claim.
In the last month, Heimbach, who is representing himself, has filed several motions, none of which appears to meet his discovery requirements.
Among the filings are a tardy request for dismissal and a request not to be sanctioned due to his stretched financial means. Heimbach outstanding discovery requirements were not discussed at Thursday’s hearing.
Another defendant, neo-Nazi and University of Virginia graduate Richard Spencer, argued in a filing this month that sanctions imposed on Kline or Heimbach would adversely affect him.
Spencer led various torch-lit rallies before and after the UTR rally but has not faced any criminal charges.
The plaintiffs have asked the court to find that Kline and Heimbach entered into an agreement with one or more co-conspirators to commit racially motivated violence. Spencer says this argument is too broad and implicates him.
Hoppe has not yet ruled on any of Heimbach or Spencer’s recent motions.
A third discovery deadline for Kline is set for Wednesday.
|alt-right, charlottesville, christopher cantwell, richard spencer, white activism, white activists|