Connect with us

If You’re Gay, And Defend Your Rights, Erick Erickson Thinks You’re Acting Like A Nazi

Published

on

https://youtube.com/watch?v=X9p8P-y-Fz0%26hl%3Den%26fs%3D1

Erick Erickson, founder and managing editor of RedState.com, on his personal blog AND on RedState.com, wrote,

“Yes, I know about Goodwin’s law, but comparing gay rights activists to the Nazis is fitting. They’ve gone from being persecuted to persecuting. Of course, they’ll say it is all in the fight for their civil rights — much like the Nazis needed to go after people to make things right.”

Ignore the fact that there is no “Goodwin’s Law”, it’s Godwin’s Law, which states that “overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.” (Yes, Mr. Erickson is a lawyer.) 

So, person A says: “You are gay, therefore you do not deserve to be protected by The Bill of Rights.”

Person B, who is gay, says: “You are incorrect. The Bill of Rights applies to all citizens in the United States.”

This simple exchange, according to Mr. Erickson, means you are acting like a Nazi. 

Go figure.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

'SUITS AND SWORDS AND WRESTLING BELTS'

‘Are You Kidding Me?’ Legal Experts Stunned as More Trump Classified Docs Discovered – at a Florida Storage Facility

Published

on

Attorneys for Donald Trump have located more classified documents, in addition to the 300 that federal agents retrieved while executing a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. These newly discovered classified documents were sent from a federal office building in Washington, D.C. to a private external storage facility in West Palm Beach, Florida, which is near the ex-president’s resort and residence..

The stunning revelation of more classified documents being found, even after a Trump attorney attested in June they had been told by the ex-president there were no more classified documents, comes after Trump’s attorneys hired a third party to search four of his properties for classified documents.

The Washington Post, which first reported on the additional classified documents, adds, “emails show that GSA [the federal General Services Administration] and Trump staffers worked together to arrange to ship several pallets of boxes and other items weighing more than 3,000 pounds from Northern Virginia to the Florida storage unit in September 2021.”

READ MORE: Supreme Court Hears ‘Most Consequential Case’ to Democracy – a ‘Fringe’ Theory Ginni Thomas Promoted

The GSA worked with the Trump team to help “secure the storage unit at a private facility in West Palm Beach on July 21, 2021,” which is 18 months after Trump left office.

“People familiar with the matter said the storage unit had a mix of boxes, gifts, suits and clothes, among other things. ‘It was suits and swords and wrestling belts and all sorts of things,’ this person said. ‘To my knowledge, he has never even been to that storage unit. I don’t think anyone in Trump world could tell you what’s in that storage unit.'”

As The Post notes, the existence of additional classified material, outside the ex-president’s Florida home, “indicates Mar-a-Lago was not the only place where Trump kept classified material. It also provides further evidence that Trump and his team did not fully comply with a May grand jury subpoena that sought all documents marked classified still in possession of the post-presidential office.”

Legal experts are stunned.

“Are you kidding me?” asked former U.S. Attorney Barbara McQuade, now a law professor and MSNBC legal analyst. “How many more classified does he have?”

Another former U.S. Attorney turned law professor and MSNBC contributor, Joyce Vance, appeared to question how the classified documents got there.

READ MORE: Guilty on All Counts: Trump Organization Loses Big in Criminal Fraud Case

“Trump lawyers found classified items at a storage unit GSA arranged for Trump in Florida, turning them over to the FBI. Trump sources say items were packed in No. Va, sent down & Trump had no idea what was there, but they had to get in there somehow?”

“Astounding,” comments former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti. He adds, “It appears that Trump’s own team doesn’t have a good handle on all the government documents in his possession, despite a criminal investigation.”

 

 

 

Continue Reading

CRIME

Trump Team Hires Outside Firm to Search Four Properties Over DOJ’s ‘Lingering Concerns’ Classified Docs Still Missing

Published

on

Lawyers for Donald Trump have hired an outside firm to search four of his properties after the Dept. of Justice raised concerns there remain classified documents still missing.

In June an attorney for Trump signed an affidavit claiming all classified documents taken from the White House had been returned. FBI agents executing a legal search warrant subsequently found over 300 classified and top secret documents at Mar-a-Lago.

A team of two people recently “searched Trump Tower in New York, the Bedminster golf club and two other properties amid lingering concerns from the Justice Department that not all documents had been returned to the federal government,” CNN reports. “The four searches, which were carried out in recent weeks, were overseen by Trump’s legal team, the source said.”

READ MORE: Supreme Court Hears ‘Most Consequential Case’ to Democracy – a ‘Fringe’ Theory Ginni Thomas Promoted

The Washington Post reports Trump’s legal team says the outside hired firm did not find any new classified documents. But even after the Mar-a-Lago FBI search, DOJ “prosecutors have continued to question whether Trump has returned all materials with classification markings.”

Some are questioning why the Trump legal team hired an outside third party, and wonder if they have clearance to view classified and top secret documents.

The Twitter account for National Security Counselors, a “Washington-area non-profit public interest law firm that specializes in national security law,” offer such a question.

READ MORE: Guilty on All Counts: Trump Organization Loses Big in Criminal Fraud Case

The account, generally run by Kel McClanahan, whose bio at the George Washington University Law School notes he often represents the Intelligence Community, tweeted:

What

OK wait a minute

You’re telling me that his lawyers hired YET SOMEONE ELSE to READ THROUGH POTENTIAL NATIONAL DEFENSE INFORMATION

And PEOPLE THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA

He added:

AND THE FIRM AGREED TO DO IT

thus opening themselves up to prosecution under the Espionage Act

 

Continue Reading

RIGHT WING EXTREMISM

Listen Live: Supreme Court Hears ‘Most Consequential Case’ to Democracy – a ‘Fringe’ Theory Ginni Thomas Promoted

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court Wednesday morning will hear oral arguments in a case that could literally determine the future direction of American democracy – based on a theory Ginni Thomas, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas‘ spouse, was pushing in several states to try to overturn the 2020 election results and install Donald Trump in office.

Marc Elias, the attorney for the Democratic Party who won all 64 cases filed by the Trump campaign and its supporters challenging the 2020 presidential election results, has issued a warning about Wednesday’s case, Moore v. Harper.

Elias at his Democracy Docket website calls it “a case out of North Carolina that gives the Court the opportunity to consider the fringe independent state legislature (ISL) theory.” On social media he calls it, “the most consequential case for our democracy this term.”

READ MORE: Ginni Thomas ‘Intertwined’ With ‘Vast’ Campaign Pressuring Supreme Court to Overturn Roe: Report

Simply put, the Supreme Court justices today will decide if only state lawmakers, some, like in North Carolina, in tremendously gerrymandered districts that give Republicans a guaranteed majority, should be the only ones who can decide all the rules of how their state conducts elections, including ignoring the popular vote and deciding for themselves who their state has “elected” to be President.

“The independent state legislature (ISL) theory is a right-wing constitutional theory about who has the power to set rules for federal elections,” Elias explains. “The theory interprets the word ‘legislature’ in the U.S. Constitution to mean that state legislatures — and only state legislatures — can make laws regulating federal elections. This differs from the standard interpretation, in which ‘legislature’ means the state’s general lawmaking process, which includes the governor’s veto, citizen-led ballot measures and rulings of state courts.”

“By excluding all other parts of the state government,” Elias continues, “the theory would allow state legislatures to set election rules and congressional maps unchecked — not by governors, state courts, the people or even state constitutions themselves.”

READ MORE: Ginni Thomas Attempts to Influence Overturn of Election Even Wider Than Previously Known

“A fan favorite for former President Donald Trump’s campaign,” he adds, “this theory was advanced by his lawyers in multiple cases challenging the outcome of the 2020 election.”

Robert Reich, a Berkeley professor, frequent cable news commentator, and former U.S. Secretary of Labor, explains the case another way: “Moore v. Harper could let extremist state legislatures disregard the popular vote and choose their preferred presidential candidate.”

On Tuesday, Reich issued this warning: “Ginni Thomas used the independent state legislature theory in her efforts to pressure state lawmakers to overturn the 2020 election results. This theory is central to a case before SCOTUS tomorrow, called Moore v. Harper. Are we really going to let Clarence Thomas rule on this?”

Last week he posted this short video to explain the case.

You can hear the oral arguments in Moore v. Harper at the Supreme Court’s website or on C-SPAN, starting 10 AM ET.

Watch Reich’s video above or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.