Neo-nazis tried to sway 2018 elections for Republicans



https://www.azmirror.com/blog/leaked-ch ... elections/

US citizens have every right to perform First Amendment protected acts of free speech. That especially protects the right of unpopular people to speak whether it be the alleged neo-Nazis or even someone like yourself.

Far-right extremists getting bolder as threatening behaviour goes unchecked, police warned

As the holy month of Ramadan began, the bearded man in reflector sunglasses and a maple leaf-embroidered baseball cap recorded himself in a series of videos staking out Edmonton's largest mosque.

"So it's April 24th — the start of the Ramadan 'bombathon' and I'm just performing my civic duty to make sure that no one's actually showing up at the Al Rashid mosque," said the man, who had taken it upon himself to make sure worshippers were following a health order to contain the coronavirus.

After announcing plans to eat a bacon sandwich as Sweet Home Alabama played on the radio, another segment appeared to show the man driving into the mosque's parking lot while he counted vehicles. He recorded a woman with her baby and toddler, commenting: "Social distancing apparently."

More than two weeks after the videos were posted to social media, the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) is among those questioning why charges have not been laid in this case, as well as in previous incidents.

"This is not the first time that white supremacists and neo-Nazis in the city of Edmonton have operated brazenly and have faced zero consequences," said Mustafa Farooq, lawyer and CEO of NCCM.

"It means allowing those folks to feel that if they walk on the streets and they intimidate people, they're free to do so because they're not going to face charges," he said in a Friday interview with CBC.

The council is warning Edmonton police that far-right extremists are getting bolder as Islamophobic behaviour goes unchecked.

. . .

"So when you have an individual in that context, lurking around a place of worship, making and uttering these words of 'bombathon', I think any reasonable person would be very concerned with that," said Edmonton lawyer Janan Jarrah in an interview Sunday.

"As a defence lawyer, I've seen people charged for saying and doing things far less concerning."

Jarrah said members of the Muslim community are genuinely fearful, pointing out that many children pray or attend community events at Al Rashid.

And like Farooq, Jarrah suggested a similar incident involving a non-Muslim faith group might be treated differently.

"The fact that criminal charges weren't laid seems to suggest that there may be a double standard at play here," Jarrah said. "It definitely makes you question why in this particular scenario the Muslim community isn't as deserving of a sanction against someone who does something like that."

. . .

If a Muslim was the main person in an incident like the April video, police and the public would be more likely to view it as a criminal activity rather than an exercise in freedom of speech, said Faisal Bhabha, a professor at York University's Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto.

"It's easier to explain away when the person looks like the individual that is depicted in those videos," said Bhabha, who specializes in constitutional law and national security.

"He's clearly a white guy. He's wearing a maple leaf hat. He's listening to Lynyrd Skynyrd, classic rock. And he's eating a bacon sandwich. And those are all characteristics that align with a particular identity … And they're meant to signal a kind of 'I'm with you, I'm with the majority'."

In contrast, said Bhabha, someone who appeared as a minority would likely attract greater scrutiny, less understanding and more racism leading to law enforcement action, social repudiation or political intervention.

Bhabha said there may be other factors at play in police exercising their discretion to press charges, such as political considerations or an attempt to influence future behaviour by issuing a warning.

"But that kind of thing is more likely to happen if you're white and the police officer making the decision can relate to you," Bhabha said. "Whenever police exercise their discretion in a way that appears to be hypocritical … it's worth asking whether this is the kind of exercise of discretion that is consistent with equality and anti-discrimination."

White Supremacists Built a Website to Doxx Interracial Couples — and It's Going to Be Hard to Take Down

Racists have published a hate-filled database targeting white women dating black and brown men as “traitors” — and some are being harassed online.

Allison and her fiancé have a shared public Instagram account that they use to give their followers a glimpse into their life together in Chicago, often alongside the hashtags #love and #interracialcouple.

They’d grown accustomed to the occasional racist comment under their photos every now and then. But in early May, those comments started happening with more frequency, and took on a more sinister, even threatening tone — often containing references to obscure white supremacist or incel memes.

On May 5, Allison, whose real name is being withheld for her safety, received a strange DM. It was from a woman she didn’t know, who informed her that she was on a disturbing website that was compiling information about white women in interracial relationships.

When she went to the website, she found her name, photos, and social media handles under the label “traitors.”

“It was weird, and strange, and creepy,” said Allison, 28. “I was thinking, ‘Who takes the time to do this?’”

The website names, shames, and effectively promotes violence against interracial couples and families — and it’s been circulated in some of the darkest corners of the internet, including in neo-Nazi Discord servers and accelerationist Telegram channels.

White supremacists have long invoked “racial purity” to justify horrific racism and brutal acts of violence against nonwhite people. And in recent years, they’ve relied on fringe social media or forums to mount mass harassment or doxxing campaigns targeting people of color, Jews, women, and journalists.

“A website like this is concerning for reasons even beyond the repulsive hate it promotes. The site is yet another example of how certain online spaces are being designed to literally facilitate harassment,” said Oren Segal, vice president of the Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism. “They have real-world impacts on real people. The online systems that a site like this requires to operate should take steps to respond.”

Richard Burr: US Senate intelligence chief quits amid virus trading scandal

Richard Burr of North Carolina would step down on 15 May, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said.

It has emerged on Thursday that Mr Burr's phone has been seized by the FBI as part of the probe.

The senator is alleged to have used inside information to avoid market losses from coronavirus.

He and his wife sold as much as $1.7m (£1.4m) of equities in February, just before markets plunged on fears of an economic crisis.

It is illegal for members of Congress to trade based on non-public information gathered during their official duties.

Republican Senators Kelly Loeffler of Georgia and James Inhofe of Oklahoma, as well as Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, also reportedly sold holdings before the downturn, but are not confirmed to be under investigation.

Ms Feinstein said she answered questions from the FBI regarding trades made by her husband, however.

Mr Burr's office did not respond to a request for comment.

Germany far right: Explosives found at elite soldier's home

German police investigating links between the military and the far right have seized weapons and explosives at the home of a special forces soldier.

The 45-year-old sergeant major in the elite KSK special forces command has been under investigation since 2017.

Reports say he had hidden a cache of weapons at his home in Nordsachsen in the eastern state of Saxony.

German military intelligence (MAD) said in January there were 592 suspected far-right cases in the army last year.

In March, officials said they had identified 27 people as far-right extremists. The KSK, considered the most secretive unit in the army, is seen as a particular problem.

It has some 1,000 soldiers trained for crisis situations such as freeing hostages abroad and 20 of them have reportedly come under investigation. Germany's Spiegel website says action has been taken against nine of them.

Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer promised further investigation of possible extremist networks and said it was clear there was no place for anyone in the armed forces who acted "in a radical way".

In yet another assault on checks and balances, President Trump abruptly removed the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) independent watchdog late Friday – the same night he announced plans to fire the State Department Inspector General (IG). At DOT, the acting IG was overseeing a high profile investigation of Secretary Chao’s alleged favoritism benefiting her husband Senator Mitch McConnell’s political prospects, but has now been replaced with a political appointee from within the agency. The acting IG’s ouster calls into question the future of the Chao-McConnell investigation, other critical oversight, and whether the watchdog was dismissed for unearthing damaging information.

This move is the latest salvo of Trump’s assault on oversight. And it looks like the President made sure to cover all his bases to block accountability, not only nominating an IG to succeed the experienced watchdog who held the post, but also demoting the acting IG who was investigating Chao, and installing a political appointee to serve in his place while the Senate considers a permanent replacement. To make matters worse, Trump’s pick to be the new acting IG, Howard “Skip” Elliott, already has a job overseeing the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), an office he will now also be in charge of policing.

Trump’s decision to sideline DOT acting IG Mitch Behm (who has 17 years of experience with OIG) was lost in the shuffle of outrage following the announcement that Trump planned to fire the State Department IG, but potential conflicts of interest abound. The most high profile is the DOT OIG’s review of allegations that Secretary Chao gave Senator McConnell’s constituents special treatment and helped steer millions of federal dollars to Kentucky as he is facing low approval ratings and a tough reelection bid.

As Senate Majority Leader, McConnell was integral to the Senate’s consideration of Howard Elliott’s nomination to lead PHMSA. Now McConnell will also be instrumental to Eric Soskin’s potential confirmation as permanent IG. Soskin is a Justice Department trial lawyer “involved in some hot-button immigration and civil rights cases.” These moves will leave oversight of the Chao-McConnell investigation in the hands of Trump administration officials who McConnell has effectively endorsed. In the case of Ellinott, as Secretary, Chao maintains authority to fire him from PHMSA. As CREW has pointed out before, this situation poses a huge conflict of interest. How can the American people expect transparency and accountability when the watchdogs must pass a loyalty test from the President and be approved by officials impacted by their investigations?

In addition to the role new acting IG Elliott will play overseeing the Chao-McConnell investigation, a DOT spokesperson explained that Elliott “will continue to serve as leader of the pipeline agency under a dual-hat arrangement.” As a result, Elliott will potentially oversee audits or investigations into PHMSA, and be responsible for ensuring that the administrator of PHMSA (him) complies with recommendations made by OIG (led by him). It’s hard to understate the significance of this conflict of interest. Even if Elliott recuses from OIG matters related to PHMSA, which he absolutely should do, he can still discipline or fire OIG officials working for him, if he doesn’t like or agree with their handling of the Chao-McConnell investigation or PHMSA.The new acting DOT IG will also play a critical role in overseeing the Trump administration’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, which has drawn significant scrutiny from the President.

Inspectors General are meant to be apolitical and independent, so they do not typically come from among an administration’s pool of political appointees. But Elliott’s appointment is not the first time the Trump administration has sought to install a political appointee as an acting IG amid high profile investigations. In 2018, the administration abruptly moved a political appointee from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to serve as the acting IG for the Interior Department, overseeing multiple investigations into then-Secretary Ryan Zinke’s conduct. The Washington Post called the move “an unusual choice for a role that is traditionally nonpartisan.” Thankfully, public pressure led the administration to reverse course on a number of controversial acting IG appointments.

The President’s attack on inspector general independence at DOT deserves just as much public scrutiny as all the rest. It is no coincidence that an experienced and independent watchdog was sidelined while carrying out an investigation into alleged political corruption involving the Transportation Secretary and Trump’s chief enabler in the Senate, Leader McConnell. The administration’s Friday night announcements appear to be designed to keep us from taking notice. It is incumbent upon Congress, the public, and the good government community not to let President Trump get away with it yet again.

This is naked corruption.

But, but, but it's Trump's right to hire and fire AGs! So if Pompeo or McConnel ask him to replace AGs that are investigating them with friends, it's perfectly legal.


/s

I'm irritated that these Obama appointees were not removed after Trump took office. He needs to clean house just like Obama did when Obama took office.

Shouldn't you hire the best person for the job, even if don't agree with his political affiliation?

Nobody has ever asked me who I voted for in any job interview.

...it's like saying, "You're the best person for the job but I can't hire you because your skin isn't the same colour as mine".