Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
December 20, 2019
So after the Democrats gave me no Due Process in the House, no lawyers, no witnesses, no nothing, they now want to tell the Senate how to run their trial. Actually, they have zero proof of anything, they will never even show up. They want out. I want an immediate trial!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 20, 2019
The House Democrats were unable to get even a single vote from the Republicans on their Impeachment Hoax. The Republicans have never been so united! The Dem’s case is so bad that they don’t even want to go to trial!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 20, 2019
The reason the Democrats don’t want to submit the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate is that they don’t want corrupt politician Adam Shifty Schiff to testify under oath, nor do they want the Whistleblower, the missing second Whistleblower, the informer, the Bidens, to testify!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 20, 2019
Much more interesting than any of this impeachment stuff is the fact that these tweets about the impeachment would be banned on a college campus under Donald Trump’s Executive Order on Combating Anti-Semitism, which uses the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) “Working Definition of Anti-Semitism” to define anti-Semitic speech not allowed on college campuses.
Calling Adam Schiff corrupt and “shifty” would certainly be classified as “making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations” about a Jew.
The Jews have already said that Jews being “shifty” is an anti-Semitic canard.
I’m gonna go out on a limb and wager that it may also be an anti-Semitic trope.
What I don’t know is whether or not it would violate the EO to read these tweets aloud, or even read them silently, on a college campus.
The EO is vague, with the only mention of enforcement being this:
It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.
Of course, it isn’t enforced like other forms of discrimination because of the IHRA definition, which basically classifies all form of criticism of Jews as a group as discrimination.
The ostensible goal is to disallow anti-Israel groups from operating on campus, and anti-Israel speakers from speaking on campus. There is no such rule about people who are against black people or any other race speaking on campus. Just for example, Charles Murray, who wrote The Bell Curve, a book about race and IQ, is allowed to speak on campus, even though it is considered “racist” to say that black people have low IQs. Steve Pinker is a Jewish race realist and a professor at Harvard. So again – the whole concept of using Title VI to ban criticism of Jews is completely different and completely unprecedented.
But how far does it go?
I think it’s clear that reading the above Trump tweet aloud would be an offense you could be expelled for if you agreed with it. But how can you know if someone agrees with it when they read it?
You get into mind reading.
It’s the same thing with the New Testament. You certainly can’t read aloud the verses in the Bible that say that the Jews killed Jesus. That is identified specifically in the “working definition” as something you can’t say. But are you allowed to read the Bible silently? Are Bibles even allowed on campuses now? Are you allowed to believe in Christianity and set foot on a college campus?
So many questions.
It’s such a shame that more people aren’t talking about the Executive Order, because it would be great to have some more legal opinions. The only really meaningful one I’ve read is from one of the authors of the IHRA “working definition,” Kenneth Stern, who wrote an op-ed in The Guardian about it, basically just saying that it didn’t make any sense to apply it to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
Ah, well.
Strange times.
Anyway – the Orange Man is of course right that these Jews in the House have no right to tell the Senate when they’ll do a trial.
It’s pretty hilarious, actually.
RT:
US President Donald Trump has demanded that House Dems hand over impeachment to the Senate “immediately” so he could have a proper trial, while accusing them of stalling the proceedings.
Trump launched a fresh broadside at Democrats after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to say when she would turn over the articles of impeachment to the Senate, implying it might take a while.
Explaining her decision, Pelosi said that the documents would remain in the House until Democrats are satisfied with how the Republican-majority Senate will handle the trial. Trump argued that Democrats who have been rallying behind the impeachment cause since the beginning of his presidency should have no say in how the trial is managed by the GOP, since they themselves failed to ensure a fair process in the House.
“So after the Democrats gave me no Due Process in the House, no lawyers, no witnesses, no nothing, they now want to tell the Senate how to run their trial,” Trump tweeted, adding that he wants the trial to kick off as soon as possible.
“Actually, they have zero proof of anything, they will never even show up. They want out. I want an immediate trial!”
The House voted largely along party lines to pass two articles of impeachment on Wednesday evening, but while zero Republicans voted in favor of either article – “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress”– two Democrats voted against the first article and three against the second.
Trump argued that the lack of defectors among the GOP shows that “the Republicans have never been so united” while the lack of consensus among Democrats is yet another indicator that their case “is so bad that they don’t even want to go to trial!”
Yes, they certainly did unify the GOP. While confusing and abusing their own constitutes, apparently some of whom believe this is all real.
The IQ of the average Democrat is very low, unless they are malicious. Sometimes they are both stupid and malicious. But they told these poor cat ladies for more than two years that Trump was going down for a Russian election meddling conspiracy. He was proven innocent, and now they’re saying he’s going down for a Ukrainian election meddling conspiracy. Can you imagine getting fooled twice in a row like that?
What will come after this?
Which former Soviet bloc country will the Orange Man be accused of conspiring with?
Moldova?
Lithuania?
Tajikistan?
It’s all so tedious.
No wonder people are praying for a school shooting to break the monopoly.