The SPLC and CAIR are pressuring donor-advised funds to blacklist conservative and Christian "hate groups" in an attempt to defund their political opponents. DAFs had $121 billion in 2018. /1 pjmedia.com/trending/splc-…
In calling for this blacklisting, the report praises #ChangeTheTerms, a coalition of Soros-funded groups that pressure #BigTech to silence conservatives on the SPLC "hate group" list. /2 pjmedia.com/trending/splc-…
The entire report is very circular. In addition to citing Change the Terms, it cites a CAIR report from last year, urging philanthropic groups to blacklist "anti-Muslim hate groups," citing — once again — the SPLC "hate group" list. /3 pjmedia.com/trending/anti-…
The SPLC/CAIR report also cites Amalgamated Bank's "Hate Is Not Charitable" campaign, which is — sorry if I'm sounding like a broken record here — an attempt to blacklist SPLC-accused "hate groups." /4 pjmedia.com/trending/25-do…
Urging donor-advised funds to blacklist these groups is a huge deal. DAFs represent a huge chunk of philanthropy in America today, and they allow donors some degree of anonymity with their giving. Leftists like to demonize donors to conservative groups, as @AFPhq knows well. /6
The SPLC "hate group" list is also notoriously corrupt and unreliable. Former employees have called it a "scam" because it exaggerates hate and is intended to destroy political opponents. A huge chunk of my book, #MakingHatePay, focuses on this. /7
To its credit(?), the report acknowledges that blacklisting falsely-accused "hate groups" might seem "controversial," but it claims this is important for "public safety," which is ironic since the SPLC "hate map" inspired an attempted terrorist attack in 2012. /8
The SPLC routinely peppers reports like this w/ references to white supremacist terror, the El Paso shooter (a radical environmentalist as well), and white supremacist groups, giving the impression that "hate group" has KKK connotations, which it does. /9 pjmedia.com/trending/splc-…
Yet the SPLC routinely argues in court that its "hate group" accusation is mere meaningless opinion. This report, like so many others, gives the lie to that claim — they cite the number of "hate groups" as a statistically significant measure for white supremacy. /10
It is important to note that this report praises iTunes, PayPal, and AmazonSmile for taking "measures to screen out hate from their platforms." What does this mean? These #BigTech firms have allowed themselves to be weaponized by the SPLC. /11 pjmedia.com/trending/its-b…
Make no mistake: the SPLC is an engine of defamation, fundraising, and political warfare. It aims to destroy the reputations of conservative and Christian groups, even going after their funding, while making wads of cash by exaggerating hate. /12
Donor-advised funds that are tempted to take this report seriously should check out my book, #MakingHatePay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Don't become a tool for the SPLC to further bilk its donors, defame law-abiding Americans, and worsen polarization. /13
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Colorado LGBTQ groups pushed for HB25-1312, a bill that would define "misgendering" and "deadnaming" as "coercive control" and mandate custody courts consider them.
Democrats excluded parental rights groups from discussion, comparing them to the KKK.
🧵2/10
The bill passed the Colorado House, 36 in favor, 20 against, and 9 absent in a largely party-line vote.
The Colorado House has 43 Dems and 22 Republicans. The Colorado Senate has 23 Dems and 12 Republicans.
Who are the Biden political appointees who "burrowed in" to the federal bureaucracy?🤔
The list includes a former White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council member, former USAID staff, and immigration lawyers.
I'll explain "burrowing in," then get to the names.
🧵1/15
First, what is "burrowing in?" @hughhewitt gave a good concise definition in an interview with me at @JobCreatorsUSA's Freedom Fighters Summit
Presidents appoint more than 3K people for "political" positions, but there are at least 2.3M federal workers. Most are in ostensibly non-political "career" positions.
Burrowing in involves switching from a "political" to a "career" position.
🧵2/15
Why is this a problem?
“The biggest challenge that every single new Cabinet secretary and their subordinates will face is the entrenched bureaucrat,” @TheFGA's @stew_whitson told me.
He described both overt opposition to the president and “quiet insubordination.”
The SPLC released its hate map for 2018, and Nessel responded by pledging, "Hate cannot continue to flourish in our state."
"I have seen the appalling, often fatal, results of hate when it is acted upon," she added. "That is why I am establishing a hate-crimes unit in my office—to fight against hate crimes and the many hate groups which have been allowed to proliferate in our state."
That may sound noble, but if you know anything about the SPLC, it should be unnerving, if not downright terrifying.
🧵2/10
You see, the SPLC is no neutral arbiter on hate.
It champions almost every leftist cause you've ever heard of, and accuses those who dare disagree of being driven by "hate."
Do you follow the traditional Jewish or Christian teachings on sexuality? You're an "anti-LGBTQ hate group."
Want our immigration laws enforced? You're an "anti-immigrant hate group"—even if you have legal immigrants on the board.
Are you concerned about radical Islam inspiring terrorism? You're an "anti-Muslim hate group."
Do you think parents should have a say in their kids' education? You're an "anti-government extremist group" and on the hate map.
Last year, the SPLC even added groups of doctors who oppose "gender-affirming care" and @againstgrmrs to the "hate map."
When the FBI was caught citing the SPLC's "hate map" in targeting "radical traditional Catholics," it was rightly a huge scandal.
A shocking new poll from @ScottWRasmussen shows just how many D.C.-based bureaucrats who voted for Kamala Harris say they plan to disobey a lawful Trump order if they consider it bad policy.
Yes, people who work for the taxpayer plan to disobey the people's elected president. This is the key definition of the deep state.
RMG Research, Rasmussen's polling firm, identifies federal government managers as federal employees in the DC region who earn at least $75K.
The firm asked this essential question:
"Suppose that President Trump gave an order that was legal but you believed was bad policy. Would you follow the president's order or do what you thought was best?"
THREE QUARTERS—75%—of DC bureaucrats who voted for Kamala Harris said they would "do what I thought was best" rather than follow Trump's order.
Only 16% said they'd do as the people's elected president ordered.😲
🧵2/10
NOTE: This isn't asking if they'd follow Trump over the law.
This is just asking if they place their own opinion of good or bad policy ahead of the person who was elected by the people to lead the executive branch.
It's also worrying that 18% of those who voted for Trump say they'd "do what I thought was best" instead of following the order. That's probably a lot lower than it would have been if the poll was conducted in 2017, however.
“It’s codifying into law that if their ideology confuses your child, and you don’t affirm that delusion, you’re committing child abuse and can lose custody of your child,” Caldwell told me.
“We have now crossed the Rubicon of parental rights with this bill,” he added.
🧵2/6
When Caldwell asked whether parental rights groups had been allowed to weigh in on the legislation, a Democrat—Rep. Yara Zokaie—mocked the very idea.
“A well-stakeholded bill does not need to be discussed with hate groups, and we don’t ask someone passing civil rights legislation to go ask the KKK their opinion,” she quipped last Tuesday.
Zokaie doubled down on the comparison on Friday, explicitly citing the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Colorado state Rep. Yara Zokaie doubles down on comparing parental rights groups to the KKK, citing the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Zokaie did so while defending a bill that would define "misgendering" and "deadnaming" as "coercive control" and would require courts to consider it in custody battles.😡
So, parents who don't want to trans their kids should have their kids removed from them, and if these parents team up to form a group, they'll be demonized as hateful like the KKK.
Zokaie had first compared parents groups to the KKK in a hearing on Tuesday.
She attempted to explain why parental rights groups had been excluded from discussions on HB 1312, the bill in question.
“A well-stakeholded bill does not need to be discussed with hate groups, and we don’t ask someone passing civil rights legislation to go ask the KKK their opinion,” she quipped.
🧵2/7
Two House Republicans slammed Zokaie's remarks.
“Calling parental advocacy groups ‘hate groups’ is just their excuse to marginalize and ignore them while maintaining a pretense of moral superiority,” @COrepKdeGraaf told me.
@RepCaldwell said the comparison uses “inflammatory labels that are only meant to create division” and “dismisses the valid concerns of parents.”