#44

There should be a Sadly Stupid Flag.

He ran away from the other thread on this subject, after having been shown to be foolish tool.

He would have Taco'ed on Kissinger, and tried to date Jane Fonda.

These charges are a bad joke; the kind of Lawfare Jbellyache whines about so much... as proven here:

- And people here running around screaming "White Supremacist were America's greatest threat" were brain washed
#35 | Posted by oneironaut

Hilarious, really.

"White supremacist and white nationalist ideologies are consistently identified by major U.S. law enforcement and research organizations as the primary and most lethal source of domestic violent extremism.

While specific data points shift year-to-year, the broader trend over the last decade shows these groups are responsible for the highest number of domestic terrorist attacks and fatalities in the U.S." FBI, DHS

from the above link:

"It is very thin, (and) does not adequately allege in my judgment any violation of the mail or wire fraud statutes (which are the indictment's key allegations)," said John C. Coffee Jr., a professor at the Columbia University Law School, in a statement.

"SPLC was under no duty to disclose to the world that it was paying secret agents to advise it about the activities of violent organizations. That it paid agents to inform it does not imply that it was supporting these organizations, even if the agents (with mixed motives) gave some of the payments to the organization."

Robertson said that organizations, including the government, regularly use confidential informants because it is an important tool to collect information about groups that actively withhold information about their activities.

In the indictment, the DOJ alleged several instances of wire fraud. But Robertson said "it doesn't seem to me there was any criminal intent at all."

"When you are paying an informant who is deeply embedded in a group that is engaged in violent activity, whether it is terrorism or others, you don't want to risk their lives by making it clear they were receiving payments," she said.

Robertson said the indictment doesn't even go as far as to allege any criminal intent to defraud financial institutions. The allegations were that SPLC tried to hide its activity from its donors.

;;

"That seems really problematic to me," Robertson said. "I don't believe the donors were, in any way, misled."

In the end, Robertson said the government will likely have a difficult time proving its case.

"I would be surprised if this case made it very far in the process," she said. "I would be absolutely shocked if it went all the way to a conviction. I think it will get dismissed earlier in the process."

"Legal experts skeptical of DOJ's criminal case against Southern Poverty Law Center

One said the 11-count indictment against the civil rights organization amounted to an abuse of the criminal law.'

"The conduct at the core of the indictment, paying confidential sources inside violent extremist groups to gather intelligence, is something federal law enforcement does as a matter of course," said Cassandra Burke Robertson, director of the Center for Professional Ethics at Case Western Reserve University law school.

"Charging a civil rights organization criminally for doing the same thing, in this political context, strikes me as an abuse of the criminal law."

Video version:

The Chris Hedges YouTube Channel