Well, over the recent day, there been news of a John Kelly of last year trying to stop the White House from giving Security Clearance to Jared Kushner, surely there would be speculations into the wife as well, Ivanka Trump, who is the daughter of the President, both who are in informal or non-specific roles in the Trump Administration. They are there, but not really there. Which makes the whole arrangement more hectic.
However, ever since winning the election, these two, the power-couple behind the President. Has lingered around him. Not that they have any expertise or knowledge in public administration. No, they are just relatives of the President and therefore, trusted counsel. They are not what you say, career civil servants nor been ideological driven to get the position they are in. It is not because of their education or their profession, they have no experience and no merits to prove their value. Therefore, only the blood-line and the relations are the reasons.
That is why it is even more striking, that the power-couple behind the President are under fire today again. Because of an issue that lasted so long. They went so long without proper security clearances. It is now proven that the President demanded the son-in-law to get the Top Secret Security Clearance, even if he could be compromised, lied about foreign communications and other forms, which is used to prove scrutiny and eligibility for security clearances in the White House. The same was done by his wife Ivanka, as she also had revise her forms and information to the officials for Security Clearance.
These two wouldn’t have gotten away with it, if they weren’t related with the President. The White House has already been in a hot mess of the Security Clearances, as there been plenty with interim security clearances and not gotten properly integrated and following protocol, as the staff is supposed to be clear and trustworthy of such. As they are keeping state secrets and ensuring the safety of the Republic. However, instead there been plenty of questionable behaviour and connections, that even the ones who was already flagged and in question got appointed with the likes of Gen. Michael Flynn.
What we have seen and read is yet another step of nepotism. Where the President has resident and ruled in favour of his family and his closest kin over the Republic. Where the President are ordering for his own sake and not for the safety of the Republic. That is why Security Clearance given to Jared Kushner is done in spite of the laws. The same can be said about the position and abilities Ivanka has too in the White House. They are there because of the President and nothing else.
This is what Tin-Pot dictators does. This is what autocrats and tyrants do, because they doesn’t trust anyone else than family. This is like the mafia and crime-families, this is not actions made by government or public administrations, which are taken serious. They would hire and appoint people of expertise and merits in the fields. Not hire family members and give them ultimate security clearances without having an official office or position in the Cabinet.
Instead, they are two internal satellites within the West Wing. Doing whatever they like, as their mission, their value to staff is bound by family loyalty and not by any ordinary function. They are not afraid of being fired or retired. The family will always take care of them. They are as thick as thieves and maybe they are. Since the investigations are following them and they have to answer for the public for the orders and the appointment of themselves. Since, it is a public administration and not a Sopranos. Feel me?
Kushner, explain yourself, why you revised your documents a million times, John Kelly didn’t advance you and later you still got clearance! Explain, also Mr. President explain that and why Ivanka got a vital role, when none is doing anything significant. Peace.
If you have followed the Right Wing media in the United States, the key persons would be Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly or Alex Jones. But a person who is now as significant and whose a Fox News Contributor on the Sean Hannity Show is Tomi Lahren. She has gone from being a rising star on The Blaze which is run by Glenn Beck. After being fired for her pro-life admissions on the View, she became a slogan-queen on a Great American Alliance. From there she has become a part of Sean Hannity’s show. Therefore, the nonsense of her still matters. Because she is on the biggest news commentary show of the Right Wing and the Republican Party.
The Fox News are initially state TV at this point, where the Presidents agenda and wanting to defend him no matter what he do. Even stand by his conspiracies and his vicious attacks, even if there are no evidence or no basis for the matter. Like Tomi Lahren was during the Government Shutdown, blaming the Democrats for the shutdown. Tomi just did what the Republicans did too, hit that Narrative, even as the House of Representatives, Senate and the Presidency was run by Republican’s. It cannot be Democrats direct fault. Secondly, the negotiations had been hectic and the White House was running in circles. Therefore, even Senate leader Mitch McConnell wondered what Trump wanted. This proves that the stories portrayed from the State TV and Fox was fictitious.
That is the trouble I have with Tomi Lahren, her reality and the messages she sends often make no sense. She speaks of freedom of speech on her behalf and for the republicans. Republicans can march and can speak out, they can stand and use all methods to spread their message. However, when Beyonce or Colin Kaepernick did what they did for their causes. Then it was wrong, because Blue Lives Matter, not only Black Lives Matter. BLM has even called all sorts of things by Tomi, but she has not said similar about White Supremacists or addressed the Charlottesville attacks. That is because it is the right group who did violence, while peaceful protest done by leftist is wrong. Just like the Woman’s marches on the One Year Anniversary of Trump Presidency was also catching heat from Lahren. Because, if these was Tea-Party Woman, it would be cool, but since they addressed the womanizer-in-charge, the President and the #MeToo issue. To make their own messages and try to empower themselves in a time of harassment in working places. That has to be taken care of and warnings of misconduct should be taken serious. Instead, Lahren was mocking it and said these woman should do something else. Well, did she think her rights to her own body and allowing her to abort if she wants came without marches in America? Lahren needs to read a book on Woman’s Right in the US.
That means in general that she is demeaning the Freedom of Speech and of liberty. That only the narrative and stories, which matters, that is why it is tiring and that Lahren has gotten this prime-time spot and that Hannity has given her this slice of TV. A this point there is little difference between her and White House Counselor Kellyann Conway or White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. All of them is spinning the same narratives, it just their titles and their positions. They are using the words, but all defending Trump by all means. Making his hypocritical acts and words into poetry. They are trying to make vomit into Shakespeare and hope people sees the same.
Fox News is state TV and its known. If you didn’t know. Now you do. To see how she makes everything leftist and using her voice to address people. Instead of building people up or using her voice for something positive. Since she actually has a stage. Lahren is using it to blame people for the Tide Pod Challenge and blaming the parents. Tomi could have listen and asked how this trend became a thing. But using it to make parents sensing the up-coming elections.
It is like, she can pin-point at anyone outside her camp. Blame them and throw trash at them. But if his master and the MAGA crowd is the trolls, the terrorists or the ones who creates the problem. She still deflects and blame the left. It is like no matter what President Trump does or have done. It is fine, but if Obama or Clinton did the same it would be full war. If Obama had paid porn-star and cheated on his wife. Lahren would have gone of the wires. Since Trump was having relations with Stormy Daniels. The RNC and the Republican Party hasn’t addressed this. All others has to fall on their swords when they do something like this or impeached, but Trump is the Holy Grail.
Tomi Lahren could have spread a positive message, she could have done that even inside the Right Wing. Not all there are hating on minorities, not everyone is playing games with people’s lives. Many do and many uses immigration and using taxes to take control. Like the RNC has done and proven how they uses meaningful government programs with humanity as bargain chips for a border-wall and other pledges of Trump. This is something Lahren knows, but still she defends it by all means.
Her last words are usually strong and fierce, but not facts. They are defending a narrative that isn’t building a United Republic. Instead, it is continuing to spread vile content. Is that the legacy and the words you will be remembered for? Is your fame and fortunes based on hatred and misuse of patriotism for one man and his selfish political position. Trump uses people and will use Fox News. He will use Sean Hannity and Alex Jones, they will be seen as cup-cakes and fear-mongers as they are. Even Tucker Carlson are looking more foolish as the days goes by. In the same box and inside the same sphere of influence is Lahren.
You could have used your position for something more fruitful. Not necessary a progressive aspect, but used it. So it made sense, not speaking of right wing agenda, family values and then defending cheating President. Not defending patriotism, but saying to the ones defending the real values smearing them with hatred. It so backwards into the future. However, we from the outside of America sees it. But you in the bubble cannot grasp it.
Lahren and the State TV has to look into their mirror and wonder if they become cyber- and broadcasting bullies with high-paid salaries sanctioned by Rupert Murdoch. We can wonder if that is the reason for the existence of the Fox TV Channel. The Broadcasting is becoming InfoWars and Breitbart, but with better lightning. Is that the memo we can take for this day and age?
Lahren, was this your destiny to defend a scrupulous man, which happen to be the President. Is that your motivation and aspiration. You have no true ethical and moral backbone, whatever he does or says, you will a story to defend it? Is that who you are?
So you will be blind to facts and science itself, to any common sense, as long as it fits the President? That is good to know, because if he back peddles, if he back-flips or even raises eyebrows for the Republican’s we will know. Because back in the day, he used to pay Democratic Politicians and use them for building his buildings. Therefore, his moral authority is non-existent, that is known for the rest of us. But not you.
ME: “So Tomi Lahren, will you take this President? Donald J. Trump, Honor him, bow down to him and as long as you can in your professional career. Stand by him and promote his ideas, in good and bad days, promote his disgusting and vicious believes, his attacks on his own institutions and family values. Will you be his propaganda tool?”
Me: If so say “YES”. Tomi Lahren: “Yes”
Me: “And you will be together in the time he is in Office. You can now take the ring and kiss the flag. Your now officially his propaganda tool and useful contributor on State TV. The President will never praise you or hold your hand. But you wash his in good and bad days. We can now all say Amen”. Tomi Lahren: It’s my final thoughts, A-MEN God Bless the President and the United States!”.
“3 U.S. Code § 105 – Assistance and services for the President: (e) Assistance and services authorized pursuant to this section to the President are authorized to be provided to the spouse of the President in connection with assistance provided by such spouse to the President in the discharge of the President’s duties and responsibilities. If the President does not have a spouse, such assistance and services may be provided for such purposes to a member of the President’s family whom the President designates” (Cornell Law School).
I don’t know about you, but it’s just one of these days, where you see entitlement in the New York Gang or the Trump Administration. This was made and prepared for the President Donald J. Trump, as he was swearing-in and starting his term. Because the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), who is in-charge of checking and making the sure the personnel and staff is following the codes and procedures for their roles in government. Seriously, the OGE Lawyer worked the laws in his favor, even when I struggle to see it. My first question after reading the US Code 105 Title 5(d), did the President loose his wife? Therefore, because of his tragic loss, he needed counsel from son-in-law Jared Kushner and oldest daughter Ivanka Trump inside the White House. How can you spell the code wrong, “If the President does not have a spouse”. True she was in New York the first months of the Presidency. Still, she was still his spouse, meaning that “he had”. But before I rant, take a look into key parts of the reasoning for the appointments of his family inside the White House!
“Section 3110 of title 5, also known as the anti-nepotism statute, states that “[a] public official may not appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate for appointment, employment, promotion, or advancement, in or to a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control any individual who is a relative of the public official.” 5 U.S.C. § 3110(b). The statute expressly identifies the President as one of the “public official[s]” subject to the prohibition, and a son-in-law is a covered “relative.” Id. § 3110(a)(2), (a)(3). Moreover, under Article II of the Constitution, the President exercises “jurisdiction or control” over the White House Office as well as over the rest of the Executive Branch. See Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52, 163–64 (1926); Inspector General Legislation, 1 Op. O.L.C. 16, 17 (1977). Less certain is whether the White House Office is an “agency”—a term that section 3110 defines to include an “Executive agency,” thereby calling up the definition of “Executive agency” generally applicable to title 5, see 5 U.S.C. § 3110(a)(1)(A); id. § 105. But whether or not the White House Office meets this definition (a subject to which we will return in Part II, infra), we believe that the President’s special hiring authority in 3 U.S.C. § 105(a) permits him to make appointments to the White House Office that the anti-nepotism statute might otherwise forbid” (Koffsky, P:2, 2017).
“A President wanting a relative’s advice on governmental matters therefore has a choice: to seek that advice on an unofficial, ad hoc basis without conferring the status and imposing the responsibilities that accompany formal White House positions; or to appoint his relative to the White House under title 3 and subject him to substantial restrictions against conflicts of interest. Cf. AAPS, 997 F.2d at 911 n.10 (declining, after holding that the First Lady qualifies as a “full-time officer or employee” of the government under FACA, to decide her status under the conflict of interest statutes). In choosing his personal staff, the President enjoys an unusual degree of freedom, which Congress found suitable to the demands of his office. Any appointment to that staff, however, carries with it a set of legal restrictions, by which Congress has regulated and fenced in the conduct of federal officials” (Koffsky, P: 16-17, 2017).
I will not jumping jacks around this OGE Lawyer Koffsky, but office that is run by the President is an Executive Office, that issues Executive Orders and Executive Memorandums. That if followed by current law and within provisions within the state because legal and acts that all citizens has to follow. To subject the White House into a sublime role of the state is demeaning, even if he needs support of the branches of government like the Courts and Congress. But that doesn’t make the White House into a playhouse for playboy bunnies, its the place where executive orders and legal minds meet to determine the future of the Republic. It’s insulting that Koffsky is belittling the office and the White House, so it fits legally President role and his ability to appoint family members.
Yes, the President is allowed to seek advice and that ad-hock with family members. That is without doubt, but that is different ones in while speak with an uncle in Louisiana before making a decision that matters for both United States and the World itself. There is problematic to hire family into the White House, as their supposed restrictions and the boundaries of their roles. Since the family bond will not be cut, but be ever present in the decision making.
That Jared Kushner is a Public Official is clear with his title and responsibilities, as a Senior Advisor to the President, who is working on American Innovation, Peace in the Middle East and combating the Opioid crisis in the United States. Ivanka Trump is by title the Assistance to the President. Both of them has had a public role and been acting as Public Officials. They have been there, traveling with the President and even taking his place when he was tired or wanted to relax. Like Ivanka Trump did during the G-20 in July 2017, when the not-elected family member took the seat G20 Leaders Table. So her assistance goes further than ordinary public officials. Since, this sort of role would usually end on Secretary of State and the Vice-President. However, it isn’t the case in the matter of Trump Family.
“Enforcement. While the statutory language bars the appointment of relatives as well as the acceptance of such appointments, enforcement of the prohibition may be limited. The remedy expressly provided for violating this prohibition states that the appointed individual “is not entitled to pay, and money may not be paid from the Treasury as pay” for that person. The statute itself does not require nor does it provide expressly for removal of the individual from the federal civilian position. As noted above, the provision was directed at stopping the practice of placing relatives on the government payroll, and thus the law assures that a relative so appointed may not be paid from federal funds for any such service. The statute likewise does not provide a penalty for the public official who appointed the individual. However, it may be noted that for some rank-and-file positions, not of a confidential or policy making nature, the appointment of a relative may involve a “prohibited personnel practice” by the appointing official” (CRS Report & Analysis, 2016).
Here is another one giving leeway for the possible hiring of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, that is if they are in their roles unpaid and with ranks. Even, that is an issue with the role of the Senior Advisor Kushner and all his positions, even the clearances he needs to be able to fulfill his duty at the White House. Ivanka has also been part of the close-knitted leadership of his fathers. She been part of meetings and such. So both of them has been have been close to confidential material most likely, as they work so close with their relative, the President.
Just like covered in People Magazine in January 2017: “Though Kushner’s appointment does not require Senate confirmation, it is a controversial one: Anti-nepotism laws forbid the hiring of relatives to Cabinet positions, but are less clear on whether they can be appointed to White House staff roles. In American history, anti-nepotism laws are actually a relatively recent development: They were put into place in 1967 by then-President Lyndon B. Johnson not long after one of his predecessor’s appointments raised eyebrows” (Pearl, 2017).
So even if the law and the Anti-nepotism law are put in place to accept family members in White House roles. Still, the nepotism is in full affect. There is no half-step on that. The United States should have a hard time accepting the appointment of Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump as Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President. All of this has entitled them and given them a special role in the Executive Office of the United States. What is clear by the U.S. Code 105, title 5(d) and will always stand out for the provision in the code that said this: “If the President does not have a spouse, such assistance and services may be provided for such purposes to a member of the President’s family whom the President designates”.
The President has a spouse, his third wife, Melanie, therefore he doe not need such assistance and services. Instead, they are using the titles in the anti-nepotism statutes, they can most likely not be as valuable as these words. However, Koffsky wrote this: “or to appoint his relative to the White House under title 3 and subject him to substantial restrictions against conflicts of interest”. These words are saying that its set substantial restrictions to the office, even as the President has let them be a vital part of his term, Kushner is nearly saving half of America and the Middle-East. Ivanka is publicly part abroad and in Washington. It’s not like they are restricted in that manner, but creating conflicts of interests. That should worry anyone caring about the honest of the public office.
Therefore it was striking what Jason Chafetz said in January 2017: “According to Josh Chafetz, a professor at Cornell Law School and an expert in constitutional law and legislative procedure, the White House is not regulated in the same way as other administrative agencies. “The bigger issue for the administration is not so much about the technical bounds of these nepotism laws, but it just looks bad,” Chafetz said. “I don’t think there’s anything legal that can be done in terms of the appointment. It just looks like there’s a pattern of cronyism that has emerged, especially in conjunction with the cabinet appointments.” (Delkic & Mallin, 2017).
It’s enough. Peace.
Koffsky, Daniel L. – ‘Application of the Anti-Nepotism Statute to a Presidential Appointment in the White House Office’ (20.01.2017)
Cornell Law School – ‘U.S. Code › Title 3 › Chapter 2 › § 105’ link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/105
CRS Report & Analysis – ‘The Federal Anti-Nepotism Statute: Limits on Appointing, Hiring, and Promoting Relatives’ (12.01.2016) link: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/nepotism.pdf
Delkic, Melina & Mallin, Alex – ‘Nepotism Laws Don’t Apply to Jared Kushner Appointment, DOJ Says’ (21.01.2017) link: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nepotism-laws-apply-jared-kushner-appointment-doj/story?id=44951811
Pearl, Diana – ‘Donald Trump’s Son-in-Law Has Hillary Clinton to Thank for Skirting JFK-Inspired Nepotism Rules’ (11.01.2017) link: http://people.com/politics/jared-kushner-nepotism-laws-donald-trump/
Fox News or Fox News Network are ready to become even more vigilant in their approach to news and to the principals of fun-loving non-facts driven President Donald J. Trump news-outlet. This is the reality after Fox News hired Tomi Lahren as a contributor at Sean Hannity. Sean Hannity is already one giant program made for the paradigm of fun-loving Trump. It’s only Fox & Friends that has as big man-crush on Trump. Now the former Super-PAC slogan queen Lahren has gone from the Trump Super-PAC ‘Great America Alliance, which is part of the Great America PAC.
Clearly, he final thoughts on the Blaze for Glenn Beck, which made the Blaze famous on Youtube helped her career. Even if she had to leave because of disgruntled case between former employee and the ethical code of the Blaze. The Conservative Media house couldn’t accept her belief and her Pro-Choice views. So it only took a few months from being fired and suing to become a contributor for Fox News.
As if she wouldn’t end at the Fox, she is like a younger Megyn Kelly, just with less intelligence and with mere facts. Tomi Lahren will continue to be the teleprompter and the angry voice of the right-wing paradigm at Fox. Surely, her parts of Sean Hannity will hit viral and make the show more popular. Especially, as her role will bring another bombshell into the screens.
That facts wouldn’t matter on the show, it is news-spin and state-TV for Trump. Both Hannity and Lahren will continue that. They have concern for the facts, it will be conservative TV fiction, even any HBO fiction show will have touch with reality, than the news and opinions spread by these two. These will surely just be there for the concern of Trump and spread his views on the cable-News channel.
Fox News: “In addition, Lahren will have a signature role on a Fox News digital product currently in development, the network announced. “I am blessed and honored to join the Fox News team. This exciting new step will allow me to give voice to all the America-loving patriots who have had my back since day one. I will remain a solid and passionate advocate for you,” she wrote on Facebook” (Fox News – ‘Tomi Lahren Joins Fox News Channel as a Contributor’ (30.08.2017) link: http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/08/30/tomi-lahren-joins-fox-news-channel-contributor
The bigotry, the racism and the hatred will certainly fit well with the Fox New paradigm, the misuse of information and trying to spin it in favor of the President. This is what Lahren will do and she will be paid-in-full. Peace.
It is hard to believe, but it is true that, President Donald J. Trump, who says there are good people and great people within groups of White Supremacists, White Nationalists and Nazis; because of this are obviously racist. There are only fools, that can deny that now. Those who do is apologists for the President and his fellow complicit aides. This could be said for a number of reasons, also because of the people around him, and not denouncing fellow leadership of organizations who spread hatred in the United States.
President Trump has clearly supported the ‘Unite the Right’ rally in Charlottesville and the way it has been done with violence. Clearly, shows the problems of the alt-right and the neo-Nazis. Still, the ACLU of old, are still with their wisdom showing how a just and free society should make sure their transgressions and their hatred get perceived in society. The ACLU in the 1934 shows their paper on free speech for Nazis are still relevant today. It shouldn’t be, but clearly it is. Because the ideals of the ACLU are noble and shows the openness, to a society where ideas get spread and get to streets. Still, there should be allowed to address the differences without breaching the laws and statutes of the law. If so, then the Nazis should serve for their crime, as all of the ones who breaks the law.
The ideal of ACLU of 1934, the argument and the approach are one of the best I have read, even if it is in defense of despicable, this was done before the holocaust and all the hatred of the Nazis was known. Before, they could do so, when they took to power in Germany and started their dictatorship that led to the second World War. Still, with the knowledge of the results of all the hatred and disgusting ideals and ideology, the ACLU shows with their paper, an understanding we should follow in this day. Not because the streets, the airways, the TV-Channels or any other platform should have Nazis and their teachings on their, but if should mock it or fact-check their ignorance. Than it needs to be in the open and not make it underground to grow into an unknown force, that can come with militias and destroy the freedom of speech.
This is what the ACLU of 1934 believed and we should be like that today. Just take a look!
“To whose who advocate suppressing propaganda they hate, we ask – where do you draw the line? They can answer only the terms of revolutionists – at our political enemies. But experience shows that “political enemies” is a broad term, and has covered the breaking up even of working class meetings by rival work class organizations. It illustrates the danger, and the impractically of making any distinctions in defending rights sought by all” (…) “To those who urge suppression of meetings that may incite riot or violence, the complete answer is that nobody can tell in advance what meetings may do so. Where there is reasonable ground for apprehension, the police can ordinarily prevent disorder” (…) “To whose who would suppress meetings where race or religious hatred is likely to be stirred up, the answer is simple – that there is no general agreement on what constitutes race or religious prejudice. Once the bars are so let down, the fields is open for all-comers to charge such prejudice against any propagandists – Communists, Socialists, atheists, – even against Jews attacking the Nazis. On that ground the Union has opposed the anti-Nazi bills introduced in the New York and New Jersey legislature punishing propaganda which “stirs up race or religious hatred” or “domestic strife”. No laws can be written to outlaw Nazi propaganda without striking at freedom of speech in general” (…) “Further, we point out the inevitable effect of making martyrs by persecution. Persecute the Nazis, drive them underground, imitate their methods in Germany – and attract to them hundreds of sympathizers with the persecuted who would otherwise be indifferent. The best way to combat their propaganda is in the open where it can be fought by counter-propaganda, protest demonstrations, picketing, – and all the devices of attack which do not involve denying the rights to meet and speak” (…) “If and when Nazi meetings results in breaches of the peace, their organizers can be prosecuted under the criminal law. If their speakers libel individuals by reason of race and religion, recourse to the criminal libel statutes is open as a remedy. Short of that, and of overt acts of interference with others’ rights their freedom to carry on their agitation should be unrestricted” (ACLU, 1934).
It is proof that the knowledge and the arguments of old can be useful today as it was yesterday. The people, the organizations and their ideals might be the same, the problem might be a resurrected one. But the Nazis should be allowed to speak and have their meetings, as long as they are not breaching the law and the statutes. If they do, then they should be prosecuted!
The ACLU of 1934, have understood certain aspects of life and also the martyrdom of the political enemies and revolutionaries might give soil for further extremes. Also, give the platform and the leadership of these organization more power. Therefore, to silence them totally and ban them, does not make them go away, but make them underground.
This paper shows the importance of free speech, but also the grandeur of fighting the Nazis within just acts, to counter their propaganda and their ideology. That we should do, undress the hatred and white supremacy, which should be buried. Since the Nazi ideology shouldn’t be needed to be in our time, as it wasn’t needed even in the 1930s when the ALCU wrote this paper. Still, we should counter it and show the misgivings and the worthlessness of the Nazism, instead of banning it. The bans of their acts will only enforce it more.
It doesn’t help that President Trump defended the Charlottesville ‘Unite the Right’ rally and their violence. While attacking the counter-demonstrators. Also, neglecting the fear and the violence created by the right-extremists. That is why peaceful marches, the peaceful demonstrations and addressing the lacking clues of justification for their ideology and their belief is needed. Instead, of making them a fringe organizations, who can suddenly pop-up like wild-flowers. Therefore, the need to address them at public courts are more important than ever. To not give them a free-pass, but for their disgrace, their misunderstood arrogance of race and for their devilish ideology, who are to take total control and to terminate others. That cannot be shadow and put in the dark, the violence and viciousness of the Nazis, cannot be silenced and their will of doing evil. Should be known!
To say anything else is ignorant, they should not become martyrs, but make fooled and mocked. They should understand, that they are not all-powerful, but people we can bring down from the pedestal and put in the trash-bind of history. Peace.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – ‘Shall we defend free speech for Nazis in America’ (October 1934