Reply to Indictment of Southern Policy Law Center

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Indictment of Southern Policy Law Center"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]https://www.contrariannews.org/p/the-trump-regimes-heinous-attack

The DOJ alleges that the SPLC’s use of informants was part of a “scheme and artifice” to deceive donors. Acting U.S. Attorney Kevin Davidson alleges in the indictment that though SPLC’s “stated mission included the dismantling of white supremacy and confronting hate across the country” it was “unbeknownst to donors,” secretly using “donated money … to fund the leaders and organizers of racist groups, including the Ku Klux Klan, the Aryan Nation, and the National Alliance.”

[b]However, the indictment utterly fails to explain how these payments to extremist leaders undercut the SPLC’s stated mission. [/b]Nor does it say how anyone working for the center intentionally deceived donors. Nor could it; if you surveyed donors to the organization, they have already stated or would almost undoubtedly say that investigating hate is exactly what they wanted to support and that these claims are reprehensible.

The DOJ’s entire case centers on the SPLC’s alleged payments to ten informants inside extremist groups. Our special report, which will be posted here at The Contrarian at noon today, details the facts regarding these informants. The report makes evident that not a one justifies the criminal charges brought against the SPLC.[/quote]

I understand why people keep saying this, but this really is not the issue and it reflects a misunderstanding of the allegation. The SPLC isn't charged with using donor funds for an impermissible purpose. The allegation is that the SPLC failed to tell prospective donors that it used donor funds to pay extremist informants because it believed that disclosing this information would discourage donations. It is a subtle but important distinction. [/quote]

There is no way of knowing that. Frankly, I have no issue with what they did to expose these bigots. [b]The only people upset about it are the bigots.[/b][/quote]

This is just silly and makes you look ignorant. [/quote]

Point to a donor who is upset about it.[/quote]

I’m a donor and I’m upset about this. I didn’t donate for this, I think it’s profoundly wrong, and I’m unhappy.

I know you are in such a cult that you are going to claim I’m MAGA now because that’s the only way your world view functions, but I voted for, donated to, and supported Harris all the way. [/quote]

I don't understand what you're upset about.  I'm not even a donor but have been following SPLC and their work for years.  They have been investigating and exposing extremist networks for decades.  It's what they do.  Paying informants for info is one of the tools in the toolbox.  That is how many investigative organizations operate.  How could anyone not understand that or be shocked by it?[/quote]

The SPLC was giving money directly to the leadership of some of these groups, arranged transportation, and facilitated communication. It’s almost like they were propping them up.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics