"one of the most cynical, toxic, and morally bankrupt pieces of sustained political theatre I’ve ever come across." Indeed. When I first read this, I couldn't believe it! I thought I'd seen it all. If there had been any doubt left, it is now clear that all these "progressive" values we'd been hit over the head with for years are no more than cynical theater. Something needs to change in the way the media portrays progressivism. I doubt any of the mainstream channels will talk about this. If this is the case, the Left has now taken the place of the Far Right.
Your post omits that the money was used to pay informants inside violent extremist groups. You make it sound like it is an open and shut case that the SPLC was directly and intentionally funding the operations of these groups. Perhaps the intention of the group was the manufacture hate to feed its own existence. Perhaps it was actually to get insider information about insidious actions of domestic terrorist organizations and hate groups. But you sort of ignore the complexity of the situation to put forth a thesis in an uncomplicated manner.
I have not seen exact numbers, but the amount of money alleged to have been transferred go beyond informant expenses, they include event expenses. Also, some of the informants are alleged to be leaders in their organizations. If the allegations pan out then the informant excuses are dead.
I think the SPLC is a biased and vindictive organization. But Kash Patel is also about as complete a moron as I have seen in public life, and I’m skeptical that he and his team have really done the work. I suspect that when the evidence actually lands in a courtroom, it will turn out to be, well, not as lurid as advertised.
The evidence has already been seen in a courtroom, by a grand jury, remember? Yes, the standard of proof is lower, probable cause rather than beyond a reasonable doubt. And yes, grand juries have a long history of lack of proper judicial oversight (a major pet peeve of mine). But if a Federal magistrate supervised this grand jury then I would conclude there is no doubt to preclude a petite jury trial.
So if an indictment counts as complete proof of wrongdoing, you should be consistent and state that everyone indicted and convicted for the January 6 riot is guilty of trying to overthrow the government. You’re a right winger and therefore a liar, so you will never do this.
After a little research it seems possible the SPLC funded *paid informants*, which is quite different from how it is characterized in Patel’s statement. Don’t get me wrong, I have realized I’ve been betrayed by SPLC and other progressive groups for several years now, but it will be important to be accurate in the assessment of what happened.
Well, DOJ lawyers certainly double checked the FBI evidence. My one concern is the grand jury. Was it supervised by a magistrate? If so then there was another gatekeeper in this case. If not then there is more potential for errors. We will see.
Related: Public Health’s Historical Prejudice Against Men and Boys
A paper published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2011 illustrates how misguided ideology has precluded care for male well-being
“Shorter life expectancy among men in general, if likely avoidable, would clearly be an issue of public health importance based on the magnitude of potential population impact. However, men as a group have more wealth, influence, and prestige, so this difference would not be a social injustice and, therefore, not a health disparity or equity issue.”
That statement was written in a paper published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2011. The title of the paper is “Health Disparities and Health Equity: The Issue Is Justice,” and it has been downloaded over 97,000 times according to the publisher’s website and cited over 1,400 times according to Google Scholar. The lead author of the paper is Paula Braveman, who is currently a professor emeritus at the University of California – San Francisco.
Another example of supply-induced demand. The stank of this phenomenon in health care, as one of the more notable industry examples, leads to excessive waste and fraud.
"one of the most cynical, toxic, and morally bankrupt pieces of sustained political theatre I’ve ever come across." Indeed. When I first read this, I couldn't believe it! I thought I'd seen it all. If there had been any doubt left, it is now clear that all these "progressive" values we'd been hit over the head with for years are no more than cynical theater. Something needs to change in the way the media portrays progressivism. I doubt any of the mainstream channels will talk about this. If this is the case, the Left has now taken the place of the Far Right.
Which makes Justice Thomas's recent speech on progressivism perfectly timed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OI0igGDF9-Q)
It is very difficult to get someone to fix something if their income depends on their not fixing it.
You often hear this said of the pharmaceutical industry.
I heard there has been some shady funding of Ockhamists. Is that you?
No <hides roll of used fivers behind back> that was Richard Weaver
Your post omits that the money was used to pay informants inside violent extremist groups. You make it sound like it is an open and shut case that the SPLC was directly and intentionally funding the operations of these groups. Perhaps the intention of the group was the manufacture hate to feed its own existence. Perhaps it was actually to get insider information about insidious actions of domestic terrorist organizations and hate groups. But you sort of ignore the complexity of the situation to put forth a thesis in an uncomplicated manner.
Ok, here are exact numbers. Items 5&6 seem reasonable to me and will likely be rejected at trial. The others are not, especially the top two or three.
<trying to add graphic, darn Substack>
I have not seen exact numbers, but the amount of money alleged to have been transferred go beyond informant expenses, they include event expenses. Also, some of the informants are alleged to be leaders in their organizations. If the allegations pan out then the informant excuses are dead.
I am shocked, shocked to find narrative manufacturing going on in here!
Let’s wait to see the evidence, yeah?
I think the SPLC is a biased and vindictive organization. But Kash Patel is also about as complete a moron as I have seen in public life, and I’m skeptical that he and his team have really done the work. I suspect that when the evidence actually lands in a courtroom, it will turn out to be, well, not as lurid as advertised.
The evidence has already been seen in a courtroom, by a grand jury, remember? Yes, the standard of proof is lower, probable cause rather than beyond a reasonable doubt. And yes, grand juries have a long history of lack of proper judicial oversight (a major pet peeve of mine). But if a Federal magistrate supervised this grand jury then I would conclude there is no doubt to preclude a petite jury trial.
Eli Steele recounts the genuine early days of the SPLC:
https://manofsteele.substack.com/p/the-southern-poverty-law-center-fraud?r=bbwgp&utm_medium=ios
So if an indictment counts as complete proof of wrongdoing, you should be consistent and state that everyone indicted and convicted for the January 6 riot is guilty of trying to overthrow the government. You’re a right winger and therefore a liar, so you will never do this.
And we have this tidbit:
https://substack.com/@mrandyngo/note/c-247311979?r=bbwgp&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
After a little research it seems possible the SPLC funded *paid informants*, which is quite different from how it is characterized in Patel’s statement. Don’t get me wrong, I have realized I’ve been betrayed by SPLC and other progressive groups for several years now, but it will be important to be accurate in the assessment of what happened.
Well, DOJ lawyers certainly double checked the FBI evidence. My one concern is the grand jury. Was it supervised by a magistrate? If so then there was another gatekeeper in this case. If not then there is more potential for errors. We will see.
Related: Public Health’s Historical Prejudice Against Men and Boys
A paper published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2011 illustrates how misguided ideology has precluded care for male well-being
“Shorter life expectancy among men in general, if likely avoidable, would clearly be an issue of public health importance based on the magnitude of potential population impact. However, men as a group have more wealth, influence, and prestige, so this difference would not be a social injustice and, therefore, not a health disparity or equity issue.”
That statement was written in a paper published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2011. The title of the paper is “Health Disparities and Health Equity: The Issue Is Justice,” and it has been downloaded over 97,000 times according to the publisher’s website and cited over 1,400 times according to Google Scholar. The lead author of the paper is Paula Braveman, who is currently a professor emeritus at the University of California – San Francisco.
https://jameslnuzzo.substack.com/p/mens-health-prejudice?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1071344&post_id=191553755&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=6mos7&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Another example of supply-induced demand. The stank of this phenomenon in health care, as one of the more notable industry examples, leads to excessive waste and fraud.