Thank you, Brad, for this unfortunately horrifying article.
In the spring of 1966, I said hello as I passed a black woman sitting in the art building at Queen's College in NYC. She gave me a resentful look and told me that big changes were coming. Blacks would subjugate whites as payback for slavery. I was 19 and shocked. “But that's unconstitutional!” I exclaimed.
She said with deliberate emphasis, “The Constitution can be changed.”
It seems now that the Constitution didn't need changing to achieve that goal. It was already broken.
I had to subscribe if only to thank you for this excellent piece, I am really grateful to have all this info in one place, especially for when I start to suffer from my next attack of Left gaslighting.
This whole "We're not teaching CRT and it's good anyway" line of argument has really perplexed and infuriated me, and I'm still trying to wrap my brain around it.
I've been following current events etc since the 80s and I really can't think of another example of a party pushing a policy, implementing a policy, while at the same time denying that this is going on. Maybe with foreign policy and denying that we have troops somewhere, or committed some military action we don't want to publicly admit, but short of that, the whole CRT (and gender indoctrination too) lie strikes me as absolutely unprecedented.
My only guesses/theories are the leaders of the Left class know that CRT is alienating and an electoral loser, but they feel they have to support and implement it anyway because it has become impossible in the 2020s for a white liberal to say NO to any black demand, and also that black suffering and tales of black oppression have become holy scripture to white liberals, so they no longer have the vocabulary to dissent and can only take a knee and signal that they're down w the sacred cause.
Or maybe they're just like the religious fundamentalists of the 20th century smuggling the Bible into the curriculum while denying it whenever they got caught??
Appreciate any theories anyone has about the psychology of all this...
When Attorney General Merrick Garland’s goon squad came for parents
Washington Examiner ^ | 16 May, 2022 | Editorial Board
Posted on 5/17/2022, 5:58:14 AM by MtnClimber
Last fall, Attorney General Merrick Garland testified before the House Judiciary Committee that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was not using counterterrorism statutes to investigate parents who were exercising their First Amendment rights at local school board meetings.
Last week, the House Judiciary Committee produced evidence that Garland's FBI was doing just that.
“Like you, I can’t imagine any circumstance in which the PATRIOT Act would be used in the circumstances of parents complaining about their children, nor can I imagine a circumstance where they would be labeled as domestic terrorism,” Garland told the committee last October.
Now, ranking member Jim Jordan (R-OH) has identified three separate instances in which counterterrorism statutes were indeed used to open investigations into parents whose only crime was speaking at a public event about their local school. Jordan claims that a whistleblower has identified dozens of other similar cases.
In one case, the FBI interviewed a mother after an informant called the National Threat Operations Center tip line to report that a woman who belonged to a “right wing mom’s group” had told a local school board, “We are coming for you.” The mother, a member of Moms for Liberty, told the FBI she was upset about the school’s mask mandate and that the only threat she leveled at anyone was to replace the school board members at the ballot box.
In another case, an informant again utilized the National Threat Operations Center tip line to report a father who “fit the profile of an insurrectionist,” “rails against the government,” and “has lots of guns and threatens to use them." When an FBI agent interviewed the informant, the informant admitted to having “no specific information or observations of any crimes or threats.”
Thank you, Brad, for this unfortunately horrifying article.
In the spring of 1966, I said hello as I passed a black woman sitting in the art building at Queen's College in NYC. She gave me a resentful look and told me that big changes were coming. Blacks would subjugate whites as payback for slavery. I was 19 and shocked. “But that's unconstitutional!” I exclaimed.
She said with deliberate emphasis, “The Constitution can be changed.”
It seems now that the Constitution didn't need changing to achieve that goal. It was already broken.
If any parent is still sleepwalking in denial about the pervasiveness of CRT, this article will wake them up! Thanks, Brad.
I had to subscribe if only to thank you for this excellent piece, I am really grateful to have all this info in one place, especially for when I start to suffer from my next attack of Left gaslighting.
This whole "We're not teaching CRT and it's good anyway" line of argument has really perplexed and infuriated me, and I'm still trying to wrap my brain around it.
I've been following current events etc since the 80s and I really can't think of another example of a party pushing a policy, implementing a policy, while at the same time denying that this is going on. Maybe with foreign policy and denying that we have troops somewhere, or committed some military action we don't want to publicly admit, but short of that, the whole CRT (and gender indoctrination too) lie strikes me as absolutely unprecedented.
My only guesses/theories are the leaders of the Left class know that CRT is alienating and an electoral loser, but they feel they have to support and implement it anyway because it has become impossible in the 2020s for a white liberal to say NO to any black demand, and also that black suffering and tales of black oppression have become holy scripture to white liberals, so they no longer have the vocabulary to dissent and can only take a knee and signal that they're down w the sacred cause.
Or maybe they're just like the religious fundamentalists of the 20th century smuggling the Bible into the curriculum while denying it whenever they got caught??
Appreciate any theories anyone has about the psychology of all this...
Either way, thanks again!
When Attorney General Merrick Garland’s goon squad came for parents
Washington Examiner ^ | 16 May, 2022 | Editorial Board
Posted on 5/17/2022, 5:58:14 AM by MtnClimber
Last fall, Attorney General Merrick Garland testified before the House Judiciary Committee that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was not using counterterrorism statutes to investigate parents who were exercising their First Amendment rights at local school board meetings.
Last week, the House Judiciary Committee produced evidence that Garland's FBI was doing just that.
“Like you, I can’t imagine any circumstance in which the PATRIOT Act would be used in the circumstances of parents complaining about their children, nor can I imagine a circumstance where they would be labeled as domestic terrorism,” Garland told the committee last October.
Now, ranking member Jim Jordan (R-OH) has identified three separate instances in which counterterrorism statutes were indeed used to open investigations into parents whose only crime was speaking at a public event about their local school. Jordan claims that a whistleblower has identified dozens of other similar cases.
In one case, the FBI interviewed a mother after an informant called the National Threat Operations Center tip line to report that a woman who belonged to a “right wing mom’s group” had told a local school board, “We are coming for you.” The mother, a member of Moms for Liberty, told the FBI she was upset about the school’s mask mandate and that the only threat she leveled at anyone was to replace the school board members at the ballot box.
In another case, an informant again utilized the National Threat Operations Center tip line to report a father who “fit the profile of an insurrectionist,” “rails against the government,” and “has lots of guns and threatens to use them." When an FBI agent interviewed the informant, the informant admitted to having “no specific information or observations of any crimes or threats.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/when-attorney-general-merrick-garlands-goon-squad-came-for-parents