The richest man in the world takes on the most subversive group in the world
By James Edwards
We are witnessing what could turn out to be one of the most important battles in American history—Elon Musk vs. the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). I want to stress that while this could possibly be a pivotal point in American history, there’s certainly no guarantee of that. There is a very real risk that Elon Musk will cave in, or that the corrupt judicial system will sell him down the river to save their own hides.
The controversy began in late August, with calls by users on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter, to ban the ADL for maliciously lying about and arguably defaming Musk and his free speech policies. Musk began to chime in on the trending topic, #BanTheADL, offering insight into the subversive nature of the ADL and its efforts to harm the financial success of the platform by organizing advertising boycotts and smear campaigns following Musk’s takeover.
Musk noted that Twitter revenues are down by billions of dollars due to the ADL intimidating corporations into pulling their ads from the social media platform. I want to focus on how high the stakes are for the future of free speech and the ability of the ADL to dictate what can and cannot be discussed in the modern day public square—social media.
The ADL claims to be a “civil rights” organization, but it’s just a viciously anti-white hate group that exerts tremendous control over business, politics, and culture in America. Over the past few years, it has become increasingly brazen with ever-escalating demands for censorship of opinions it doesn’t like. For anyone who wants an in-depth look at the history of this sordid outfit, a good place to start is the books by the late, great AFP writer, Michael Collins Piper.
If not for the fact that the ADL works to promote Jewish interests while masquerading as an “anti-hate” civil rights group, the government might have long ago declared it a criminal organization, seized its assets and locked up its executives. Many observers say that the ADL is essentially an extortion racket. In just one example, last year when NBA player Kyrie Irving tweeted his approval for a movie the ADL doesn’t like, the ADL demanded “consequences.” Almost immediately, Irving’s team suspended him. He was only allowed to play again after “donating” half a million dollars to the ADL and issuing a public apology.
Many Americans are just now learning about the ADL, thanks to the #BanTheADL campaign. They’re shocked at what they’re discovering from men like Irish YouTuber Keith Woods on Twitter, but trust me, the current scandal is only the tip of the iceberg.
Most Americans under the age of 40 have no idea that “hate crimes” are a novel concept in jurisprudence. They just assume that crimes motivated by “hate” have always received harsher sentences. They would be shocked to learn that there was no such thing as a “hate crime” until the late 1980s when the concept was invented by the ADL. That’s no exaggeration; they boast about inventing the concept of “hate crimes.” It was part of their war on white people. “Hate crime” charges are rarely pursued against non-whites, although they are oftentimes genuinely warranted.
The ADL never stops seeking to portray white people as monsters who are always on the verge of lynching a black person or burning down a synagogue, and are only stymied in their efforts by the constant vigilance of the ADL.
More recently, every time President Trump did anything to restrict immigration, the ADL immediately went to court and filed paperwork seeking to have a federal judge declare his efforts unconstitutional—and they almost always got their way. The ADL paints white Americans who oppose mass immigration as “Nazis,” while at the same time defending Israel’s extremely race-based immigration policies.
The ADL is also a gigantic and Orwellian surveillance outfit. Author Matt Taibbi once described Goldman Sachs as a “great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money.” The ADL does the same thing to truth, freedom, and Christian culture.
Did you know that for decades, when many U.S. Representatives and Senators received letters from “right-wing conservatives,” they would forward the letters to the ADL so they could “keep an eye on” them? Did you know that many newspaper editors across America used to do the same thing? Even more incredibly, PayPal recently gave the ADL access to its database to search for transactions from groups it doesn’t like. This isn’t a secret; PayPal admits it. Every American should be up in arms over this, but nobody seems to even be aware of it.
The ADL is the #1 enemy of free speech in America. In 2012, after Pat Buchanan appeared for the third time as a guest on my radio program, the ADL demanded that MSNBC fire him, and MSNBC complied. The media-manufactured controversy made national news, and Buchanan was asked by National Public Radio if he regretted associating with someone the ADL refers to as an “anti-Semite” and “white supremacist.”
Buchanan responded, “I think there’s an awful lot of smearing being done by the Anti-Defamation League, frankly, over the years of individuals who simply disagree maybe with U.S. policy towards Israel, and a lot of name calling.”
The ADL’s subversive activities do not stop at smearing its political opponents. They dictate to Amazon what books they’re allowed to sell. They tell Facebook what opinions users are allowed to post. They demanded that Fox News fire Tucker Carlson—the most popular host on the network by far—and Fox News complied shortly thereafter! When Elon Musk bought Twitter, the ADL told big brands to stop advertising on Twitter, and Twitter’s revenue dropped by tens of billions of dollars in a flash.
And one more thing: The ADL says that saying “Christ is Lord” is anti-Semitic, demonstrating their hostility towards Christians and traditional Christianity.
I’m supporting Elon Musk, even though I was banned from Twitter after he took it over, along with several other honorable men, including Paul Fromm, Kevin MacDonald, and Tom Sunic. I am supporting Musk because it was almost certainly to please the ADL that we were banned in the first place. The fact that he’s finally standing up to this powerful hate group bodes well for more free speech in the future for us and other truth-tellers.
I’m also proud to say that I’m a supporter of the man who started the #BanTheADL movement on Twitter, Keith Woods. Keith and I were both speakers at last month’s American Renaissance conference and he is the rarest of combinations—an absolute genius and an effective pro-white activist.
Keith got the #BanTheADL movement started, and he got the attention of the world’s richest man, who has a long and difficult journey ahead if he has the courage to stick to his convictions.
[Maybe that why Dr. Tom Sunic, Dr. Kevin Macdonald, myself and a number of other nationalists who were all purged from Twitter in April have not been reinstated. CAFE retained a lawyer but we’ve had no explanation or satisfaction. As Andrew Torba explains, sadly Elon Musk succumbed to the ADL cenrsors.]
Over the past few days a grassroots campaign popped up on X calling for the platform to ban the ADL. The campaign, united around the hashtag #BantheADL, has been trending on the platform for days with hundreds of thousands of posts.
This campaign comes after the CEO of the ADL, Jonathan Greenblatt, made a post gloating about his organization’s sheer power to control the platform that Elon Musk purchased for tens of billions of dollars last year. Although the #BantheADL campaign effectively highlighted the significant influence the ADL holds in regulating the flow of information online, it is essential to delve into the reasons why Elon Musk cannot remove the ADL from the platform or hinder their effective management of his company, even if he were inclined to do so.
First we have to understand a bit of the context for how a platform like X actually works and is able to exist on the internet along with the inside baseball of how the ADL flexes its power to control massive corporations without owning a single share.
X is built on the rails of multiple third-party services including, but not limited to the Google Cloud infrastructure among others. X has had a partnership with Google Cloud since 2018, and Bloomberg reports that this collaboration has incurred annual expenses ranging from $200 million to $300 million for the company. Jonathan Greenblatt has openly bragged about the ADL’s partnership with Google, YouTube, Facebook, and X, going so far as to change the algorithms of these companies to meet their demands.
With one phone call to Google the ADL can cripple X. If Google pulls the plug on the cloud hosting deal massive parts of X’s critical infrastructure will be down for a long time, possibly the entire platform would be taken offline with one click. We saw this happen in 2020 with Parler when Amazon AWS pulled the plug and the platform was taken offline. They were never able to fully recover and recently shut the platform down completely after it sold to a third-party.
Going after the cloud hosting providers is just the start for the ADL’s ability to utterly destroy X. Next come the app store bans. With that same phone call to Google the ADL could easily highlight the hundreds of thousands of “antisemitic” posts on the platform and point the the #BantheADL posts as their prime example. Don’t put it past them. They likely have multiple studies going on behind the scenes tracking the “rise in hate” on the platform since Elon took over and will use this to present their case.
Without critical infrastructure and the app stores X would be in serious trouble, but Elon may be able to pull off a miracle and keep the platform online. Next come the advertisers. The ADL has close connections with all of the top Fortune 500 companies and will use their mafia-style power to get these companies to pull their ad dollars from X. This has already been going on since the moment Elon took over the platform. X is operating in a cash flow negative situation and reports claim that ad revenue has fallen by a dramatic 50% since Elon took over.
That’s only the beginning. Next the ADL will contact the sitting members of Congress and the Biden White House. We’ll see Elon be summoned to testify in Congress about the rise in “misinformation” and “hate” on the platform since he took over.
Elon is in a unique position because he’s not only running X. He’s also running several other companies including SpaceX and Tesla, both of which require him to appease the Regime and stay within their favor. The ADL can and will go after not only X, but all of Elon’s companies. It’s no coincidence that the CEO of X is having meetings with the ADL just days after the DOJ announced that they were suing SpaceX.
How do I know all of this? Because I lived it–and survived it by the grace of God.
The ADL has been attacking Gab and me for many years. Their smear campaigns against us successfully lobbied dozens of third-party services to deplatform us and cripple our infrastructure. Despite all of their efforts this didn’t stop us. We were able to rebuild our own servers, payment processing, and so much more in order to keep Gab online. It took many years and it wasn’t easy, but we are still standing.
The ADL has also come after me personally. They pay Google to promote their smear articles about me to the top of search results. They lobbied the DOJ to investigate me after January 6th, even though I wasn’t even in attendance. Jonathan Greenblatt went on national television and called me “one of the most toxic people in public life” effectively painting a target on my back.
None of this stopped me.
I don’t fear the ADL. I don’t answer to the ADL. I fear and answer only to God almighty.
The ADL has NO POWER over Gab which is why they hate us. It’s that simple. There is absolutely nothing they can say or do to get us to censor opinions they don’t like and it’s going to stay that way.
Elon has a choice. He can continue to allow this disgusting organization to run his company by proxy without his approval or he can fight back, take a stand like Gab has, and face the consequences head on. He can continue to have his CEO take groveling phone calls and enforce the ADL’s strategy of freedom of speech but not freedom of reach or he can tell them to pound sand. If he can’t run his own business without permission from some ghoulish vampire at the ADL there’s no sense in running a business at all.
For me it was an easy decision.
Andrew Torba CEO, Gab.com Jesus Christ is King of kings
It has become unmistakably clear that NYAG James aims to suppress our VDARE.com website, seize control of the VDARE Foundation and even expropriate our Berkeley Springs Castle, WV headquarters (which she probably intends to fill with Third World “asylum seekers”).
VDARE.com, which is a tiny organization (revenues typically $600k-$800k range, no endowment), absolutely cannot.
Note also that NYAG Letitia James has not yet even accused us of any infraction—much less have we been convicted. We are merely being “investigated”—at deliberately destructive expense.
In other words, we are being battered to death by subpoena.
It is only because of the extraordinary generosity of our donors that we have been able to finance our defense against NYAG Letitia James’ mugging thus far.
Most tiny organizations like ours would already have been forced to capitulate—which is probably what NYAG Letitia James was counting on.
I am sure she is astounded by our supporters’ loyalty.
But now this effort has brought us to financial crisis. Our general funds have been drained, and we are right at the point of being unable to pay our writers and our technical support staff, with no end in sight to this harassment.
Trump (Love Him Or Hate Him) Was Right About NYAG Letitia James
As single-issue immigration patriots, we at VDARE.com regarded presidential candidate Donald J. Trump’s historic August 15, 2015 immigration statement as a triumphant vindication of our long struggle to get the immigration issue into politics.
Nevertheless, let the record show that, in an August 10, 2022 deposition in NYAG Letitia James ’s lawfare attack on Trump (quite separate from Manhattan DA Melvin Bragg’s lawfare attack—there are a lot of them), Trump opened with a statement that was a definitive takedown of her thuggery.
Trump described James as “a renegade and out-of-control prosecutor” engaged in “an unfounded, politically motivated witch hunt.”
Bingo.
As Trump pointed out, James ran for New York State Attorney General in 2018 explicitly promising to sue him—before she could have known any of the actual facts. She did the same with the NRA. (Trump also noted that in her campaign she called him “an illegitimate president,” something which, if said about Joe Biden, is now apparently a hanging offense).
And now, at the age of 75, I am still working on the immigration issue in my office in the Berkeley Springs Castle every day.
I regret nothing—Non, je ne regrette rien, as the French Foreign Legionnaires famously sang as they were taken prisoner after their attempt to save French Algeria failed in 1961.
Maybe that’s not the most hopeful analogy. But I like it.
Nevertheless, nothing has infuriated me as much as the lying insinuation by NYAG James that I, and my wife Lydia, bought the Castle to benefit ourselves personally.
Exactly the opposite is true. Because Lydia and I knew no commercial bank could be trusted not to cave to political pressure and pull a mortgage in the most inconvenient way—as happened to Rebel Media’s Ezra Levant in Canada [Canadian media outlet says bank denied it a commercial mortgage over conservative political leanings, by Yael Halon, Fox News, December 30, 2021]—we had to gamble on pouring all of an unprecedented and wonderfully generous 2019 gift to the VDARE Foundation into buying the Castle for cash. (The prudent and self-interested course would have been to invest it and live off the proceeds.) We sold our much-loved home in the beautiful Connecticut Berkshires. We uprooted our little daughters and moved to a small rental cottage on the Castle grounds here in Appalachia. We were forced to do this because, in the three years before COVID, our proposed conferences had been canceled because of political pressure more than a dozen times (see e.g., here, here, here, here). We concluded that, for a persecuted organization like ours to hold conferences, it ultimately must own its own venue.
The net effect: The Brimelow family no longer owns a home. But its shelter dollars now go to support the Berkeley Springs Castle complex. What NYAG Letitia James is insinuating here adds insult to injury—in fact, it adds injury (in the form of her deliberately ruinous subpoena harassment) to insult (see above) to the professional injury I have already, I may say unflinchingly, sustained.
Of course, this could never happen if the U.S. were still the Land of the Free. But the fact is that what we all now face is a communist coup. And America’s corrupted legal and regulatory institutions are complicit.
And to hell with everyone else enabling this new Soviet America.
Why was the VDARE.com Foundation registered in New York State, and thus vulnerable to thugs like NYAG Letitia James, anyway?
The VDARE Foundation was set up in 1999 by a heroic volunteer lawyer who at that time did a great deal of pro bono work for the immigration patriot movement. He happened to be admitted to the bar in New York State, so he set it up there.
(However, contrary to NYAG Letitia James’ insinuations in her filings, the foundation was subsequently dormant for several years because we were working through another foundation registered in a different state. This is why we made no further filings: they were not necessary.)
It is perfectly normal for 501(3) charities to be registered in states other than those in which they have a physical presence.
And at the time, of course, with the West’s concurrent victory in the Cold War, no one had any idea of the communist Reign of Terror that was subsequently to sweep through American institutions, above all after the apparently unauthorized election of Donald J. Trump in 2016.
Thus our heroic volunteer lawyer was later forced by his white-shoe law firm, to its great discredit, to abandon his pro bono work for immigration patriots. This an example of the stealth “Chinese Communist Social Credit–style deprivation of professional and commercial services” (see above) that is a key part of America’s ongoing communist coup.
Because our unusually good fundraising year pushed us over a N.Y. regulatory threshold, we initiated an exhaustive financial audit (i.e., a qualified third party had to look over our accounts). Our aim was to be fully compliant before we even considered raising our heads above the parapet with a request to exit.
This audit was very much hampered by the fact that our Connecticut accountants suddenly abandoned us and refused to suggest referrals (see “Chinese Communist Social Credit–style stealth deprivation of professional services” above).
The trivial, very common, easily corrected, and anyway generally obviated by the statute of limitations regulatory missteps that NYAG Letitia James is now hyperventilating about (see below) arose in the resulting chaos because we had so much trouble finding a replacement. In fact, at one point we had to turn to VDARE.com accountant reader, who had kindly offered his services.
The audit was completed—triumphantly. But of course NYAG Letitia James has ignored it anyway.
However, once the VDARE Foundation was forced into the real estate business in order to own its conference venue, we had to reorganize legally, at considerable expense, in a way that is more typical of commercial operations, to protect ourselves against predatory lawsuits (whether politically motivated or not), e.g., slip-and-fall. Thus the VDARE Foundation now owns a for-profit LLC (Limited Liability Corporation) that holds the property surrounding the Castle and leases it back to VDARE. And the Berkeley Springs Castle itself is now owned by the Berkeley Springs Castle Foundation, a 501(c)(3) supporting organization of the VDARE Foundation that is registered in West Virginia. NYAG Letitia James has made numerous lying references to this reorganization (see below).
What has NYAG Letitia James done?
Last summer, we learned from Facebook that NYAG Letitia James had hit it with two overlapping subpoenas regarding its transactions with us:
This was a flagrant violation of procedure.The Stored Communications Act, specifically 18 U.S. Code § 2703(b)(1)(b), permits a government agency to obtain third-party information from Facebook or other internet services—provided that there is ”prior notice from the governmental entity to the subscriber or customer” [viz., the third party, here VDARE].
But NYAG Letitia James never provided VDARE.com with that notice. An email from Facebook was the first we heard about it.
She simply disregarded the law.
This has turned out to be a pattern.
Significantly, in both cases, the Facebook subpoenas were issued on NYAG Letitia James’ behalf by someone called Rick Sawyer, who is described as “Special Counsel for Hate Crimes.”(In his email signature, Sawyer advertises his pronouns as “he/him”—for now.)
Needless to say, VDARE.com has not committed, or has even (yet) been accused of, a crime of any kind—let alone a “Hate Crime” (which we have anyway consistently argued is an unconstitutional concept).
But Commissar Sawyer’s role betrays what is really motivating NYAG Letitia James: not some technical issue arising from her role of overseer of charities, but the suppression of political opinion she dislikes (aka “Hate”). She apparently thinks she can do this by claiming that such political opinion results in “Hate Crimes” (unlike, of course, Black Lives Matter rhetoric).
Needless to say, this is a direct assault on our First Amendment rights.
(With characteristic leftist vindictiveness, Facebook also deleted our own personal pages, which in Lydia’s case was entirely non-political—she had used it, as all student Millennials were encouraged to do, as a diary, family resource and baby book, showing our children’s first steps, etc.—and has refused to return her data, although we understand it is legally her property.)
And we never raised much money through Facebook anyway, or spent much money on promotion there, partly because I had quickly concluded it was shadow-banning us.
So why was NYAG Letitia James targeting Facebook at all? One theory: She or her minions might actually have been crazy enough to think our Social Media Manager really was a Russian agent. (He is an American, albeit a Southerner, i.e., nearly as bad.)
Facebook, not a friend, informed us that it would comply with these subpoenas—no easy task—unless we contested them.
And we did indeed consider contesting James’ subsequent subpoena against the VDARE Foundation, because it was plainly harassment aimed at suppressing our First Amendment rights (see below).
But eventually, very reluctantly, we took the hard decision to comply, without prejudice, with NYAG Letitia James’ demands as much as possible—to demonstrate good faith to the court.
Facebook thereupon apparently met her demands.
At least, we think it did. Typical of the relentlessly hostile environment in which patriots now operate, Facebook will not tell us what data it supplied. And neither will NYAG Letitia James.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Because our relationship with Facebook was so minimal, we believe and hope that none of our readers, or even the commenters on our late lamented Facebook page—and certainly not our donors—are significantly at risk here.
But THEY COULD HAVE BEEN. This whole episode is disgraceful in a supposedly free society.
“Hate” is, of course, an offense unknown to the U.S. Constitution. “Hate speech” is in effect simply something with which NYAG Letitia James disagrees.
The Cornerstone Church has (good for them!) now filed an action under the Civil Rights Act against NYAG Letitia James. It points out that the original venue had cancelled the event after pressure from Democrat elected officials, notably Monroe County Legislature President Sabrina LaMar, and also that the Church’s hosting of the ReAwaken Tour was a legitimate exercise of their First Amendment Rights.
Free Speech Foe Sabrina LaMar
Especially significant from VDARE.com’s point of view: The Cornerstone Church has argued that NYAG James’ behavior violated provisions of the New York State Bar Association’s Rules Of Professional Conduct—because she abused her office for political purposes and lied about the nature of their meeting:
Specifically, plaintiff alleges that the Defendants negligently, wantonly, recklessly, intentionally, and knowingly sought to and did deprive them of their constitutional and civil rights, pursuant to the above-named statutes and causes of action by committing acts to deprive Plaintiffs of rights secured by the Constitution of the United States and the State of New York,” the suit states. “Further, Defendant James negligently, wantonly, recklessly, intentionally, and knowingly published multiple false statements to multiple media outlets to mar the reputations of Pastor Doyle and Clay Clark, to provoke objectionable opinions in the minds of members of the community to expose plaintiffs to hatred, contempt, and aversion.”
NYAG Letitia James’ subpoena made a staggering 44 separate demands for documents. Most of them were of no possible relevance to any oversight function that the New York Attorney General’s office could conceivably claim to exercise over charities registered in New York State.
For example:
We sued the New York Times because it described me, the Editor of VDARE.com, as an “open white nationalist.” Needless to say, this allegation is lethal in the current political climate. However, it is not an opinion, but a matter of fact—I have repeatedly said I’m a Civic Nationalist, i.e., I’m not “open” about being a white nationalist. The Southern District of New York Court recognized this when it acknowledged the issue was “actionable,” although absurdly claiming I had been made whole by the New York Times’ subsequent guilty stealth-edit of its website, even though correction was unacknowledged in the print edition despite its publicly stated ethics code.
At the time, a prominent First Amendment lawyer told us, “The Supreme Court is going to revisit SULLIVAN”—its disastrous 1964 decision that effectively deprived public figures of Common Law libel protection—”but not for you.”
We believe this is because our suppression by Colorado Springs was so flagrantly unconstitutional, as even one Reason commenter acknowledged. To quote Judge Harris L. Hartz’ magisterial dissent from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals decision:
A government effort to punish or deter disfavored speech is what VDARE adequately alleges. And the City accomplished its purpose. The complaint plausibly alleges that the Mayor’s statement caused the Resort to cancel the VDARE conference.
This atrocity is simply not something to which our new communist overlords want to draw attention.
Our initial response—WHAT ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT?
Looking over all three (3!) subpoenas, to Facebook and to the VDARE Foundation, it appeared to us that, of 68 separate demands, fully 53 were improper, with most violations landing squarely on First Amendment grounds.
For example, Item 4 of NYAG Letitia James’ subpoena to the VDARE Foundation:
Quite apart from the extraordinary, and utterly unnecessary, compliance burden that this demand imposes on the VDARE Foundation, it also aims to expose everyone who has ever been involved with us to doxing and harassment by Antifa thugs.
Above all, it aims to expose our writers, who have careers and families to support, and who therefore now operate under pseudonyms because of the Reign Of Terror.
There is simply no need for NYAG Letitia James to know who they are.
Moreover, 40 gigabytes of email could amount to a million individual items or more. Redacting them is an enormous and obviously very tricky task (because of the risk of accidentally exposing donors and supporters).
And we absolutely do not want to tell NYAG Letitia James who our writers are—because we know that she cannot be trusted with confidential information.
Just look at this MSM story about a leak from NYAG Letitia James’ office last year:
Like other nonprofits, Stand For America files an annual tax return with the IRS. While the agency and the nonprofit must make those filings available to the public, including the amounts of contributions to the group, such nonprofits do not have to disclose the identities of their donors.
However, the organization Documented, which describes itself as a nonpartisan government watchdog that investigates money in politics, obtained an unredacted copy of Stand For America’s 2019 filings, which it then shared with POLITICO. The group did not share the original source of the filing, but it bears a stamp from the charity office of the New York state attorney general. [Emphasis added]
Needless to say, giving money to GOP Establishment catspaw Nikki Haley is not really a hanging offense (except possibly in James’ crazed New York Democrat bubble).
But giving money to, or writing for, VDARE.com most certainly is a hanging offense right now—given the current Reign Of Terror. (Consider the fate of blogger Razib Khan, fired after less than 24 hours as a New York Times contributor just because he had some years earlier written a letter to VDARE.com opposing something we had published.)
So James’ incentive to leak the identities of our writers and donors is exponentially greater.
But significantly, Gulag Garland appears to have not responded to the GOP demand at all—further evidence that the Regime is now completely lawless.
(I might also note that Nikki Haley’s Stand For America appears effortlessly to have raised some $7 million in 2019. Obviously, this far outmatches any VDARE Foundation fundraising, even though donations to us are tax-deductible, whereas donations to Stand For America are not. It’s simply amazing how much money professional politicians can raise, as opposed to political truth-tellers like us. With that much money, we could cause a Cultural Revolution.)
Of course, in this sort of regulatory situation, courts do typically operate on the assumption that the government is acting in good faith.
But NYAG Letitia James subpoenas’ fail rate—53 out of 68 demands turn out to be First Amendment violations—simply is not the record of a government acting in good faith. Whatever statutory presumption NYAG Letitia James might be accorded, it is rebutted by this pattern.
Initially, we replied to NYAG Letitia James making these points.
Our subsequent response—an exhaustive (and exhausting) effort to demonstrate good faith.
I must stipulate here that the VDARE Foundation really is a tiny organization— “lean,” in our auditor’s words. And apart from editorial and tech support contractors, VDARE.com generally has only two full-time employees—Lydia and myself, home-schooling parents of three small children. And, importantly, we have no in-house lawyers.
But it simply took us time to organize our legal response to James’ massive onslaught.
This was particularly true because we have increasingly serious difficulty procuring any legal services at all—all this stuff about John Adams representing the British soldiers accused in the Boston Massacre although himself a Patriot, once the pride of the American legal profession, has gone down the toilet in this new Soviet America. (See “Chinese Communist Social Credit–style stealth deprivation of professional and commercial services” above.)
As discussed above, we elected not to fight NYAG Letitia James’ subpoena on First Amendment grounds, despite its flagrant political motivation, but instead to begin more cautiously, by demonstrating good faith and complying with the subpoena as far as was compatible with our contractors’ and donors’ security.
But the cost of this good-faith effort has been enormous—see “the process is the punishment” above. This is how what Paul Gottfried calls “the Managerial State” enforces obedience.
Our legal fees already amount to over $300,000—and, remember, we have not yet even been accused of any wrongdoing at all.
Moreover, VDARE.com event-planning and fundraising has been completely crippled since the summer of 2022. (We will have our second invitation-only Annual Conference in June—contact Lydia for more details.)
If you’re a donor and you haven’t heard Lydia’s delicious alto on your voicemail thanking you for your donation, this is the reason: She was physically digging through the Foundation’s records, which reside in a cargo container on the Castle grounds.
She’s a tall, strong girl (6’ 1”). But this is still a huge pain.
The VDARE Foundation archives after our chaotic move from Connecticut during COVID, on Berkeley Springs Castle grounds, 2022
By December 2022, the VDARE Foundation had produced over 7,000 pages of documents to AG NYAG Letitia James. We had engaged a third-party custodian to sort through our 40 gigabytes of emails, the equivalent of perhaps millions of pages, because we needed to protect the identities of our vendors, writers, volunteers and donors. And our lawyers’ review of those emails was well under way.
(Significantly, in the course of this production, our lawyers protested NYAG Letitia James’ demand that we produce the names of vendors, e.g., our webmaster, and were told the NRA had been forced to do so. This turned out to be a lie, and another ethical violation. Specifically, it is a violation of Rules 4.1 (”Truthfulness in Statements to Others”) and Rules 8.4 (“Misconduct“) of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct.
Despite all this, in early December, we received a peremptory email from NYAG Letitia James’ office demanding that the VDARE Foundation, within ten days, disclose its constitutionally protected information, reveal previously redacted (because we want to protect donors, writers and correspondents) information in the first 7,000 pages of production; complete review of the 40 gigabytes of emails (ditto); and produce a complete redaction log for the entirety of its production.
Again, the VDARE Foundation is a tiny entity in the world of New York State charities, not at all worthy of this massive regulatory overkill. And in the normal course of events, NYAG Letitia James’ underlings would have simply discussed any concerns about the status of the production with a phone call or a meeting.
But of course her persecution of us is not normal. It is purely political.
So, at this point, with NYAG Letitia James’ bad faith irrefutably evident, we filed a complaint in federal court for declaratory and injunctive relief. In other words, we want an official declaration that James has violated the First Amendment, and we want the Court to halt her attempt to enforce the subpoenas.
In doing so, she violated procedural norms yet again—it’s a pattern.
As our lawyers subsequently told the Northern District of New York Federal Court:
Especially revealing is the OAG [Office of the Attorney General]’s unseemly subterfuge in secretly rushing to state court to secure a favorable order before this Court hears and rules on its motion to dismiss.
VDARE filed its complaint in this Court on December 12, 2022, simultaneously emailing a courtesy copy of its papers to the OAG in advance of formal service, which provided the OAG with three weeks (until January 4, 2023) to respond. [Citations omitted] On December 21, 2022, a full two weeks before the OAG’s response was due on January 4, 2023, the OAG requested and secured VDARE’s consent to an extension of its deadline to respond in federal court, from January 4 to 18, 2023. In so doing, the OAG claimed (in an email) that the extension was necessary because of the holidays and an attorney who had taken ill:
Because of the holidays and a member of our team who has COVID, we would appreciate an extension until Jan 18 to respond to VDARE’s complaint in the NDNY. Can you please confirm your consent? [Citation omitted]
Unbeknownst to VDARE when it consented to the extension on December 21, 2022, however, the OAG had already initiated its special proceeding in state court the week before (on December 16, 2022) with a proposed order to show cause. [Citation omitted]
In other words, NYAG Letitia James lied to us, at least by omission, in order to get her state filing heard first.
Of course, in a just world, even apart from NYAG Letitia James’ obvious malfeasance here, the New York State Court should have stayed or even dismissed NYAG Letitia James’ petition to compel enforcement of the subpoena, pending resolution of our First Amendment case in Federal Court, which would normally have had priority.
But to our lawyers’ shock (again), and with unprecedented speed—as in, the next business day after filings were completed—New York State Judge Sabrina Kraus ruled against us, uncritically accepting NYAG Letitia James’ lying and stupid assertions as to why she had cause to want disclosure.
Kraus even endorsed NYAG James’ demand that we provide the names of writers.
This is particularly telling because NYAG James had ostentatiously eschewed asking for the names of writers in her response to our Federal suit—presumably because of its obvious First Amendment implications.
As our lawyers subsequently told the Federal Court:
…the OAG represented to this Court in its motion to dismiss this case that its subpoena to VDARE does “not seek any information regarding the development or publication of VDARE’s online content.” [Citation omitted]
Simultaneously, the OAG took the contrary and constitutionally offensive position in state court that “the identities of contractors—including writers who contribute to the website—these are precisely the records the OAG must examine in its investigation of VDARE’s organizational misconduct.”
Apart from taking contradictory positions in two different courts, the OAG’s purported rationale for the demanded disclosure does not fit its rationale: a vendor’s provision of services to VDARE and a writer’s provision of content to VDARE’s website have no automatic connection to any legitimate investigative need.
Memorandum Of Law In Opposition To Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss, February 22 2023
Arguing contradictory things in different courts is flatly unethical. It violates the doctrine of judicial estoppel, which explicitly precludes litigants from making contradictory claims in different courts.
VDARE.com’s response to NYAG James’ aggression
Of course we appealed Judge Kraus’ ruling—but only because our heroic donors had provided the money to do it. And we were granted a stay of her decision pending a full hearing.
But again, with unprecedented speed, the Appeals Court then rejected our stay pending appeal. Significantly, they even passed the matter on to their clerk for a summary order, indicating that they did not think it worth their time to be bothered with our First Amendment rights. We were granted no relief at all, not even the protection of our writers’ identities, which NYAG Letitia James of course had lyingly assured the Federal court she did not want.
From our point of view, this nightmare is like watching water cascade uphill—the case should never have been heard in New York State Court; it should not have been rejected; and our stay should never have been rejected on appeal.
But rules just don’t seem to apply to immigration patriots.
Note the net effect of NYAG Letitia James’ aggression: We are now forced to fight this ruinously expensive war on TWO fronts—in Federal Court and in New York State Court.
In fact, THREE fronts—because Lydia is still being forced to prepare production to comply with NYAG Letitia James’ demands in case we lose. See below.
The downside of VDARE Foundation’s good faith effort to comply
The downside of VDARE.com’s good faith effort to comply: NYAG Letitia James was able to find and trump up (excuse the term!) various trivial alleged infractions.
“Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” This principle, supposedly enunciated by Stalin’s secret police chief Lavrentiy Beria, is of course why Americans today are terrified of audits by the Internal Revenue Service.
And it’s why President Trump, in the video we linked to above (at 12:05), forcefully asserted his right to take the Fifth Amendment in his deposition, although specifically pointing out (at 10:36) that he had once thought that innocence was a sufficient defense.
Among alleged VDARE Foundation infractions that NYAG Letitia James is trumping up:
Lydia (“Secretary, Treasurer and Publisher”) of VDARE and I (“Director/CEO/Chairman”) did not specify in filings that we are married.
Even if this technicality were true, Lydia and I obviously USE THE SAME LAST NAMES! We file joint taxes with the same IRS where we file our 990s!! And, critically, NO BENEFIT WAS GAINED by the supposed failure to report!!!
And we have repeatedly, perhaps boringly, celebrated on VDARE.com the fact that we are married. For example, here in 2007, announcing our marriage, Another Personal Message From Peter Brimelow:
Manifestly, we had no intent to deceive.
And NYAG Letitia James knows this—because she admits elsewhere that she is stalking VDARE.com: She cites VDARE.com posts in her filings to support her lie that we were living at the Castle rent-free.
So NYAG Letitia James’ lie here is not merely malicious. It is stupid.
NYAG Letitia James claims, without evidence, that our Berkeley Springs Castle purchase is suspect
The Berkeley Springs Castle is a beautiful charismatic property and only two hours from the U.S. Capitol. (This is probably what alarms NYAG James—as Southern Poverty Law Center enforcer Michael Edison Hayden quite accurately complained in 2020: “[t]he castle gives them greater proximity to Washington D.C. and a place to hold conferences without fear of being shut down”).
But this is in West Virginia, and therefore actually surprisingly cheap—we got the Castle, 55 acres of mountain and three somewhat dilapidated cottages for $1.4 million.
(WE URGE PATRIOTS TO JOIN US HERE IN AFFORDABLE, D.C.-ADJACENT, WEST VIRGINIA! Its demographics “Look Like America” before the disaster of the 1965 Immigration Act, it has no big city to outweigh the rural vote, and it went for Trump 68.62% in 2020.)
But the serious point: It’s obviously a total waste of New York taxpayer money for NYAG Letitia James to spend so much time on this tiny transaction.
Furthermore, it is absolutely standard for 501(c)(3) charities like the VDARE Foundation to own their own headquarters, office space, meeting rooms etc. Here, for example, is the Southern Poverty Law Center’s headquarters in Montgomery AL—the notorious “Poverty Palace”:
And, as outlined above and confirmed by SPLC thug Michael Edison Hayden, we bought the Berkeley Springs Castle only becausewe discovered we could not rely on the corporate/ Ruling Class complex to defend our right to hold conferences—and the holding of conferences is critical to our role in advancing Patriotic Immigration Reform.
This is a problem that the SPLC and other communist groups absolutely do not have, for reasons that invite analysis, in the current political climate.
FOR THE RECORD: every step of the Berkeley Springs Castle transaction was carefully monitored by expensive lawyers—because we were well aware that we were susceptible to scrutiny by a malicious and unscrupulous politically motivated regulator.
Specifically:
NYAG Letitia James is lying, and stupidly lying, when she claims that the Castle purchase was illegitimate because VDARE Foundation’s board was “overseen exclusively by the Brimelow family.”
In fact, despite NYAG James’ insinuation, there is absolutely no reason the VDARE Foundation board should not have been made up of Brimelow family members: this is common for small, family-run foundations.
But again, James’ claim is still a lie, and a stupid lie. Our board has always had at least one, and at various times at many as three, non-family members, as is perfectly obvious from our filings.
NYAG Letitia James is similarly lying, and stupidly lying, by claiming that the Brimelow family’s temporary residence in the castle, and subsequently in a refurbished cottage on the castle grounds, was somehow illegitimate.
But in fact at every step, again carefully monitored by our lawyers, we paid independently determined fair market rent.
NYAG Letitia James knows this because we insisted on disclosing it to her at an early point when we were told it was allegedly the matter of concern.
But she refused to meet with our lawyers to discuss this disclosure. And her subpoena harassment rolled on.
NYAG Letitia James is lying, and stupidly lying, when she claims that we transferred assets purchased by the VDARE Foundation to a for-profit corporation that Lydia controls.
But this for-profit corporation, part of the aforementioned restructuring after we were forced into the real estate business, is in fact owned by the VDARE Foundation—NOT by Lydia personally.
NYAG Letitia James knows this because it was disclosed, e.g.,on our 2020 Form 990, which we provided (and she has access to anyway).
Again, NYAG Letitia James is simply lying, and stupidly lying.
Facebook Expenditures
NYAG Letitia James asserts that Facebook Cancelled VDARE.com in early 2020 because it determined we engaged in “coordinated inauthentic behavior” by creating a botfarm and that “these expenditures could constitute a waste of charitable assets and breach of the Brimelows’ fiduciary duties as VDARE officers and directors.”
Facebook, probably because it has testified before Congress to the contrary, seems not to want to admit that it is engaging in political censorship. But of course it is absolutely obvious to everyone that it is—e.g., completely independent third-party Facebook users who wish to share VDARE.com items are now libelously informed ”this URL goes against our community standards on spam.”
And in any case, VDARE.com is a charitable/educational organization that is in the business of spreading its message.
Paying to promote our message is unimpeachably legitimate.
Furthermore, most of the monies that NYAG Letitia James instances were actually paid, not by the VDARE Foundation, but separately by our Social Media consultant, to promote his own private business, helping us and his other clients.
NYAG Letitia James knows this—because the expenditures appear nowhere in our accounts.
By not acknowledging this she is, again, stupidly lying about material facts.
Payments
NYAG Letitia James asserts:
In 2019, VDARE reported a six-fold increase in revenue, from $700,000 in 2018 to approximately $4.3 million in 2019 […] Also in 2019, VDARE doubled the salary of its Chairman, Peter Brimelow, to approximately $345,000,
The VDARE Foundation had a great year in 2019, thanks to our wonderful donors. In previous years, in a way that is typical of small business owners, Lydia and I had often eschewed income to pay bills, depending on financial circumstances. So in 2019, the VDARE Foundation Board formally approved a payment for the year to me of $349,500. (N.b. Lydia was paid some $10,000.)
But in contrast, in 2020, with no major donor, Lydia and I together were paid only some $270,000.
And, for what it’s worth, in 2023 to date, basically because of the cost of NY AG James’ regulatory onslaught, we have not taken any salary at all.
Personally, I think that Lydia and I deserve to earn much more. In 2021, National Cuckview’s Rich Lowry was paid apparently paid $400,000.
Who is doing more for the Historic American Nation?
Compliance
NYAG Letitia James asserts about our purchase of the Berkeley Springs Castle and subsequent reorganization transactions:
[u]nder New York law each required approval and written documentation of that approval by disinterested members of the VDARE Board of Director [CITATION OMITTED] and should have been submitted for review and approval to OAG or to Supreme Court [CITATION OMITTED]. Transfer of charitable assets to a for profit entity without fair consideration to disqualified persons is a violation of both New York and federal law.
But this would only be true if the purchase and transfer were to a non-profit entity independent of, and not controlled by, the VDARE Foundation.
NYAG Letitia James knows that this is not the case with the VDARE Foundation’s purchase of the Berkeley Springs Castle and its subsequent creation of a for-profit entity that the Foundation controls.
She is again lying to the Court—stupidly, because the facts are readily ascertainable, for example in our lawyers’ briefs.
Why now?
When I’m in an optimistic mood, I think this lying Deep State assault, along with so many others, is happening now because the Ruling Class is panicking. It has simply never recovered from the shock of Trump’s 2016 victory and the realization that the Democrat stealth strategy of Electing A New People could be halted (as it actually was for a time under Trump) and even reversed.
That’s why Biden has risked impeachment by opening the borders to rush in the Great Replacement in a plainly treasonous way, to finish the job as quickly as possible.
Which means that, now more than ever, the Regime must keep the immigration issue out of public debate—until America’s demographic transformation is complete.
Dissent on immigration must be utterly crushed—even polite dissent from a tiny operation like VDARE.com.
What happens now?
Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., the senior judge in the federal District Court for the Northern District of New York,will rule ontwo of the competing motions that are pending before him:
On NYAG Letitia James’s motion to dismiss the entire case, which he will either grant or deny and
The VDARE Foundation’s motion to enjoin any attempt to enforce the subpoena by the AG.
We don’t know how long this will take. Federal judges are supposed to rule within six months, but often don’t. However, we are told this is not likely to be the case here.
But a footnote: Lies have consequences—we intend to move to sanction and disbar lying NYAG Letitia James
In journalism, and of course in politics, you get used to opponents lying all the time.
But NYAG Letitia James is not just a journalist and not just a politician: she is also the head of a state agency, and a lawyer.
That means that, as a lawyer, she is what is known as an “Officer of the Court.” As Law.com says
As officers of the court lawyers have an absolute ethical duty to tell judges the truth… [Emphasis added]
You can see why this is necessary. The system simply cannot function if all factual assertions have to be checked all the time. Truthfulness “cuts down on transaction costs,” as the great Nobel Laureate economist Milton Friedman once pointed out to me.
NYAG Letitia James, however, has consistently lied in court filings.
And it has worked—until now.
Thus, for example, New York State Judge Sabrina Kraus, in her ruling all too obviously cut-and-pasted from NYAG James’ brief, stated:
Public postings by Respondent Chairman Peter Brimelow and others indicate that he and his family have used the castle as their primary residence since at least March 2020. [A lie. As stated above, we lived only briefly in the Castle before moving to the cottage, AND WE PAID INDEPENDENTLY DETERMINED RENT THROUGHOUT. Moreover, Judge Kraus nowhere acknowledges that the Castle was purchased for an unimpeachable purpose: providing a venue for meetings that, because of communist threats that U.S. law enforcement authorities seem unable to counter, we cannot hold elsewhere.] During this same period, Respondent also substantially increased payments to Brimelow and to third-party, for-profit companies he controls… [A (confused, see “payments” above) lie. The West Virginia for-profit company—there’s only one—is OWNED BY THE VDARE FOUNDATION.]
Respondent separately reported spending tens of thousands of dollars on office expenses in 2019 [this is because at that time we operated from a home office in our home in Litchfield CT, a completely standard procedure] as well as paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to a third-party LLC controlled by Brimelow that was based at Brimelow’s residential home address. [This was simply an employee leasing company that paid the salaries of all VDARE employees, including Lydia and myself. One of its purposes was to protect our employees from being doxxed.]
In December 2020, Respondent conveyed the entirety of the Berkeley Springs Castle property to two West Virginia corporations incorporated by Lydia Brimelow, Peter’s wife and a Respondent director, five months earlier. Respondent conveyed the castle itself and the land that it sits on to the Berkeley Castle Foundation (BCF), a non-profit corporation. Respondent conveyed the remaining land, consisting of eight parcels, to BBB, LLC, a for-profit corporation. [Misleading at best. Judge Kraus nowhere acknowledges that the West Virginia corporations are ALL controlled by the VDARE Foundation.]
Of course, Judge Kraus could have avoided these stupid errors simply by reading our lawyers’ brief.
But apparently New York State judges don’t have to do that kind of thing.
Nevertheless, and this is a critical distinction: Attorney General NYAG Letitia James absolutely does have to tell the truth to Judge Kraus, and to all courts involved in our lynching.
(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer…
(3) offer or use evidence that the lawyer knows to be false…
The official comments, which are designed to elucidate the rule, provide the gloss:
This Rule sets forth the special duties of lawyers as officers of the court to avoid conduct that undermines the integrity of the adjudicative process…although a lawyer in an adversary proceeding is not required to present an impartial exposition of the law and may not vouch for the evidence submitted in a cause, the lawyer must not allow the tribunal to be misled by false statements of law or fact or by evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. [Comment 2 to Rule 3.3]
Further:
…an assertion purporting to be based on the lawyer’s own knowledge, as in an affidavit or declaration by the lawyer or in a statement in open court, may properly be made only when the lawyer knows the assertion is true or believes it to be true on the basis of a reasonably diligent inquiry. There are circumstances where failure to make a disclosure is the equivalent of an affirmative misrepresentation. [Comment 3 to Rule 3.3]
Paragraph (a)(3) requires that the lawyer refuse to offer or use evidence that the lawyer knows to be false, regardless of the client’s wishes. This duty is premised on the lawyer’s obligation as an officer of the court to prevent the trier of fact from being misled by false evidence.
Lawyers have a special obligation as officers of the court to protect a tribunal against criminal or fraudulent conduct that undermines the integrity of the adjudicative process.
Accordingly, paragraph (b) requires a lawyer who represents a client in an adjudicative proceeding to take reasonable remedial measures, including disclosure if necessary, whenever the lawyer knows that a person, including the lawyer’s client, intends to engage, is engaging or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to the proceeding.
Such conduct includes, among other things… unlawfully destroying or concealing documents or other evidence related to the proceeding; and failing to disclose information to the tribunal when required by law to do so. For example, under some circumstances a person’s omission of a material fact may constitute a crime or fraud on the tribunal.”
In our case, New York Attorney General NYAG Letitia James has committed every one of these violations.
My Twitter Account Was Suspended; CAFE Retains Legal Help
The new owner of Twitter, Elon Musk, has made a name for himself opposing censorship and promised to free Twitter from political censorship. He now has a chance to prove it. On April 24, I learned that my Twitter account which I have had for over a decade had been suspended. I quickly learned that mine was not the only one. Accounts belonging to fellow nationalists broadcaster James Edwards, authors Professor Kevin MacDonald and Dr. Tom Sunic, and the American Freedom Party were suspended the same day, interestingly the same day popular populist broadcaster Tucker Carlson was purged from Fox News.
This was Twitter’s message: “After careful review, wedetermined your account broke the Twitter Rules. Your account is permanently in read-only mode, which means you can’t Tweet, Retweet, or Like content. You won’t be able to create new accounts. If you think we got this wrong, you can submit an appeal.”All five of us appealed. Mr. Edwards and I sent in threeappeals. Both Mr. Edwards and I have had our accounts for over a decade and encountered no troubles. We asked what Twitter Rules we had broken. My appeal read: “My suspension came as ashock. I am not aware of breaking any Twitter rules. I wish to know how I offended and ask that my account be restored. I protest the denial of due process, any sort of a hearing or dialogue or proper notice of exactly in what way I broke Twitter rules.” There has been no response from Twitter to the various appeals.
Accordingly, CAFE reached out and obtained the assistance of a prominent California lawyer to take our appeals further up the food chain and, hopefully, directly to Elon Musk. — Paul Fromm
“Censor not, lest ye be censored,” Elon Musk, the billionaire owner of Twitter, tweeted recently. Since purchasing Twitter, Musk has been vilified by the far left and liberal activist community for pledging to restore free speech on the platform, ostensibly allowing more conservative and right-wing voices space on one of the world’s largest and most influential social media sites.
That very same day, Monday, April 24, several notable right-wing dissidents were unceremoniously deplatformed and banned on Twitter with no explanation given. Popular talk radio personality James Edwards, the longtime host of The Political Cesspool, Dr. Kevin MacDonald, one of the leading dissident intellectuals who edits The Occidental Observer, Dr. Tom Sunic, a Croatian-American former diplomat, academic, and author, along with countless others had their increasingly popular Twitter accounts permanently banned.
Edwards explained to this reporter:
I had been on Twitter since 2016 and never once received a prior warning or reprimand. This wasn’t my second or third strike. This was an online assassination that went straight to a permanent ban. No reason was given.
I conduct myself professionally and have always been sure to responsibly present our arguments. I don’t quarrel with individuals on social media and have never even used profanity or crude rhetoric.
Simply put, by no reasonable standard of measurement could it be argued that I violated even the most ambiguous terms of service. This was just another case of naked censorship.
Dr. Kevin MacDonald noted he simply received an email with a subject line that read: “Your account is permanently suspended.”
The email continued:
After careful review, we determined your account broke the Twitter Rules. Your account is permanently in read-only mode, which means you can’t Tweet, Retweet, or Like content. You won’t be able to create new accounts. If you think we got this wrong, you can submit an appeal.
No reason was provided for the permanent ban, and no explanation was provided detailing in what specific way any Twitter Rules were violated.
“No reason was given and that’s also the case with James,” MacDonald told this reporter referring to the permanent ban. “We have appealed, asking for reasons but I rather doubt anything good will happen.”
Sunic, meanwhile, noted that the Twitter ban didn’t surprise him at all, arguing “that the censorship in the U.S. is continuing where the Soviet Union left off.”
Sunic wrote following his ban:
I know what I am talking about. My family and I were all proscribed in communist ex-Yugoslavia for several decades. My father, an ex-lawyer, even served prison time for “hostile anti-communist literature.”
Now we are witnessing the same intellectual purges, albeit adorned with fancy and demonic euphemisms such as “hate speech” and “ethnic sensitivity training” in the U.S. and EU—akin to the ex-Soviet People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs, i.e., the NKVD.
Several other dissident commentators were purged recently as well, including Andrew Anglin, editor and lead writer for The Daily Stormer, easily one of the most censored websites in the world. Paul Fromm, a Canadian free speech activist and occasional contributor to this newspaper, was also banned. It remains unclear what specific rules any of these activists, writers, and commentators broke, if any.
In addition to the recent censoring of popular dissidents, many other content creators and political activists have been permanently banned for months now. Mike Peinovich, Joseph Jordan, Warren Balogh, and others associated with the National Justice Party (NJP), a burgeoning political movement dedicated to advocating “for White civil rights, the working and middle class, and the traditional family against our corrupt and illegitimate institutions,” have been shut down and censored on Twitter. Links to the organization’s website are also banned from even being shared on the platform.
Patriotic Alternative, a similar right-wing political movement based in the UK, and its leadership and affiliated organizations are also permanently banned on Twitter. Additionally, Nick Fuentes, a leading political commentator and organizer based in Chicago, is also banned on the platform.
Laura Towler, a leader with Patriotic Alternative, recently pointed out:
Twitter censorship is worse under Elon Musk than it ever was before. Not only are most of our accounts suspended still/again, but so are URLs to websites like Patriotic Alternative and NJP. This makes it almost impossible to share any [public] activism, direct people to solutions, or even recruit people to sign up. People are able to lie about us and we have no ability to defend ourselves.
Warren Balogh also powerfully argued that censorship under Musk is even more extreme than it was previously, noting that Musk purchased “the most important social media platform in the world for political discourse, with the promise to restore free speech, then [has made] it more restrictive than it ever was for dissident individuals and parties in the West at the wishes of the ADL [Anti-Defamation League.—Ed.].”
Balogh explained:
This is what we get living under the arbitrary rule of an oligarchy of degenerate billionaires. This whole system has to go, including oligarchs like Musk who think they are gods, and the world and all our most fundamental freedoms are their playthings, that they can amuse themselves with or discard when they get bored.
Shortly after purchasing Twitter, which was a long, drawn-out process fraught with controversy and conflict, Musk openly stated that, under his watch, the platform would allow all speech that the First Amendment specifically protects.
“By ‘free speech,’ I simply mean that which matches the law,” Musk tweeted on April 26, 2022. “I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law.”
Musk’s mixed messaging and outright schizophrenic thinking on free speech matters continues to grow. While denouncing censorship on his personal Twitter account, which receives millions of views, his underlings at the social media behemoth censor legitimate and responsible right-wing dissidents that have long been in the crosshairs of organized special interest groups like the ADL, who work overtime to cancel and shut down their opposition.
NB: This article was originally published by American Free Press on May 17, 2023. Subscribe to America’s last real newspaper today!
I had been on Twitter since 2016 and never once received a prior warning or reprimand. This wasn’t my second or third strike. This was an online assassination that went straight to a permanent ban. No reason was given. I conduct myself professionally and have always been sure to responsibly present our arguments. I don’t quarrel with individuals on social media and have never even used profanity or crude rhetoric. Simply put, by no reasonable standard of measurement could it be argued that I violated even the most ambiguous Terms of Service. This was just another case of naked censorship.
It also wasn’t my first rodeo. I was banned by Facebook and PayPal in the mid-2000s, long before it became altogether commonplace for dissidents to be banned from everything. At this point, I very nearly have been banned from everything, including YouTube, Amazon, and every known credit card payment processor in the universe. Frankly, I have never known any other reality.
Because of this, I was relatively late to join the Twitter party, not arriving until the fall of 2016. Within weeks, Hillary Clinton was featuring my Twitter account in a campaign ad against Donald Trump. Though my work had been covered/targeted by countless print and broadcast media outlets long before my tenure on Twitter, there was no doubt that Twitter boosted my audience and led to greater exposure. By the time the end came this week, my Tweets were routinely gathering tens of thousands of views, sometimes hundreds of thousands. One recent Tweet generated in excess of one million views, which, in truth, is probably the reason I have been taken out.
I suppose the only real surprise was that I was able to last there for as many years as I did. When it comes to arbitrary censorship, the interesting thing is that you just never know when or why you’ll be taken out. As I said, I certainly didn’t do anything to bring this upon myself; the timing of these things is always random. You just wake up one day and you’re gone. In the meantime, there are a limitless number of minority racists whose accounts are littered with profane, hate-filled rants that call for the actual murder of White people. Of course, those accounts are safe.
I was hardly the only one to be shipped off to the Twitter Gulag this week. At the exact same time that I was banned, Dr. Kevin MacDonald and Dr. Tomislav Sunic, among others, were also shuttered. MacDonald and Sunic, especially, are gentlemen and legitimate scholars whose voices deserve any and all platforms. Still, if the party has to end, it’s always better to leave with friends. It was not lost upon us that we all survived the previous regime only to be banned by Elon Musk’s operation.
One commenter wrote that we could take our bans as a high compliment, as well as “an independent verification that you all stand on the moral high ground of truth and courage.” Sure, at least there’s that, but MacDonald alone had a following numbering five Roman legions that have now been dispatched into the ether.
It would be disingenuous for me to tell you that it isn’t somewhat maddening to build up a large, organic following only to have it evaporated on a whim. Like most people, I don’t like being violated. But what I like even less is to hear men whine about things not being fair. I have long possessed an admiration for the Machiavellian nature of our enemies. They have done to me exactly what I would do to them. I respect that. They have set the rules and we should remember them.
I do not now, nor have I ever believed in the equality of individuals or ideas. We are right and they are wrong. If I were in control, I would be eager to do everything within my power to extract the anti-White, “woke” agenda from our society. Root and stem. I give my enemy credit for being more ruthless than our people, who are still too noble for their own good. While we ought not to lose the moral compass that separates us from our adversaries, we must see things clearly.
Still, the one message above all others that I want people to remember during this teachable moment is that we cannot apologize for our positions or behave during times of difficulty in a way that brings dishonor to our cause. It is an animating thing to engage in the struggle of one’s time. In the best of us, it will stir the Faustian spirit that exists within our hearts and minds. Without trials of principle, you will never know whether or not you are honest. Making the hard decision during times of challenge brings honor to our ancestors and solidifies our standing as a man.
As a friend of mine recently put it, great men are never made except through great trials. Adversities aren’t obstacles, but rather our greatest opportunities — to get better, forge our character, work harder, become smarter, and prove our worth. You won’t know what you’re made of until your time comes and you face a decision. We should welcome these opportunities, whether it be something as trivial as a social media ban or during other situations when the stakes are much higher.
At the end of the day, I remain thankful for the opportunity to serve and hope that whatever example I set can be done for the greater good of our collective. In the meantime, the show must go on and it’s time to get back to work.
James Edwards hosts The Political Cesspool Radio Program. When not interviewing newsmakers, Edwards is no stranger to making news himself, having appeared as a commentator many times on national television. Over the course of the past two decades, his ground-breaking work has also been the subject of articles in hundreds of print publications and media broadcasts around the world.
Federal Government Requested Removal of Online Content, Document Shows
The Twitter logo is seen on a sign on the exterior of Twitter headquarters in San Francisco, Calif., on Oct. 28, 2022. (Constanza Hevia/AFP via Getty Images)
Multiple federal departments and agencies have interacted with social media companies to request online content be taken down, often to have impersonating accounts removed but also to purge posts they deemed offensive.
The Canadian government provided the information on March 27 in response to an Inquiry of Ministry submitted by Conservative MP Dean Allison.
Allison asked for an account from each governmental organization on requests to “take down, edit, ban, or change in any other way social media content, posts, or accounts, since January 1, 2020.”
The most serious case involved Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) employees sharing private taxpayer information in a Facebook Messenger chat group not approved for use by the agency. CRA requested the information be taken down but said it didn’t receive confirmation it had been.
Organizations in general didn’t provide the name of the accounts they were targeting, only giving generic information, but the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) did.
The director general for communications at CBSA sought to have posts removed for “hate speech or symbols,” “harassment or bullying,” as well as nudity and impersonation.
The agency flagged accounts associated at one point to former CBSA employee Patrick McNulty, who was reported to be under investigation last summer. McNulty made social media posts critical of COVID-19 measures and advised travellers on how to avoid the once-mandatory ArriveCAN app to enter Canada.
Instagram flagged posts by accounts “exbordercop” and “the_real_mcnulty” for “harassment or bullying,” but the social media company reportedly did not take down those posts. Those accounts currently appear to be inactive. https://7747da1e68c728378791e7e383630aec.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-40/html/container.html
The National Post wrote in August 2022 about a social media post made by McNulty in which he reportedly made disparaging comments against a CBSA superior who contacted him regarding one of his videos denouncing the ArriveCan app. The Epoch Times has not seen the post.
CBSA could not comment on the case of its former agent due to privacy reasons but said its employees are expected to ensure that their comments and behaviour “do not impair, or are not perceived as impairing, their ability to perform their duties in an impartial manner as public servants.”
“Any social media posts that were flagged for removal was done as it was deemed that these violated CBSA’s Code of Conduct and Instagram’s own policies on abuse and harassment,” said spokesperson Guillaume Bérubé.
McNulty could not be immediately reached for comment.
Other agencies under the Public Safety portfolio did not report sending many requests to social media companies. Public Safety Canada itself said it hadn’t and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service declined to answer citing operational security.
The RCMP reported making a single request for a takedown, saying that it involved a Facebook account impersonating then-commissioner Brenda Lucki that was sending out fake messages. Facebook deleted the account.
Flagging Offensive Content
Another reason multiple federal organizations contacted social media companies was to have content they deemed offensive removed. The accounts involved and details of the targeted posts are not available.
The Public Health Agency of Canada’s online actions focused on “offensive language” on Twitter.
Since December 2020, it has made 21 requests to the social media company to have the flagged tweets removed, but Twitter only took action on three occasions.
Health Canada had more success with its requests to Facebook to have posts removed. In February 2021, its social media chief requested that three posts on “disinformation about lifting of COVID 19 restriction” be taken down. The document says that the company followed through.
Two requests to Twitter in December 2022 to remove posts showing “abusive behaviour towards a Health Canada employee” were also successful, along with another post exposing private information about an employee of the department.
The Digital Innovation and Engagement Division at Global Affairs Canada (GAC) handled all of the departments’ requests for takedowns.
GAC reported having submitted eight requests to Twitter and Facebook over the period being examined, mostly for “content violating terms of use.” One request to Twitter was for “threat of violence.” All of the posts were removed, says the Inquiry of Ministry.
The Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC) under GAC also complained about an offensive tweet directed at one of its employees, but Twitter did not remove the post. However, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram did remove accounts identified by the BDC as impersonating the bank’s CEO.
The Treasury Board requested that LinkedIn and Facebook delete comments made on posts about diversity and inclusion. It said the comments were “racist, hateful, sexist or defamatory.” The document says the comments were not entirely deleted. Another containing “hate speech” was removed by Facebook.
The Competition Bureau under Innovation Canada requested that Twitter take down an “offensive reply” to one of its tweets in March 2020, but the company did not take action.
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC), which oversees Service Canada and Passport Canada, flagged posts on Twitter for “encouraging criminal activity” by the promotion of fraudulent vaccination certificates.
Other ESDC takedown requests related to spam, impersonating accounts, and content making a “reference to violence (suicide/self-harm).”
‘Undermining Public Confidence’
The director of communications at the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) asked Facebook and Twitter to take down a post in September 2021 that linked back to a Toronto Sun article.
The IRB said the article contained “serious errors of fact risking undermining public confidence in the independence of the Board as well as the integrity of the refugee determination system.”
The Inquiry of Ministry notes that the posts were not taken down given they linked back to the Sun’s article.
The paper had reported on Sept. 6, 2021, that the Trudeau government was removing barriers for asylum claims in Canada, citing a leaked draft document from the IRB.
The IRB had more success when it asked Facebook to remove a post containing confidential information on a refugee claim.
Not Tracking Takedown Requests
The Department of National Defence (DND) said it also makes takedown requests but did not provide any data, saying that it does not centrally track that information.
“When necessary, National Defence will ask social media companies to take down posts from other users if they contain information that poses a risk to operational security, or if the post violates the terms and conditions defined by the social media platform,” said DND.
It added that its Public Affairs group contacts social media companies several times a month to ask for the removal of fake DND- or Canadian Armed Forces-related accounts.
Canada’s eavesdropping agency under DND, the Communications Security Establishment, made numerous requests to Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok to have accounts removed for “brand infringement” and impersonation, and all were successful.
CBC also said it made requests to social media companies asking them to take down content that infringes on copyrights or that violates the platform’s terms of use. However, the public broadcaster said it doesn’t systematically track the information.
Heritage Canada, linked to internet regulation bills C-11 and C-18, said it did not made any takedown requests over the period covered.
‘Twitter Files’
The self-reporting by government entities through the Inquiry of Ministry likely only provides a partial picture of efforts to remove content deemed undesirable, with some organizations involved not providing any data.
Efforts in the United States by the government, NGOs, and elected officials to remove posts on social media have been more widely documented through the release of internal Twitter files since Elon Musk took over the company in October 2022.
One recent release by journalist Matt Taibbi, on March 17, detailed how Stanford University’s Virality Project had contributed to the censorship of what he called “True Stories” on COVID-19 across “at least six major Internet platforms.”
He wrote that Stanford’s project, which started in 2021, “worked with government to launch a pan-industry monitoring plan for Covid-related content.”
I’m Martin Gargaglione, a member of CitizenGO’s Media team and last month our account was suspended from Twitter, after posting an image on our Twitter page drawing attention to dangerous attempts of the most radical branch of the LGBT lobby to normalize pedophilia.
On top of that, in pure censorship fashion, almost all of our tweets scheduled one week before were never published. We even had to delete everything to regain access to our account.
The censorship we suffer at the hands of social media platforms is nothing new for us and is an open attack on pro-life and pro-family voices. Twitter moderators seek to prevent people from becoming aware of or talking about the perversions and radicalization of the LGBT lobby.
We may have been suspended, but we will not be silenced. I am proud of who we are and what we defend. I am proud that we have such a huge and global network of active citizens who are concerned with such fundamental issues on which our freedoms and those of our children depend on. We will continue fighting against the radical lobbies and corporations who are targeting us.
Right now, my voice and thousands of pro-life and pro-family voices worldwide, are being excluded from public debate and discriminated against just for ideological reasons!
The radical LGBT lobby is rapidly becoming a menace to children. By now, they are no longer hiding it. Children are increasingly the target of the LGBT lobby. Look no further than the parade of drag queens taking place all around the world in the presence of minors.
It’s nothing new that pedophilia seeks to piggyback itself off the current LGBT ideology. There have even been initiatives to rebrand pedophiles as ‘minor-attracted people’ (MAP), using the same logic that “we cannot control who we are attracted to.” They use the same slogan as the LGBT’s “Love is Love”.
And just because we warned about this danger, we were censored on Twitter!
Since Elon Musk took over Twitter, we all believed that he would do what it takes to end the long and frustrating years of censorship and work towards a platform where at last, freedom of speech is respected … because he promised exactly that: to restore free speech rules on Twitter.
Yet, Twitter is still more restrictive than Facebook, Instagram, and Youtube – where we posted the same content and were not banned!
We know very well that most those who manage social media platforms will stop at nothing to have their way and prohibit whatever traditional, pro-life, pro-family posts and publications.
Enough is enough!
We need to put an end to the censorship and the suppression of our voices. There is absolutely no time to waste. We are counting on your signature to rise and fight back:
Just recently, a new #TwitterFiles investigation revealed that teams of Twitter employees built blacklists, prevented disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limited the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users!
Censorship like the one we are facing causes great difficulty for us to get key information out to the public about critical issues like child indoctrination and the latest woke radical ideas that threaten our children and their education. Not to mention that it is an open form of discrimination against people like us for simply having the opinions we have.
The LGBT lobby, aided by most social media platforms, celebrates this censorship in an attempt to erase us, stigmatize us, and isolate us. And if we do nothing to defend our rights they will continue to push against us, because they are scared of what we say – they are scared we say the truth while they live in a lie!
I am proud of who I am, of my views and opinions, and I do not regret the post I published on CitizenGO’s Twitter account some days ago. I thought it was important for people to see how far the most radical branch of the LGBT lobby is going.
I am equally proud of all of us who stand up together in times like these, as a network of citizens who together are making a difference.
P.S.These attacks are happening everywhere, so people across the world must know of the lengths social media platforms and big tech companies are willing to go to curb free speech, propagandize the information we have access to, and police us with how we can and cannot think.
We need you to take action NOW: we must show that we will not be intimidated, oppressed, or silenced out of the society we all live in.
Climate Activists Alarmed That Twitter Under Musk Allows More Dissenting Views on Global Warming
Figurines with smartphones and computers in front of the Twitter logo in an illustration on Nov. 28, 2022. (Dado Ruvic/Illustration/Reuters) By Bryan JungJanuary 22, 2023Updated: January 23, 2023 biggersmallerPrint 0:003:17
An organization that says it is a coalition of “climate and anti-disinformation organisations” says Twitter under CEO Elon Musk is allowing more dissenting views on climate change.
Climate Action Against Disinformation (CAAD), released a Jan. 19 study (pdf), accusing Musk of allowing misinformation about the climate crisis to spread on the social media platform.
The study accused Twitter of boosting the hashtag “#ClimateScam” to users when searching the word “climate,” as its top search result.
The hashtag has suddenly spiked on Twitter search results since July 2022, with its appearance increasing ever since, according to CAAD.
The report said that “in 2022, denialist content made a stark comeback on Twitter in particular.”
Twitter Search
CAAD alleged that at least 91,000 Twitter users reported the #ClimateScam hashtag more than 362,000 times by December.
“The source of its virality is entirely unclear, and re-emphasises the need for transparency on how and why platforms surface content to users,” said the study’s authors.
They said that term appeared to be trending despite “data that shows more activity and engagement on other hashtags such as #ClimateCrisis and #ClimateEmergency.”
The research team claimed that the rise of the term in search results could not be explained by user personalization, the volume of content, or popularity.
“A basic search for ‘climate’ on Facebook did not autofill with overtly sceptic or denialist terms; searching explicitly for #ClimateScam only showed 1.5k users mentioning the term, versus 72k for #ClimateEmergency and 160k for #ClimateCrisis.”
CAAD complained that the source of the #ClimateScam hashtag was unclear and that there was a need for transparency on how the search result came up.
“Equally, TikTok returned no search results for #ClimateScam, but instead suggested the phrase ‘may be associated with behaviour or content that violates our guidelines.’”
Interest Groups
The authors said that not enough of the content was labeled as misinformation by Twitter’s new management and claimed that it could not find a comparable trend or uptick in “#ClimateScam” on other platforms.
CAAD is partially funded by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a think tank, which is heavily funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
The ISD said it is working with social media platforms to explore radicalization online, to minimize the impact of extremist recruitment by groups in Europe and North America.
Since buying Twitter in October, Elon Musk has reduced the social media team’s staff by 50 percent and cut down its content moderation team to protect freedom of expression.