True Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Investigation of Donald Trump

Jeffrey Toobin writes in this 2020 book:

* The assignment involved a good deal of time spent in a hotel in Baltimore, and it was at the restaurant there that [Jeannie] Rhee explained to Mueller her philosophy of the buffet, which she had learned from her parents. One should always order the buffet, Rhee asserted, but then load up one’s plate with proteins—especially meat—and avoid carbohydrates, like rice. Proteins were expensive, and carbs were cheap. As a customer, the best bang for your buck were the proteins, and Rhee could be found at the hotel buffet every morning with her plate full of bacon and sausage. Mueller found Rhee’s dollar-based intensity on the subject of food fascinating and bizarre, and he proceeded to needle her about it relentlessly over the course of their time together. Mueller’s subordinates often said that they could tell they remained in his good graces if he continued to tease them about something. For Rhee, it was the “boo-fay,” as Mueller pronounced it, as if it were some exotic culinary passion rather than a staple of high school cafeterias. Mueller despised all forms of pretension, including in food, where his tastes were relentlessly bland. Rhee’s passion on the subject, and her intensity generally, marked a significant contrast to Mueller’s aristocratic reserve.

In making hiring decisions, at the Office of Special Counsel and elsewhere, Mueller often said he was looking for people who were “sparky”—that is, dynamic and energetic. This was notable because Mueller himself rarely exuded spark—a kind of looming intensity, to be sure, but not in a way that was any more colorful than his white shirts. Rhee, in contrast, was all spark, all immigrant hustle, always looking for an edge. She was loud, aggressive, and opinionated, which was not to everyone’s taste, especially since she rarely dialed down the sparkiness. But that kind of attitude was exactly what Mueller wanted.

* But there was a kind of method to Giuliani’s approach. He understood, as Dowd and Cobb did not, that the struggle between Trump and Mueller was essentially political, not legal. In the current, polarized political environment, Giuliani could make any claim he wanted on Trump’s behalf, and it would be embraced by the president’s supporters, like Hannity. It made sense, then, to get the real story of the Stormy Daniels payments out in public. Giuliani had to get the truth out because he knew that Cohen might flip, and Trump’s checks to Cohen reimbursing him for the money paid to Daniels might be revealed at some point (as they were). In light of this, Giuliani thought he should get ahead of the story. He never had to worry about Trump’s supporters criticizing the president for flip-flopping, or lying, because his supporters never criticized him for anything.
As Trump’s lead attorney, Giuliani was responsible for defending him in a complex series of overlapping investigations—of his campaign’s connections to Russia, of possible obstruction of justice in the White House, and of the hush money payments to Daniels and McDougal. But Giuliani never even bothered to learn the facts of the cases, preferring instead to bluster off the top of his head.

* Giuliani thought (as did Trump) that the most important objective was always to stay on offense against their enemies. On Hannity and elsewhere, Giuliani adopted the president’s characterization of the Mueller investigation as a “witch hunt.” He denounced the president’s pursuers as “thugs” and worse. As for the FBI agents who searched Cohen’s home and office, Giuliani called them “storm troopers,” comparing federal law enforcement officials to Nazis—a remarkable statement coming from a former U.S. Attorney. (Cohen said that the agents were “extremely professional, courteous, and respectful.”) With no evidence, Giuliani accused Mueller of leaking to the press. He argued, again on no evidence, that Attorney General Sessions should appoint a special counsel to investigate Mueller. “Investigate the ‘investigation and investigators,’ ” he tweeted. “Unlike the illegal Mueller appointment you will be able to cite, as law requires, alleged crimes.” As ever, Mueller responded to these attacks with silence.

* Giuliani recognized what worked for Trump—insults, diversions, lies—could work for him as well. And it did work. Giuliani, in a very determined way, sought to turn Mueller into just another Trump enemy, just another Democrat (even though Mueller is a Republican). When Mueller was appointed, polls showed bipartisan support for him, but after Giuliani’s attacks public opinion about the special counsel divided along the same partisan lines as on any other issue. Giuliani brought Mueller down to his level—and Trump’s. Giuliani’s apotheosis—the moment that best summed up his service to the president—came on Meet the Press . Giuliani had said that one reason Trump might not do an interview with Mueller was that the prosecutor might set a “perjury trap.” But Chuck Todd, the host, asked Giuliani whether a perjury trap could even exist, since a witness who told the truth couldn’t be trapped. Giuliani responded, “When you tell me that, you know, he should testify because he’s going to tell the truth and he shouldn’t worry, well that’s so silly because it’s somebody’s version of the truth. Not the truth.”

* It’s a myth that defendants plead guilty, agree to cooperate, or even just start to tell the truth because they have attacks of conscience or religious awakenings. They do so because they believe the alternatives would be worse for them. To cite the most obvious example, defendants plead guilty and cooperate because they think that going to trial will result in a conviction and a longer sentence. For this reason, prosecutors thrive on fear. Without fear, defendants—even ordinary witnesses—feel emboldened to challenge and defy prosecutors. However, a president who is under investigation has a unique ability to remove the element of fear for those who might be witnesses against him. A president can issue pardons.

* Prosecutors in complex white-collar investigations make progress in one way—by persuading targets to plead guilty and cooperate against higher-ups. The plea by Rick Gates, Manafort’s deputy, was an important step for Mueller in that vein. But the special counsel’s team needed more people to flip—among them, Manafort himself, Flynn, Cohen, and Roger Stone. But after Trump and Giuliani started talking about pardons, their discussions of cooperating stalled, or never started in the first place. In all, then, Giuliani might have sometimes looked silly on television, but he delivered real accomplishments for his client: he set loose the president to turn the Republican base against Mueller; he used pardon talk to shut down the pipeline of cooperators; he cleaned up the facts of the Stormy Daniels situation so the president was not continuing to defend a false version of what transpired. As 2018 began, Mueller’s investigation was soaring as indictments and guilty pleas mounted. Just a couple of months after Giuliani took charge, Mueller’s work was stalled, and it never recovered its momentum. For this, Giuliani deserves a large measure of credit or blame, depending on one’s perspective.

* By May 2018, when Mueller completed his first year on the job, he was no longer perceived as the hero, with bipartisan acclaim, that he had been when Rosenstein named him.

* As the next presidential contest began, Biden appeared to be Trump’s most formidable Democratic rival. Early polls showed him leading Trump, often by substantial margins. But the president had an instinct for the political jugular, and he knew that Biden had a potential vulnerability. The story wasn’t a secret—the basic outlines had been known for years—but Trump understood how he and a compliant news media could convert a minor problem into a mortal threat. What had worked with Hillary Clinton’s emails could work with Joe Biden’s son.

* Then, in 2014, he [Hunter Biden] was named to the board of Burisma, one of the largest natural gas producers in Ukraine. Hunter had no apparent qualifications in the field or the region, other than his relationship to his father, whom President Obama had assigned to oversee relations with the government of Ukraine. Hunter’s position at Burisma had at least the potential for conflict of interest with his father. At a minimum, the situation looked seedy; at worst, corrupt.
Giuliani told Trump that Hunter Biden’s work in Ukraine represented a potential gold mine of opposition research.

* Mueller kept his word. He made no news before Congress. Instead, unfortunately, he was the news—his performance. As Donald Trump knew better than anyone, television is about appearance at least as much as substance, and Mueller had failed at both levels. He looked bad and said little. Mueller had come of age at a different era in American justice and American life, when modesty and self-effacement were ascendant values. There was something admirable in his embrace of this vanishing world.

Posted in America | Comments Off on True Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Investigation of Donald Trump

Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election

Jeffrey Toobin writes in this 2001 book:

* The Eighth Congressional District in Indiana stretches along the southwestern corner of the state, from the university town of Bloomington to the industrial city of Evansville. The district had been so evenly balanced between Democrats and Republicans that it elected four different congressmen in four consecutive elections in the 1970s. In 1984, the incumbent Democrat, Frank McCloskey, was seeking his first re-election against an aggressive challenge from a Republican named Richard McIntyre. The election-night totals put McCloskey ahead by 72 votes, but it quickly became apparent that the votes in one precinct had been counted twice. When the votes were retallied, McIntyre was ahead by 34. A recount—and a political war—followed.

An army of Washington lawyers trooped out to the district for the battle, and young Ben Ginsberg wound up leading the Republican crusade. (The Democrats included Chris Sautter, who would later co-author The Recount Primer with Jack Young.) The recount showed McIntyre ahead by 418 votes, and the Indiana secretary of state certified the Republican victory, but the Democratic House, led by a rising star named Tony Coelho (later Gore’s campaign chairman), refused to seat McIntyre. In January, when the new Congress began work, “Indiana 8” was left vacant while the Democrats scrambled for a new way to count the votes. The House majority set up a task force to “study” the election results, a process that dragged on until April. Ultimately, the House voted along straight party lines to certify the Democrat, McCloskey, as the winner by 4 votes. As even many Democrats would acknowledge later, it was as close to an outright theft as had occurred in modern American political history.

Newt Gingrich said that the fight over Indiana 8 marked a turning point in the radicalization of the Republican minority in the House. (At the time, Representative Dick Cheney, of Wyoming, said of the recount battle, “I think we ought to go to war. There’s unanimity. We need bold and dramatic action.”) In a broad sense, Indiana 8 helped convince an entire generation of Republicans in Washington that the Democratic Party was not just politically misguided but fundamentally cynical and deeply corrupt. Fights like this one set the rhetorical tone of the Gingrich years in the House, and the Republican air of moral certainty had only grown stronger through the Clinton years and into the election of 2000. In a way, there was a bracing absence of cynicism in the Republican style of this era. Whether the subject was Monica Lewinsky or the vote in Florida, Ginsberg and his colleagues operated at a sustained pitch of perpetual outrage.

“Recounts change lives,” Ginsberg would often say. Indiana 8 changed his. Ginsberg’s anger over the Democrats’ tactics in that race turned him from a part-time volunteer to a full-time Republican Party activist, and he spent the next decade as the general counsel to various campaign committees, leading up to the Republican National Committee. In 1993, he joined the large lobbying firm of Patton Boggs, but he kept a close hand in party activities. He signed on early with George W. Bush’s campaign. Over the years, Ginsberg’s once-full head of hair retreated to a few wisps around a bald dome, but his passion never faded. As he listened to the honeyed phrases come forth from the Democrats on the Today show (“Count all the votes”), Ginsberg knew it was time once again, in Dick Cheney’s words, to go to war.

* Al Gore turned into the Ancient Mariner of the Florida recount, the man who couldn’t stop talking about his plight. There was an almost compulsive quality to his lobbying of the press. He called network anchormen, substitute network anchormen, and weekend network anchormen, not to mention cable personalities, newspaper columnists, and the editorial board of his beloved New York Times. Yet, as so often was the case, he never proved a very successful messenger. From Election Day forward, Gore had believed the Washington conventional wisdom that the public would quickly run out of patience with the recount. This turned out to be largely false. Throughout his effort to count the votes, Gore maintained remarkable popularity despite the many crises of the period—even through the “military”-absentee-voting controversy and the certification of the election by Katherine Harris. True, the numbers of people supporting Gore’s efforts dropped in early December, falling to around 40 percent in most polls. But notwithstanding the predictions, there was never a hemorrhage of support. The recount cause inspired loyalty, even if Gore himself did not.

The vice president’s neediness seemed to inspire a degree of contempt from those who interviewed him. On CBS’s 60 Minutes, on Sunday, December 3, Lesley Stahl practically baited Gore. “You’re not really reaching the public with this argument,” she informed him. “You’ve been making it over and over: ‘Every vote has to be counted.’ There is more of a sense that you’re asking, you know, to change the rules of the game. Can you go on if you lose the public?” Gore responded in his by now familiar singsong style: “The public, I think, has shown a remarkable amount of patience and a determination to see that all the votes are counted. Of course, it is split . . .”

“But it’s slipping. It’s slipping,” Stahl said.

“Well, you know, I—this isn’t easy for—for any of us in this country,” he replied. “And I know that the Bush family, same as my family, is wanting this to be over, and I—and I know the American family wants it to be over. But as strongly as people feel about that, they feel even more strongly that every legally cast vote should be counted.” The “count all the votes” theme had less visceral impact than “we wuz robbed,” but the cautious vice president would never allow the latter sentiment to pass his lips.

If Gore’s mission looked like a lonely crusade, that’s because it was. The vice president’s political operation in Washington belatedly brought together surrogates to speak for him in Florida, but it was a halfhearted endeavor on both ends. Gore didn’t have the kind of relationships with elected officials in which he felt comfortable asking them to go to Florida, and in turn, few Democratic politicians felt like putting themselves out for Gore. The Bush team, by contrast, ran its surrogates’ program out of Tallahassee and came up with more than a dozen names to fill a white marker board every day. “CBS Morning News—Gov. Racicot,” “CNN Midday—Gov. Whitman,” and so on. The surrogates’ operation also displayed the trademark Bush-team cockiness. Once the contest ended, Republican media adviser Dorrance Smith grew so confident about Gore hurting his own cause that he took to telling bookers, “We’d really like you to put Gore out again.”

* Far from ending with the inauguration, the politics of the recount became a touchstone of the new administration. To be sure, the recount reflected the personalities of the two candidates, but the early days of the Bush presidency also suggested that those thirty-six days displayed the DNA of the contemporary Democratic and Republican parties: the party of process versus the party of results, reliance on elite opinion versus trust in public opinion, the agony of deliberation versus the exercise of power. It took a little while for quasi-official Washington to understand this. For example, on the day after Bush declared victory, R. W. Apple, Jr., wrote in The New York Times: “Mr. Bush will need to foster the kind of bipartisan cooperation he promised during his campaign. To accomplish that, the Texas governor will have to choose his issues carefully and weigh with caution how hard to push his viewpoint on contentious questions like abortion and the sweeping tax cut he has pledged.” If he had won, Al Gore might actually have taken this kind of advice.

George W. Bush, by contrast, ran his new administration with the same air of jaunty confidence he had exhibited during the recount. The symbols and words of bipartisanship turned out to be just that. On his first day in office, Bush signed an executive order banning U.S. funding for international family-planning organizations that provide or counsel for abortions. As his first major legislative initiative, he advocated and won passage of the largest income-tax cut in a generation, just as he had pledged to do during the campaign. Bush didn’t modulate his views or his agenda just because the conventional wisdom suggested that he should. He had run as a committed political conservative, and that was the kind of president he would be.

Bush’s straight-ahead approach did exact costs in the closely divided capital. In May 2001, Republican senator Jim Jeffords, of Vermont, citing the rightward tilt of the Bush administration, switched to an independent affiliation, putting the Senate in Democratic hands for the first time in more than six years. But Jeffords’s defection had no discernible impact on the way Bush conducted his presidency. George W. Bush was a man of strong and steady convictions. And nothing—not the loss of the Senate, the advice of the Washington establishment, or the extraordinary circumstances of his victory—would change what he believed or how he behaved.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Too Close to Call: The Thirty-Six-Day Battle to Decide the 2000 Election

Ghettoside: A True Story of Murder in America

Jill Leovy writes in this 2015 book:

* [John] Skaggs had been a homicide detective for twenty years. In that time, he had been in a thousand living rooms like this one—each with its large TV, Afrocentric knickknacks, and imponderable grief.

* Skaggs, like most LAPD cops, was a Republican.

* She lived in a federally subsidized rental apartment, and she was a Democrat who would weep in front of CNN later that fall when Barack Obama won the presidential election, wishing her mother were still alive to see it.

* Homicide had ravaged the country’s black population for a century or more. But it was at best a curiosity to the mainstream.

* They [black men] were the nation’s number one crime victims. They were the people hurt most badly and most often, just 6 percent of the country’s population but nearly 40 percent of those murdered. People talked a lot about crime in America, but they tended to gloss over this aspect—that a plurality of those killed were not women, children, infants, elders, nor victims of workplace or school shootings. Rather, they were legions of America’s black men, many of them unemployed and criminally involved. They were murdered every day, in every city, their bodies stacking up by the thousands, year after year.

* According to the old unwritten code of the Los Angeles Police Department, Dovon’s was a nothing murder. “NHI—No Human Involved,” the cops used to say. It was only the newest shorthand for the idea that murders of blacks somehow didn’t count. “ Nigger life’s cheap now,” a white Tennessean offered during Reconstruction, when asked to explain why black-on-black killing drew so little notice.
A congressional witness a few years later reported that when black men in Louisiana were killed, “ a simple mention is made of it, perhaps orally or in print, and nothing is done. There is no investigation made.” A late-nineteenth-century Louisiana newspaper editorial said, “If negroes continue to slaughter each other, we will have to conclude that Providence has chosen to exterminate them in this way.” In 1915, a South Carolina official explained the pardon of a black man who had killed another black: “ This is a case of one negro killing another—the old familiar song.” In 1930s Mississippi, the anthropologist Hortense Powdermaker examined the workings of criminal justice and concluded that “the attitude of the Whites and of the courts … is one of complaisance toward violence among the Negroes.” Studying Natchez, Mississippi, in the same period, a racially mixed team of social anthropologists observed that “the injury or death of a Negro is not considered by the whites to be a serious matter.” An Alabama sheriff of the era was more concise: “ One less nigger,” he said. In 1968, a New York journalist testifying as part of the Kerner Commission’s investigation of riots across the country said that “for decades, little if any law enforcement enforcement has prevailed among Negroes in America.… If a black man kills a black man, the law is generally enforced at its minimum.”
Carter Spikes, once a member of the black Businessman Gang in South Central Los Angeles, recalled that through the seventies police “didn’t care what black people did to each other. A nigger killing another nigger was no big deal.”

* John Skaggs stood in opposition to this inheritance. His whole working life was devoted to one end: making black lives expensive. Expensive, and worth answering for, with all the force and persistence the state could muster. Skaggs had treated the murder of Dovon Harris like the hottest celebrity crime in town. He had applied every resource he possessed, worked every angle of the system, and solved it swiftly, unequivocally.

* America has long been more violent than other developed nations, and black-on-black homicide is much of the reason. This is not new. Measurements are problematic, since few official efforts were made to track black homicide before 1950. But historians have traced disproportionately high black homicide rates all the way back to the late nineteenth century, and in the early twentieth, “nonwhite” homicide rates exceeded those of whites in all cities that reported federal data. In the 1920s, a scholar concluded that black death rates from homicide nationwide were about seven times white rates. In the 1930s, Southern observers also noticed startling rates of black violence, and in the 1940s, a Philadelphia study found that black men died from homicide at twelve times the white rate. When the U.S. government began publishing data specific to blacks in 1950, it revealed that same gap nationwide. The black homicide death rate remained as much as ten times higher than the white rate in 1960 and 1970, and has been five to seven times higher for most of the past thirty years.
Mysteriously, in modern-day Los Angeles, young black men are murdered two to four times more frequently than young Hispanic men, though blacks and Hispanics live in the same neighborhoods. This stands out because L.A., unlike well-known murder centers such as Detroit, has a relatively small black population, and it is in decline. By Skaggs’s time, there were few solidly black neighborhoods left; most black residents of South Los Angeles lived in majority-Hispanic neighborhoods. Yet black men died here as they died in cities with large and concentrated black populations, like New Orleans, Washington, D.C., and Chicago—more often than anyone else, and nearly always at the hands of black assailants. In L.A., it was strange how all those bullets seemed to find their black targets in such an ethnically jumbled place; it was, as one young man put it, as if black men had bull’s-eyes on their backs.
Violent crime was plummeting in Los Angeles County, as it was across the country, by the spring of 2007, when Dovon Harris was murdered. But the disparity between black male death rates and those of everybody else remained nearly as large as ever. No matter how much crime dropped, the American homicide problem remained maddeningly, mystifyingly, disproportionately black.

* Despite so much evidence of a particularly black homicide problem, however, there was relatively little research or activism specific to black-on-black murder. That gruesome history of Southern racism made the topic an uncomfortable one for many Americans. One of the enduring tropes of racist lore had been the “black beast,” the inferior black man who could not control his impulses and was prone to violence. By the early twenty-first century, popular consensus held that any emphasis on high rates of black criminality risked invoking the stigma of white racism. So people were careful about how they spoke of it.
Researchers describe skirting the subject for fear of being labeled racist. Activists have sought to minimize it. “When the discussion turns to violent crime,” legal scholar James Forman, Jr., has pointed out, “ progressives tend to avoid or change the subject.” Privately, some black civil-rights advocates describe feeling embarrassed and baffled by the stubborn persistence of the problem. “Like incest,” is how one L.A. street activist, Najee Ali, put it, talking of the shame and secrecy the issue evokes. Other concerned blacks cite their fear of inflaming white racism: Why emphasize what seems sure to be used against them?
Yet the statistical truth was undeniable, and most Americans understood it intuitively even if they didn’t talk about it in polite company.

* Randall Kennedy: “It does no good to pretend that blacks and whites are similarly situated with respect to either rates of perpetration or rates of victimization. They are not,” Kennedy wrote. “The familiar dismal statistics and the countless tragedies behind them are not figments of some Negrophobe’s imagination.”

* Black humor helped. But it still got to him—the him—the attitude of black residents down here. They were shooting each other but still seemed to think the police were the problem. “Po-Po , ” they sneered. Once, De La Rosa had to stand guard over the body of a black man until paramedics arrived. An angry crowd closed in on him, accusing him of disrespecting the murdered man’s body. Some of them tried to drag the corpse away. The police used an official term for this occasional hazard: “lynching.” Some felt uncomfortable saying it. They associated the word with the noose, not the mobs that once yanked people from police to kill or rescue them. De La Rosa held back the crowd. “You don’t care because he’s a black man!” someone yelled. De La Rosa was stunned. Why did they think race was a part of this? Sometimes, in the Seventy-seventh, De La Rosa had the sense that he was no longer in America. As if he had pulled off the freeway into another world.

* To other cops, ghettoside was where patrol cars were dinged, computer keyboards sticky, workdays long, and staph infections antibiotic-resistant. To work down there was to feel a sense of futility, forgo promotions, and deal with all those stressful, dreary, depressing problems poor black people had. But to Skaggs, ghettoside was the place to be, the place where there was real work to be done. He radiated contentment as he worked its streets. He wheeled down filthy alleys in his crisp shirts and expensive ties, always rested, his sedan always freshly washed and vacuumed.

* The qualities that make great homicide detectives are different from the qualities that make great patrol cops. But they are related. Wally Tennelle had a baseline of attributes that steer many young people toward police work. Although he was not college-educated, he was smart and energetic. Police work can be a haven for brainy, action-oriented people who do not, for some reason, gravitate toward formal education—the type afflicted with what DeeDee Tennelle diagnosed in her whole family as “a touch of ADD.”
It made them uniquely suited for a job that was carried out almost entirely out of doors and involved sleepless nights, relentless bursts of activity, and the ability to move from one situation to the next quickly without leaving too much behind. A great cop—or a great detective—needed to be smart and quick, but not necessarily bookish or terribly analytical. A good memory, a talent for improvisation, a keen interest in people, and a buoyancy of spirit—one had to like “capering”—ensured that the hyperactive flourished in a job that left others wilting with stress.

* “Nobody cares” was a universal lament south of the Ten during the Big Years, and for many years after.

[LF: Were the accomplishments of those who died sufficient for wider society to mourn them? You can’t expect out-groups to care about you just because you once breathed.]

* Very few murders were covered in the media. Television stations covered more than the papers, but without any particular consistency, and many, many deaths received no mention by any media outlet, especially if the victims were black. It rankled deeply. The lack of media coverage seemed to convey that black-on-black homicide was “small potatoes” in the eyes of the world, said a father who lost a daughter. “Nothing on the news!” a mother cried, weeping, at the sight of a journalist the day after her son was murdered. “ Please write about it! Please!”

* “I remember a banner headline in the Los Angeles Times one weekend,” recalled a detective named Paul Mize. “A bomb in Beirut had killed six people. We had nine murders that weekend, and not a one of them made the paper. Not one.”

* But to brass, detective work was “strictly reactive,” as one high-ranking officer called it, dismissing the whole function. Crime prevention was seen as more progressive, and so competing priorities always seemed to win out over investigations: preventive patrol projects, gang sweeps. “Just all upside down,” said a Newton homicide detective named Johnny Villa.
Law, of course, isn’t like hygiene, and crime “prevention” inevitably leads to stereotyping people as potential threats. But “proactive” patrol work sounded better. Prevention carried an added bonus, as legal scholar Carol Steiker has noted: it gave police wide latitude, since the Constitution places many constraints on legal procedure after a crime, far fewer before it.

* The smallest ghettoside spat seemed to escalate to violence, as if absent law, people were left with no other means of bringing a dispute to a close. Debts and competition over goods and women—especially women—drove many killings. But insults, snitching, drunken antics, and the classic—unwanted party guests—also were common homicide motives. Small conflicts divided people into hostile camps and triggered lasting feuds. Every grudge seemed to harbor explosive potential. It would ignite when antagonists met by chance, gunfire erupting in streets or liquor stores. Vengeance was a staple motive. In some circles, retaliation for murder was considered all but mandatory. It was striking how openly people discussed it, even debating the merits from the pulpit at funerals.

* When the Swedish social scientist Gunnar Myrdal studied the black South in the 1940s, he found that, despite rampant complaints about law enforcement, black Southerners everywhere also said they wanted more policing—to protect them from other black people.

* Wally Tennelle was idiosyncratic, even a little radical. He lived in the Seventy-seventh Division.
Among LAPD officers, the proscription against living in the city of Los Angeles went without saying. It was something that had long annoyed various liberal critics of the department. For years, most officers in the department had refused to live in the city they policed and instead commuted into the city from distant suburbs. They formed little red-state bastions sprinkled around the five-county area of Southern California—Santa Clarita and Simi Valley to the north, Chino and as far as Temecula to the east, and Orange County to the south. But with a few exceptions, such as San Pedro, a historic enclave of ethnic whites, Los Angeles was considered off-limits, the length and breadth of this beautiful city disdained by its police.

* Watts claimed an equal share of the city’s best attributes. It was Mediterranean and golden, with air that was soft in summer and crisp in winter. Gardens there burst with bird-of-paradise flowers and purple-blooming jacarandas. Palm trees lined streets, their glossy fronds flashing in the sun. There were still paddocks in Compton and a stable in Athens, and people rode horses up the grassy median of Broadway. They sat on couches on front porches, barbecued in their driveways on summer evenings as their children played.
The setting made much of the literature about the urban “underclass” based on observations in places such as Philadelphia, Baltimore, and the Bronx seem like some dark fantasy. A foreign visitor in 2008 said she was surprised by the pleasant surroundings; referencing George Kelling and James Q. Wilson’s famous essay, she noted that there were no broken windows at all.

* Only people who weren’t familiar with this kind of “inner-city” environment would attribute its problems to alienation or lack of community solidarity. The truth was that “community spirit” in the sense of both local pride and connections among neighbors was far more in evidence in Watts than elsewhere. It was one of the defining aspects of the ghettoside setting: a substantial portion of the area’s residents were related to each other through extended family ties, marriage, or other intimate connections. Relatives who were only nominally related by blood often saw each other daily, ate together, celebrated together, quarreled and comforted each other. They shared food, money, and living quarters.
They raised each other’s children. They traded off transportation and housework… In contrast to wealthier neighborhoods, where most people worked at day jobs and neighbors knew each other in passing or not at all, the unemployed people of these places were home all day, hanging out together, confined to a few blocks.

* Among officers in the division, the company line was that most of South Bureau’s population were “good people.” But a minority—some cops put it at 1 percent, some as high as 15 percent—were “knuckleheads.” This term referred to unemployed, criminally involved men, and gang members, especially black ones.
Blacks “could better their lives, but they don’t,” said one officer of Hispanic ethnicity. “They love it. They love selling drugs. They love forcing old people out of their homes so they can sell drugs there.” Said a white officer: “The true victims are Hispanic. Black suspects prey on Hispanic victims.” There was plenty of Hispanic crime and “gang activity,” too. But the hard-core underclass in Watts was black, and it was impossible for patrol cops not to see that. All day long, their radios buzzed with familiar suspect descriptions. “Male black, five-six to six-two, eighteen to thirty-five, white shirt, black pants,” a gang officer intoned drily, reading aloud from a report in the Watts station one day. All the cops present laughed, for they all sought the same suspect. But even as officers laughed, some cops also searched their souls, trying to figure out how to accommodate their experiences at work with the antiracism they shared with most of their countrymen.
They sometimes wrestled with race in disarming ways. No one in the wider world seemed to want to talk about it, but black residents, to many officers, appeared more violent than Hispanics. Their own eyes told them so. Statistics backed them up. Few officers wanted to believe that black people were somehow intrinsically wired for violence.

* Nearly every official who dealt closely with crime in Watts felt the same way. “ They have their own businesses … their own law!” prosecutor Joe Porras said of the participants in the gang cases he tried in Compton Courthouse. “It’s a parallel world, and you are trying to bring your law into it.” Cops and prosecutors felt like door-to-door salesmen, trying to peddle a legal system no one wanted anything to do with.

* Compassionate by nature, Barling was unafraid to air his distress over the bloodshed in Watts. He was appalled by the Monster, tormented by what he perceived as the public’s indifference and political neglect, baffled by the black tilt to the stats. “It’s either society’s racism, or something is wrong with them—something wrong just with black people. And I don’t believe that!” Barling said, his voice rising in distress. “I believe we are all created equally, men, women, all races! That’s why I cannot buy that.”

* By the late twentieth century, the criminal justice system was no longer very corrupt. Many police and prosecutors were sincere and professional, and legal outcomes were relatively color-blind. But because the reach of the system was so limited, the results were similar to those produced by masquerade justice. Even when criminal justice procedures were clean and fair, violent-crime investigations remained too ineffective and threadbare to counter the scale of black-on-black murder.

* If you don’t incapacitate violent actors, they keep pushing people around until someone makes them stop. When violent people are permitted to operate with impunity, they get their way . Advantage tilts to them. Others are forced to do their bidding.
No amount of “community” feeling or activism can eclipse this dynamic. People often assert that the solution to homicide is for the so-called community to “step up.” It is a pernicious distortion. People like Jessica Midkiff cannot be expected to stand up to killers. They need safety, not stronger moral conviction. They need some powerful outside force to sweep in and take their tormentors away.

* Her parents had split while Jessica was young, and she said that an abusive stepfather had raped her repeatedly. By the time she was eleven, she was performing oral sex for cash, food, and clothes. She was turning tricks in cars by fourteen.
Prostitutes such as Midkiff are effectively slaves. But they tend to spin a narrative about their own lives that suggests more agency. Midkiff referred to various pimps over the years as “boyfriends.” Some were pimpier than others. In her mind, there existed the possibility of a man being “kind of like a pimp.” She had straight pimps who kept her with a stable of other prostitutes and appropriated all her earnings. She also had boyfriends like Derrick Starks, with whom she was paired as a couple but who also asked her to turn tricks now and then.
Her daughter’s father, who had gotten Jessica pregnant while she was a student at Washington High, had been one of the few men in her life who was not abusive and didn’t try to pimp her. But after his brother was murdered, he joined a gang and ended up in prison, she said.
While still an adolescent, Midkiff traveled as a prostitute. She worked in Los Angeles, Riverside, Las Vegas, and parts of Arizona. She worked Sunset Boulevard, peddling ten-minute intervals in cars: oral sex for $50, intercourse for $100, both for $150. She was hired by a professional football player and for pricey all-night parties, once earning $850 for a single trick. She’d also worked Figueroa Street—that dangerous bargain basement for prostitutes. You were down-and-out when you found yourself working the long murderous stretch that plunged southward along the Harbor Freeway. Years later, the thought of it still caused her to shudder. “I hate Figueroa,” she said.

* Prostitutes tended to be among the most dysfunctional people in the street environment, their problems intractable, their unreliability profound.

* Brent Josephson, the old ghettoside hand from the previous generation, had a memorable story from the peak years. It involved a scoop-and-carry homicide case in a park. Assigned after the fact, with the evidence cleared away and no witnesses, Josephson was standing helplessly at the scene, thinking he didn’t have a prayer of solving the case, when he noticed a skinny Hispanic youth in the distance. Josephson called out to him, thinking the kid might have some pointers. Thunderstruck, the young man hung his head and shuffled over. “You got me,” he told Josephson, and proceeded to confess. The specter of an LAPD detective beckoning from across the park had apparently been too much for him. It was like a summons from God.

* “As homicide creeps up, witness cooperation drops off,” he said. A feedback loop exists between murder rates and ambient fear;

* For the city of L.A., it is clear that demographic change is an important driver. The city’s black population is fast disappearing: black Angelenos were once nearly a fifth of the city’s population, but they made up a scant 9 percent in the 2010 census. Their numbers have been dropping steadily each year as the city’s black residents scatter to the exurbs. To some extent, their high homicide rates travel with them.

* enrollment of working-age African Americans in SSI in 2009 was nearly twice their representation in the population, and African American children made up nearly one-third of SSI recipients age fifteen to seventeen.

* Money translates to autonomy. Economic autonomy is like legal autonomy. It helps break apart homicidal enclaves by reducing interdependence and lowering the stakes of conflicts. The many indigent black men who now report themselves to be “on disability”—many of them with mental disabilities, such as ADD and bipolar disorder—signal an unprecedented income stream for a population that once suffered near-absolute economic marginalization. An eight-hundred-dollar-a-month check for an unemployed black ex-felon makes a big difference in his life. The risks and benefits of various hustles surely appear different to him. He can move, ditch his homeys, commit fewer crimes, walk away from more fights. Doubtless many people will criticize this trend and decry the expense of SSI. But this author can’t condemn a program that appears to have saved so many from being murdered or maimed.

* Another factor reducing murder rates is a bleak one—large numbers of black men in prison. Imprisonment brings down homicide rates because it keeps black men safe, and they are far less likely to become victims in prison than outside it. California’s rate of imprisonment increased fivefold between 1972 and 2000. Homicide deaths among this largely black and Latino population of tens of thousands number just a handful per year. But this is, it need hardly be said, a rotten—and expensive—way to combat the problem. Other factors, such as the shift to cellphone sales of drugs, the abuse of legal pharmaceuticals, computer games that keep adolescents indoors, and the improved conduct of police (former chief Bernard Parks deserves much credit for the latter in L.A.), probably count, too.
People are much safer, on the whole, in America than they used to be, and this is good. But anyone who tracks homicide in L.A. County and elsewhere still can’t escape the obvious: black men remain disproportionately victimized.

Posted in Blacks, Los Angeles, Murder | Comments Off on Ghettoside: A True Story of Murder in America

Facebook & Twitter Censor New York Post Story On The Bidens

Here are some of the comments at Steve Sailer:

* “Why was it a good idea to set up a handful of zillionaire monopolists as the intermediaries between individuals and web content they want to access?”

The problem got its start a long time ago however, when people decided they wanted to use corporate chats like AOL Instant Messenger over IRC, web message boards and reddit over nntp/usenet, etc.

Facebook just took that trend and made it worse. And of course now people are moving from blogs to twitter, from e-mail to facebook messages.

The sad truth is, people want the zillionaire intermediaries. For one thing, they do a better job at blocking spam than e-mail and usenet.

People also seem to like “smart feeds” where they follow/friend 500 people, and the zillionaire’s algo picks and chooses for them what to display.

Finally there’s ease of use.

* Notice that the way the First Amendment is worded does not enumerate freedom of speech, assembly, press or religion as positive rights that people possess, but rather as activities which the Legislative branch of the national government may not regulate. If Bill of Rights author James Madison had meant to stipulate them as positive “rights” belonging to the citizenry all he had to do was write it that way, but he chose not to. In the next clause of the amendment, peaceful assembly and petitioning the government are clearly stated in Madison’s deliberate and careful legal language as rights (presumably inalienable) of the people.

In any case the first sentence of the amendment imposes no restrictions on the Judicial or Executive branches or on state governments or non-governmental entities concerning the stated “freedoms.”

* I’m a trial lawyer in NYC and pick juries all the time. I always ask prospective jurors where they like to get their news as a way to determine potential bias.

In the last 4-5 years, I was amazed at how many people respond that they get their news from Facebook. I have a Facebook account but rarely go on it. So was initially confused by these responses.

But the reality is that Facebook is the largest purveyor of news content in America now. To treat it as something different than a publisher is insanity.

Posted in Censorship | Comments Off on Facebook & Twitter Censor New York Post Story On The Bidens

War For Eternity: Inside Bannon’s Far-Right Circle of Global Power Brokers

From the European Conservative:

It has been nearly three years since Steve Bannon was pushed (or jumped) out of the Trump Administration. Since then, he has become something of a genre. In 2018, the documentary filmmaker Errol Morris (The Thin Blue Line, The Fog of War) released American Dharma, a film-length journey through Bannon’s mind. In 2019, filmmaker Alison Klayman released The Brink, a fly-on-the-wall look at Bannon’s attempt to cobble together a coalition of right-wing populists around the world to spearhead a global nationalist movement. And earlier this year, Harper Collins published Benjamin R. Teitelbaum’s War for Eternity: Inside Bannon’s Far-Right Circle of Global Power Brokers.

Unlike other ‘Bannon-watchers’—many of who seem unable to resist casting him as a Rasputin-like figure, while being simultaneously repulsed and fascinated by his insistence on speaking in symbolic and often apocalyptic terms—Teitelbaum approaches his subject from an unlikely angle. An assistant professor of ethnomusicology and international affairs at the University of Colorado Boulder, Teitelbaum has spent years developing relationships with those on the far right. His 2017 book, Lions of the North: Sounds of the New Nordic Radical Nationalism, focused on the right-wing fringe in the Nordic countries. In War for Eternity, he suggests that some of Steve Bannon’s views might be a lot weirder than most people realize. Specifically, Teitelbaum believes Bannon is a student of ‘Traditionalism.’…

Perhaps what is most refreshing about Teitelbaum’s work is that he is willing to enlighten where others are ready to condemn. “Studies of right-wing extremism are uncommon in the extent to which they thrive on conforming to readers’ stereotypes and expectations,” Teitelbaum told me. “The prevalent discourse among scholars and commentators to not normalize or platform the people we study, though motivated by legitimate concerns, also leaves little room for inquiry and education. I would like for all my work—including this book—to work against that instinct.”

In the case of War for Eternity, he says: “I offer a study that not only exposes thoroughly radical and disruptive visions for the future being pursued by figures with significant (if intangible) influence—[but] I hope that I have also shown the peculiarity of their lives and thinking, and provided an example of the ways that our old categories for thinking about politics—right, left, fascist, etc.—may not serve us well when trying to understand the actual ideas now infusing our governments. If concern and alarm as well as increased inquiry and reflection are the products of my book, I will have done my job.” By those metrics, Teitelbaum has certainly succeeded.

Here are some highlights from this 2020 book by Benjmain R. Teitelbaum:

* LATE IN THE EVENING ON NOVEMBER 8, 2016, A FEW hours’ drive away from the spot of Trump’s final rally in Grand Rapids, a young man named John B. Morgan walked into the bar of the Gandy Dancer restaurant perched on the banks of the Huron River in Ann Arbor, Michigan. John had been the founding editor in chief of a Traditionalist publishing house called Arktos. Now he worked for another
publisher, Counter-Currents, which was more plainly white nationalist than Traditionalist. It wasn’t a perfect fit for John, but nothing was.
John lived in Budapest, and India before that. But Ann Arbor still felt like home, and he was in the midst of a pilgrimage. This election was something special. Trump had no chance of winning, he thought.
And John couldn’t really call himself a fan per se. But the fact was that someone who was less than
completely hostile to his ideals of white identity politics was in contention for the U.S. presidency. John
wanted to vote in person to commemorate that unbelievable state of affairs. This was a once-in-a
lifetime event.
He was meeting an old friend at the bar to watch the results that night. They were drinking beer, paying little attention to the TV screens showing CNN’s coverage of the vote. The hour arrived at and passed seven. They noticed when the states of Indiana and Kentucky were called for Trump. That was expected, but still, it was nice, John thought, to confirm that Trump had won something. Back to what their conversation: old jobs, old places, old people, old . . . shit!
Wolf Blitzer was saying on CNN that Trump was competitive. Of course he’s winning the southern states, and he’s leading in Florida. Hillary is struggling to wrap up Virginia. But the real battle is taking place around the Great Lakes, in America’s industrial region—the Rust Belt. He’s got a chance there.
Here.
Another round of beers. Blitzer was back on TV before long, interrupting their conversation. Trump is a favorite, even likely at this point. Was John drunk?
His friend had to work the next day, so they parted ways and John hustled back to the apartment where he was staying. He poured himself a Dark Horse beer and turned CNN back on. Trump was going to win. States including Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—his part of the country—were pivotal. He was thrilled, proud—full of solidarity with the working people of Michigan whom he’d lived among for so many years. He was jumpy, almost. For about thirty seconds.
Then a different sentiment washed over John. He took another deep draw of Dark Horse. “Now we actually have to do something.”
We? The alt-right, or whatever people are calling them. Those on the edges—the extremes rejected by mainstream conservatives—who dare to make politics an explicit fight for the fates of white people. If they had a role in electing Donald Trump, then they could also have a role in helping him govern. But they had a considerable resource on the inside. John thought to himself, There is this Bannon guy, I’ve been reading about him. He’s one of us! Maybe he’ll be sitting there in the White House, telling Trump Traditionalist ideas.
On that night in front of the television, John felt something he had never felt following U.S. politics: optimism. It was almost frightening, he later told me, and profoundly un-Traditionalist.

* Meanwhile, our night is drawing to a close. Darren Beattie and I are chatting. Prior to his days in the Trump administration, he was a philosophy professor, and we are talking about obscure authors we knew about.
“Do you know Michael Millerman? A Heidegger scholar, into Aleksandr Dugin,” Darren asked. I replied. “Yeah, yeah. I’ve read his stuff. Another guy I know from my research, his name is Jason Jorjani, he’s—”
A clatter. Did Steve just drop his silverware? That’s what it sounded like, but my eyes were turned away at that moment.
“How . . .” Steve is suddenly in our exchange, staring at me with a new intensity. “How do you know who Jason Jorjani is?”
“I know him from my past research,” I say, taken aback. “I know a lot of those guys.”
Bannon says nothing and turns back to peek at his cell phones. How does he know who Jason Jorjani i —an obscure intellectual moving in the darker corners of the far-right and associated with Arktos?

* Jason Reza Jorjani is the son of an American mother of Scandinavian and Irish ancestry and an Iranianexile father, and he grew up wealthy in New York. Most people who meet Jason comment on how young he looks for his thirty-eight years. His eyes are bright; his hair is full and youthful. His face is evidence of a gentle life.
But Jason had a vision, and he was willing to sacrifice for it. You could call it an Iranian nationalist vision, but that wouldn’t capture its fervor or eccentricity. He dreamed of a unified Aryan world where societies with Indo-European spiritual roots would mobilize as one to assume leadership in a new global order. This would include Buddhists in Japan; Hindus in India in the East; Europe and its satellites in North America; and Iranians—the fount of Zoroastrianism and its Shia Islamic incarnation —at the center. These are the great peoples, the superior civilizations best positioned to handle the challenges facing humanity and the world. The unification begins, Jason believes, with a cultural and political revolution in Iran aimed at returning the nation to its own roots and throwing off its allegiances toward Islamic counterparts in the Sunni world, followed by integration with its true spiritual brethren, the other Aryan states, including the U.S.
Jason talks big. At times it sounds fanciful and unserious, especially considering his background and
lack of direct contacts with government. He was a humanities professor at the New Jersey Institute of
Technology and a philosopher (he earned his doctorate in philosophy in 2013). He’s a writer, in other
words, not an official policy maker. However, his was a Traditionalist, Evolian vision, one that seeks to
base state formation and geopolitics on historical essences and spiritual roots, with not always veiled
allusions to racial determinism (Jason has discussed using eugenics programs to rid Iran’s population
of its Mongol genetic traces), not to mention a specific celebration of Indo-European spirituality and thehierarchical exaltation of “Aryans.” And this approach had a chance to be implemented in the brave
new world that emerged following the rise of Trump and the arrival of a Traditionalist in the White
House. At least Jason thought it had a chance. That is why he attempted a daring campaign that would bring him into partnership with parapsychological terrorists and international money launderers,
transform organized white nationalism, and eventually present a public relations hurdle for the Trump
administration.
On the phone, Jason began to tell me the story. He explained that in February 2016, well before the
presidential election in the United States, he had published a book arguing for the West to embrace the spiritual archetypes of its pre-Christian Greek heritage: Prometheus and Atlas—the same book that
Jason later asked me to give to Steve Bannon. In it, Jason claimed that reviving ancient spiritualities
would allow the West to not only escape dry rational modernism but even unleash repressed ways of
thinking and knowing—most specifically ESP and psychokinesis. He published the book through an
outlet he had just recently come to know: Arktos. Arktos was not only a controversial outlet but anunstable one. Its then editor in chief John Morgan warned him during the production phase of the bookthat interpersonal conflicts at Arktos were flaring and that his own ouster appeared imminent. Still,
Arktos was open to his commentary on psychic and telekinetic powers, and it turned out that this was aplus for both author and publisher. Prometheus and Atlas garnered an award from the American
Parapsychological Association.
However, you write a book on topics like these, and freaks of all kinds come out of the woodwork. By
mid-spring 2016, Jason was receiving emails hard and fast from people making outrageous claims
about their psychic abilities, professing to have unlocked secrets of the universe and to be
representatives of hidden orders. Some even threatened to attack Jason through parapsychological
means.

* A few months after his lunch with [Michael] Bagley, Jason would again be sitting in Persepolis restaurant. This
time, however, he was meeting with white nationalist Richard Spencer.
Jason had just returned from a trip to London, where he spoke before an Iranian nationalist crowd and
met the Londoner for the first time. The Londoner received a full report about his and Bagley’s
meeting, and he wanted to help develop the idea that the two had hatched, that of building a new
organization. It should be a “think tank,” the Londoner insisted, one that combined the best resources
in the radical right these days. Arktos could cover the deeper intellectual stuff, but Red Ice—another
Sweden-based outfit headed by a man named Henrik Palmgren and specializing in slick radio and video
shows—could serve as a media outlet. And perhaps an American organization could be involved, too,
like Richard Spencer’s National Policy Institute, which had been hosting large white nationalist seminars
and conferences for years. They could call the umbrella organization the AltRight Corporation. And, the
Londoner added, he could make sure it was well funded.
That was the conversation that brought Jason back to Persepolis. He was here to solidify the American
wing of this new project. Spencer had been catapulted into the public eye as the face of the alt-right
movement, amid claims by journalists, pundits, and Hillary Clinton herself that the alt-right was deeply
involved in Donald Trump’s then floundering campaign for the U.S. presidency. Spencer wasn’t sure
that those allegations were true. Steve Bannon had publically referred to his media company Breitbart
as a platform for the alt-right, but it was unclear what he meant by that (the term alt-right was still
new and its meaning a matter of debate). Still, during the campaign, Trump had been slow to reject
the endorsement he received from former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, though he eventually issued
a condemnation. Small stuff, but even the slightest hint of receptiveness from a major presidential
candidate was cause for elation among the likes of Spencer. It was something they had only dreamed
of—namely, momentum, and the potential that the most maligned and rejected political cause in the
post–World War II West might have made an inch of progress toward the goal of relevance, maybe
even influence. Further, it was a position they achieved not by camouflage or clandestine infiltration of
the mainstream, but as themselves—as unapologetic white nationalists. The radical right saw this as
an age of possibilities, a time for innovation and ambition.
Perhaps that is why Richard was so eager to say yes to Jason—yes to a new three-way partnership
among Red Ice, Arktos, and his own organization, the National Policy Institute. Their partnership would
mark the unification of the major transatlantic cultural and intellectual platforms associated with white
nationalism today. The AltRight Corporation was going to be a reality.
The lunch at Persepolis was just the after-party. Jason and Richard had reached their agreement the
day before and had then headed to a private club for a night of booze and celebration. During the wee
hours of the morning the two posed for a picture. Against a wall behind them stood a statue of Herme
—the Greek god of trickery. Jason had included Hermes in the picture on purpose.

* The [Alt Right Corporation] organization was supposed to be run equally by all the leaders—a Knights of the Round Table model. However, Richard was the outward face of the organization, whether they liked it or not. He had become famous as an icon of the new white nationalism. Both he and his ideology were constructions of the media, Jason believed. But Spencer’s persona was a liability. In late January, he was punched in the face during a filmed interview outside on the street, and the video of the attack was spread virally by liberal America. Richard, meanwhile, had taken to carrying weapons, even to work. A mythos seemed to be forming around him. This presented a major branding problem, because thanks in part to Richard’s antics, their name was starting to mean something other than what Jason wanted.
Alt-right. The term was originally coined not by Spencer as the media kept saying, but by a renegade philosopher and professor named Paul Gottfried who published books with Arktos. Its rise to public attention during the 2016 presidential election came in part when Steve Bannon was quoted describing Breitbart News as a “platform for the alt-right.” The term was further solidified about a week after Bannon took over Trump’s campaign, when Hillary Clinton devoted a speech in Reno, Nevada, to exposing the alt-right as a white nationalist cause that—via Bannon and Breitbart News—had “effectively taken over the Republican Party.” Alt-rightists themselves were thrilled by the attention, although they also knew that the characterizations were somewhat inaccurate. Alt-right was being used internally as a catchall for a wide range of actors and ideologies, some of them ideologically irreconcilable. What they shared was a strong opposition to immigration, hostility toward the established conservatism in the Republican Party (hence the alt, or alternative right), and—the main innovation meriting a new moniker—a methodological focus on internet activism. All that, plus a relative lack of squeamishness about sharing space with white nationalists. Political extremes are dens of sectarianism, but this new term was uniting a broad coalition.
Now Richard had taken it over, and this made Hillary Clinton retroactively correct in her characterizations— alt-right was becoming synonymous with old-fashioned white nationalism. Daniel Friberg was basically in that camp; the Traditionalism that Arktos published seemed like a side interest of his. Jason was now swept up in it, too. Shortly after Trump’s election, Richard held a gathering for white nationalists in Washington—a victory rally, basically—and toward its conclusion held a press conference. Jason was invited to the stage and he obliged, saying nothing and appearing less than comfortable with this degree of visibility, sitting between famous American white nationalist ideologues like Kevin MacDonald and Jared Taylor before a sea of international cameras and journalists.
Jason wished the term alt-right had retained its more open definition—he bet Bannon did, too—if only because association with the movement was becoming riskier to him professionally. Already in late 2016, his faculty colleagues at the New Jersey Institute of Technology were beginning to take notice of his emerging public profile. But Jason was willing to sacrifice: the alt-right was offering him a megaphone.

* Steve saw his role in the White House as one of holding the president to his earlier campaign promises, and putting an end to gratuitous war-making had been a pillar of their pitch to voters. It was part of Trump’s pledge to American workers that his administration would start prioritizing them, making decisions based on whether or not their interests were being served. Spending their money and lives in wars that didn’t directly involve them and their welfare was antithetical to that cause, the reasoning went.
America first.

* THEY MET in McIntire Park in Charlottesville, Virginia, on Saturday, August 12, 2017, a little before eleven A.M . Daniel Friberg, Richard Spencer, and Henrik Palmgren—three of the four leaders from the AltRight Corporation—joined hundreds of other protesters assembling for the Unite the Right rally, its official purpose being to contest the removal of a local public statue of Civil War Confederate general Robert E. Lee. But as its name indicates, this rally was also intended to bring together actors who identified with the alt-right.
The most colorful attendees were masses of militant white nationalists, swastika-toting neo-Nazis, and Ku Klux Klan members. There were plenty of Confederate flags, too, of course. Marchers even seemed to have studied, rehearsed, and performed renditions of the Civil War Confederate war cry, the Rebel yell.

* Richard, Daniel, and their nearest associates at first defied the order, but chaos ensued as protesters and authorities scattered in multiple directions. After some initial confrontations with police, Richard Spencer ran to his getaway car and left the scene. On his way out, he happened to see his informal predecessor walking the streets—the last man to emerge in American popular culture as an outspoken white nationalist, former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, who jumped to safety in their car.

* ILL-FATED, TRAGIC, CATASTROPHIC —these were the words being used by the white nationalist intelligentsia during the immediate aftermath of Charlottesville. The menacing tiki-torch gathering, the militarized garb, the Nazi sloganeering, and of course the violence would wipe out any potential that the alt-right movement had to rebrand white nationalism and anti-liberal activism. Far from a display of ingenuity and innovation, the people marching in Charlottesville surely looked all too familiar to onlookers. Even participants voiced their reservations. Richard Spencer denounced the event organizer’s response to the death of Heather D. Heyer online. And in the wake of an op-ed I wrote in the Wall Street Journal highlighting Daniel Friberg’s uncharacteristic willingness to march alongside visible Nazis and Klansmen, he clarified to the Scandinavian media that he was unsettled by the presence of those actors and would have prohibited their participation had he been an organizer.

* Bannon was thrilled with Trump’s response. Despite the fact that he had been isolated in the administration for months, the New York Times reported that he consulted with Trump about the response to Charlottesville. Indeed, all public communications from the White House following the rally aligned with Bannon’s reported long-standing advice to the president, as the Times reported it, “not to criticize far-right activists too severely for fear of antagonizing a small but energetic part of his base.” The president’s behavior at the press conference marked a breathtaking stand in Bannon’s eyes—a stand for the importance of history, a stand on behalf of who he believed were righteous people on the streets made invisible by the Nazis next to them, and a courageous refusal to bow to media pressure.
Being in step with the president at this particular moment turned out to be a liability, however. When the president received blowback for his remarks, critics blamed the incident on Bannon’s influence, meaning that his dismissal could palliate to the ongoing outcry. They could attribute Trump’s racism to the presence in the White House of a man who had presided over a news organization—Breitbart—that produced consistently positive coverage of European identitarian groups and seemed obsessed with crime committed by African Americans; a man who had allegedly developed ways to stir racial animus as vice president of Cambridge Analytica; who had celebrated the online world of the alt-right; and who had a tendency to be drawn to racialist culture and literature, from the Nazi war-era films of Leni Riefenstahl to the writings of Jean Raspail, Charles Murray, and of course, Julius Evola.
Three days after Trump’s second press conference, Steve Bannon resigned, under pressure.
On the same day that Trump gave the press conference, August 15, Jason Jorjani left both the AltRight Corporation and Arktos. Ask him why and he’ll tell you that he left in part because his original vision for a more dynamic and encompassing alt-right movement seemed dead. He was especially sobered by user comments on his own AltRight site. “Iranians is brown poo-poo people,” rang one. The alt-right was a narrow white nationalist initiative after all, just as its most vocal critics alleged. There wasn’t room for his cause there. The “Charlottesville disaster,” as he referred to it, solidified those impressions in spectacular fashion.

* In order to understand the motive behind an action, look at its effects, Jason thought. This premature centralization of the alt-right without proper capital investment—this attempt to bring together the likes of Richard Spencer, Daniel Friberg, and Henrik Palmgren—destroyed the AltRight Corporation. It also destroyed his career.
I thought back to my early suspicions when he first told me about the Londoner, that the figure sounded too sensational to be true, and that he might have been a law enforcement plant and spy. A conspiracy, perhaps, targeting the alt-right and Jason.

* About a month after the Unite the Right rally, on September 19, 2017, the New York Times published an article featuring Jason. He had met a young Swedish man named Erik Hellberg earlier that spring at a gathering called the London Forum. And later, in June, the two reconnected for a drink at an Irish pub close to the Empire State Building. What Jason didn’t know was that “Erik Hellberg” was really Patrik Hermansson, an anti-racist activist who had infiltrated rightist circles in Europe and the United States. He was wearing a hidden camera during their conversation at the pub, and quotes from that conversation—to his horror—were now appearing in one of the largest newspapers in the world.
“It’s going to end with the expulsion of the majority of the migrants, including citizens who are of Muslim descent. That’s how it’s going to end. It’s going to end with concentration camps, expulsions, and war, that’s how it’s going to end. At a cost of a few hundred million people,” Jason had told the undercover activist. He had been characteristically articulate in form and grand in content. But in print this didn’t sound good either: “We will have a Europe, in 2050, where the bank notes have Adolf Hitler, Napoleon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great. And Hitler will be seen like that: like Napoleon, like Alexander, not like some weird monster who is unique in his own category—no, he is just going to be seen as a great European leader. You know like we say in English, you don’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.”
Jason contended that he was describing a “nightmarish prediction of a future that would follow from Western policy makers’ failure to address the Muslim migrant crisis” rather than his own ideals.

* Jason wasn’t just out of the AltRight Corporation, which would soon be dormant. His university in New Jersey would eventually fire him, too.

* Steve: “But why does a guy who is that sophisticated get hooked up with Richard Spencer?” Something about Jason’s story as I presented it made him sound suspect. “Richard Spencer is a goofball, and you can’t get in business with goofballs like that.”

Posted in Alt Right, Richard Spencer, Steve Bannon | Comments Off on War For Eternity: Inside Bannon’s Far-Right Circle of Global Power Brokers

The Rocket That Fell to Earth: Roger Clemens and the Rage for Baseball Immortality

Jeff Pearlman writes in his 2009 book:

* To those who had come to know [John] McNamara during his time in Boston, the shifting of blame was hardly a surprise. Though popular with a handful of Red Sox veterans, the 54-year-old skipper was a guarded, crotchety man who trusted few people outside his tight ring of coaches and friends. Upon being hired by the Red Sox, McNamara McNamara owned a lifetime major league record of 751-805 and had been fired three times. He saw himself as one of the geniuses of the game, and anyone who dared question his moves or motives was, in his eyes, a buffoon. “Everybody thinks he can do your job,” he snarled. “Everybody.” So when the press asked about Clemens’ departure from game six, what was he supposed to say? That he was wrong? No way. Not McNamara’s style. He would blame his ace before taking any personal responsibility. Clemens was livid. “Did McNamara tell you that he’s a drunk?” he later asked television announcer Tim McCarver in an unsubstantiated off-the-air rant. “Did he tell you that he had the clubhouse guys fix him a drink in the fifth inning? That he was completely clueless?” Upon reporting to spring training, Clemens’ mood hardly improved. Because he had slightly more than two years of major league service, Clemens was required to pitch one more season before becoming eligible for arbitration. Hence, while Yankees first baseman Don Mattingly, the MVP runner-up, was being awarded a $1.975 million salary via arbitration, Clemens was forced to accept Boston’s offer of $500,000—a mere $160,000 raise from 1986. “We decided to renew Roger’s contract at a figure we think is fair,” Lou Gorman, Boston’s general manager, said at the time. “This is fair.”

What frustrated Clemens wasn’t necessarily the paltry contract offer but that the Red Sox had lied to him. During the off-season, Clemens, his agents and Gorman had agreed to a one-year, $1 million contract that left all sides smiling. Yet when Peter Ueberroth, baseball’s commissioner, learned of the agreement, he called Gorman in a tizzy. “Lou, I’m reading that you’re going to pay Roger Clemens $1 million,” said Ueberroth. “Please tell me it’s not true.” “That’s right,” said Gorman. “I shook hands and made a deal with the man.” A lengthy pause. “Well, Lou, I’m ordering you not to give him $1 million,” said Ueberroth. “You can’t pay him more than $500,000. Not a penny more.” “But Pete,” asked a stunned Gorman, “what am I supposed to do here?” Over the previous two years, baseball’s ruling class had colluded to drive down wildly escalating salaries.

* As Jordan would later write of Clemens in a piece for The New York Times Magazine:

“A French dilettante once said, “I am such an egotist that if I were to write about a chair I’d find some way to write about myself.” Clemens’s egotism is more childlike and innocent. He doesn’t realize that he sees himself as the center of his small universe, at the center of every story he tells… Everyone is a bit player in Clemens’s universe, even his beloved mother, Bess, who reared him and his five siblings mostly without a father. She left her first husband when Clemens was a baby, and her second husband died when Clemens was 9. Bess has been fighting emphysema for years. “She has her good days and bad,” Clemens says. “I only hope she can hang on to see me go into the Hall of Fame.” Clemens assumes everyone’s pleasure revolves around him…. He says he hates to miss a start because that might deprive his fans, especially young boys, from the pleasure of seeing “the Rocket Man punch out 20.” The Rocket Man is his nickname. He sometimes autographs his book “Rocket Man” or “Roger ‘The Rocket’ Clemens” and then adds a list of his awards.”

When the Clemens family purchased a Porsche, Roger insisted on a CY-MVP vanity license plate. When Clemens ate out at a restaurant, he would look around, hoping someone would recognize him. (Then, when he was recognized, he would audibly complain about the lack of privacy.)

* As the hundreds of major league ballplayers who turned to performance-enhancing drugs throughout the 1990s did their absolute best to keep the media at arm’s length, Piazza took the opposite approach. According to several sources, when the subject of performance enhancing was broached with reporters he especially trusted, Piazza fessed up. “Sure, I use,” he told one. “But in limited doses, and not all that often.” (Piazza has denied using performance-enhancing drugs, but there has always been speculation.) Whether or not it was Piazza’s intent, the tactic was brilliant: By letting the media know, off the record, Piazza made the information that much harder to report. Writers saw his bulging muscles, his acne-covered back. They certainly heard the under-the-breath comments from other major league players, some who considered Piazza’s success to be 100 percent chemically delivered. “He’s a guy who did it, and everybody knows it,” says Reggie Jefferson, the longtime major league first baseman. “It’s amazing how all these names, like Roger Clemens, are brought up, yet Mike Piazza goes untouched.” “There was nothing more obvious than Mike on steroids,” says another major league veteran who played against Piazza for years. “Everyone talked about it, everyone knew it. Guys on my team, guys on the Mets. A lot of us came up playing against Mike, so we knew what he looked like back in the day. Frankly, he sucked on the field. Just sucked. After his body changed, he was entirely different. ‘Power from nowhere,’ we called it.” When asked, on a scale of 1 to 10, to grade the odds that Piazza had used performance enhancers, the player doesn’t pause. “A 12,” he says. “Maybe even a 13.”

* Perhaps his strangest away-from-the-family pursuit came in the form of Charlize Theron, the bombshell South African actress with the 36B-24-36 body and the form-fitting red-carpet outfits. Clemens had long fancied the starlet, who during the 2002 season came to New York to promote a new film. While eating dinner at Serafina—one of Manhattan’s snazziest bistros—an apparently intoxicated Clemens looked up and spotted his Hollywood crush. He approached the actress, introduced himself and asked whether she’d like to join him for a drink. When Theron—who, as a baseball ignoramus, likely had no idea who the pitcher was—declined, Clemens trailed her through the restaurant until a bouncer stepped in his way. “Take one more step,” he growled, “and there’ll be some real trouble here.” With that, Clemens stopped, looked up as Theron exited through the front door and yelped, “But Charlize, I’d do you right…”

* In the insular world of professional baseball, there exists a code of honor that, in any other sector of society, would make no sense whatsoever. On the diamonds and inside the clubhouses, loyalty means standing up for your teammates, no matter the circumstance. Boston outfielder Wil Cordero is arrested for beating his wife in 1997? He’s welcomed back with hugs and open arms. Mets pitcher David Cone allegedly exposes himself to female fans in the Shea Stadium bullpen in 1989? Most Mets laugh it off as wacky hijinks.

* The once-bashful kid now lived for the attention. He didn’t merely want it—he needed it. “You’re talking about the ultimate narcissist,” says Pat Jordan, the writer and former minor league pitcher. “Actors are fearful—their narcissism is a product of their fear. But an athlete’s narcissism doesn’t spring from fear, it springs from arrested development. A person like Roger Clemens has never cultivated anything but himself. Everything is about the arm, about maintaining the arm. The longer it goes on, the easier it is to become a Roger Clemens. You constantly call attention upon yourself, because you’re all you know. I used to be like that when I played, and I wasn’t one one-thousandth of the pitcher Roger was. It took me a long time to get out of the idea that if it rains on my parade, I’m the only one get

Posted in Baseball | Comments Off on The Rocket That Fell to Earth: Roger Clemens and the Rage for Baseball Immortality

Yelp Enables One Click Smearing

Posted in America | Comments Off on Yelp Enables One Click Smearing

The Arsonist: A Mind on Fire

Chloe Hooper writes in this 2020 Australian true-crime book:

* The arsonist had had no need to set kindling amongst the blue gums. Each tree had made its own pyre. Every summer they dropped their bark and branches and leaves, and each year without fire the piles grew higher, and they released toxins to ward off new growth that would compromise their fuel beds. No plant on the planet craves fire like the eucalypt: to live it needs to burn. ‘Gasoline trees’, the Americans call the globulus . Flames release gases that act like propellant, sending fireballs rolling across treetops. The shedding ribbon bark unfurls streamers of fire that travel kilometres on the wind.

* It is estimated that only one per cent of bushfire arsonists are ever caught.

* But in many minds, staying to defend your house is the Australian test of grit: it’s proof that you deserve to be living in the bush in the first place.

* fire-setters were more often than not male; they were commonly unemployed, or had a complicated work history; they were likely to have disadvantaged social backgrounds, often with a family history of pathology, addiction and physical abuse; and many exhibited poor social or interpersonal skills.

* The Arson Squad was aware that there were more deliberately lit fires near the urban–rural fringe – places where high youth unemployment, child abuse and neglect, intergenerational welfare dependency and poor public transport met the margins of the bush, the eucalypts. And that pretty much described most of the towns in the Latrobe Valley.

* Although statistically it’s uncommon for firefighters to deliberately set fires, it is common for arsonists to be firefighters. Volunteering to battle local blazes offers camaraderie and status. It’s a bonding, adrenaline-filled service, for which politicians and the media turn some of those in the ranks into heroes. And, of course, if there are no fires when the season starts, someone feeling powerless and forgotten might start to itch for the thrill.

* Before long she was also butting heads with Detective Shoesmith about the child pornography charges. In crime parlance, they looked to her like a ‘burger with the lot’, similar, for example, to an armed burglar also being accused of double parking and firearm possession. She felt the Arson Squad had charged Brendan too hastily and caused immeasurable reputational damage. Paedophiles and arsonists were the pariahs of modern Australian life – to be both rendered someone the ultimate outcast.

The barrister knew all the clichés about fire-setters also being sexual perverts. Sex and fire was an old, old fusion. Sigmund Freud had not been required reading in any law school course on fire-setting – and Legal Aid did not go in much for psychoanalysis – but in Civilization and Its Discontents (1930), Freud synthesised the idea by writing that fire-lighting was a regressive attempt to master the threats and uncertainties of the natural world: ‘In man’s struggle to gain power over the tyranny of nature, his acquisition of power over fire was most important. It is as if primitive man had had the impulse when he came in contact with fire, to gratify an infantile pleasure in respect of it and put it out with a stream of urine . . . Analytic findings testify to the close connection between the ideas of ambition, fire and urethral eroticism.’

A few years later, Freud provided his further thoughts: ‘The warmth radiated by fire evokes the same kind of glow as accompanies the state of sexual excitation, and the form and motion of the flame suggest the phallus in action.’

Eighty years on, fire-lighting was still widely considered to deliver an erotic thrill. Back at the Morwell police station, some local detectives who had been inside a lot of fire-setters’ houses reckoned they’d found uncommon amounts of sexual paraphernalia. And some of McCrickard’s colleagues, criminal barristers who went on to defend Sokaluk, privately also believed in the connection. One had defended a man who would lie down by his car, nearby his blaze, and masturbate; another defended two intellectually disabled men who would head into the bush, light fires and jerk each other off; and yet another defended a man whose calling card was setting fire to women’s shoes.

Posted in Australia | Comments Off on The Arsonist: A Mind on Fire

Sukkot Stroll Stream

Posted in America | Comments Off on Sukkot Stroll Stream

Sins of My Father: Growing Up with America’s Most Dangerous White Supremacist

William Pierce’s son Kelvin writes in his 2020 biography:

* He would fly into sudden violent, volcanic rages, to the point that he even killed the only two living things he truly loved, our sweet Siamese cats. The only time he was truly happy was when he could lock himself in his study with his books and Nazi paraphernalia, to write about the race wars to come that he hoped to organize and orchestrate. When he wasn’t writing or addressing fund-raising rallies for his neo-Nazi organization, the National Alliance, he liked to experiment with chemicals and explosives in the basement of our home or in the woods behind it. He had me help him produce nitroglycerine and showed me how to make bombs. To my mother’s terror, he hid weapons and other dangerous stuff in the crawl space of our house until a few days before the FBI came sniffing around. Sometimes he used me as a guinea-pig, once knocking me flat on my rear from a powerful electric shock. While I was frightened I was happy, too, because I was spending time with him…

* I would have done anything for a word of praise, a hug, or a kiss from him, but in the end, I always failed him. No matter how hard I tried, I couldn’t become the little Aryan he wanted and so he abandoned his attempt to mold me. As for my brother, Erik, he didn’t even try with him. The only time I saw him display any affection toward either of us was after his death, when I found among his belongings a photograph of us as babies, sitting on his lap. He was smiling. It wasn’t until I left for college and met the outside world that I realized what a monster he was. When he left my mother, he wrote her a letter saying he was going because he loved his political party more. He went on to marry four other women, mostly mail-order brides. He died at his secluded compound on a West Virginia mountaintop before he had the chance to wed a sixth woman that he had squirreled away out of sight of his fifth wife. He spent his last days restructuring the National Alliance to make sure it survived him and gave no thought to us at all – his Nazi acolytes didn’t even know our names or that we existed, although they did try to recruit me a few days after his death, like some sort of prized trophy to hang on the wall.

* I had spent most of my life hating Dad, and he surely hated me. He hadn’t spoken to me in seven years and never acknowledged the adoption of my two baby girls from Eastern Europe six years earlier. I had sent him pictures and letters about them, but he never bothered to reply. I strongly suspected that he didn’t approve of them because they weren’t white enough for his tastes. When I finally stopped blubbing, I realized why I was so upset. I had wanted him to love me and be proud of me, and for us to be able to talk and enjoy each other and have a normal relationship.

* After I got myself together I called my twin brother, Erik, and told him the news. “He evidently died from cancer but I don’t know much more than that,” I said. Erik said he didn’t really care — Dad was a complete jerk and he didn’t give a damn about any memorial service. I suggested that it might give us closure to attend and we’d be able to see Uncle Sandy, too, but he was adamant. “That bastard didn’t give a damn about me or my kids, and there is no damn way I’m going to his service,” Erik said. “He was a horrible father and nothing will change that!”

* “Well, your father had cancer,” said Charles. “It was adenocarcinoma, a cancer of the adrenal glands. Several months ago he began losing weight and had lost quite a bit before his secretary finally insisted he go see a doctor. He resisted because he didn’t trust the doctors, but eventually made an appointment. He said he didn’t feel particularly sick but had lost about 30 pounds and wasn’t sure why.” After a series of tests, Dad was diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer. He was admitted to the hospital and started treatments. After about two weeks, he was told that the treatments were helping and his progress was so promising that he could go home and continue on an outpatient basis. But he quickly got worse and within a few weeks was back in the hospital. This time they told him the prognosis was dire and that he needed to stay in the hospital. “That’s when I went to see him,” Charles said. “He phoned and said he didn’t trust the doctors. I spoke to them and decided that he did, indeed, have Stage 4 cancer. After discussing his options with me he decided to go home and discontinue further treatment.” Once home, Dad declined rapidly, to the point where he couldn’t get out of bed any more. Soon, he refused to eat or drink anything at all. “I suspected he knew the end was near and did not want to prolong it any longer than necessary,” said Charles. “Without taking in any fluids he became very weak and for his last few days he was so weak that he couldn’t speak. He passed a few days later. Your father was a very strong man and he went out on his own terms.”

* Charles put his hand on my shoulder. “Your father and I spoke several times before his death and he told me near the end that one of his only regrets in life was in regards to you and your brother. He said he sincerely regretted not having a better relationship with you two,” Charles said.

* I remember as a kid Dad devouring history books, particularly tomes on European history, culture and morals, and he knew that a movement built around a single person would not survive once that person died. The clearest example of that was his former boss George Lincoln Rockwell and his American Nazi Party, which tore itself to shreds within three years of his assassination in 1967. Dad witnessed it all, yet when it came to his own demise 35 years later he totally ignored the principle that he had believed in for so long. When he learned that he was dying, he gave no thought to Mom, my brother or me, or our future, which makes me angry to this day. Instead, he set about trying to organize the Alliance’s affairs to ensure a smooth transfer of power. He had refused further treatment at the hospital and returned home to meet with each staff member to discuss their work and outline a plan for when he would no longer be there. Six days after his death, the Alliance’s 17-strong professional staff announced they had chosen Erich to be their new leader, in accordance with his wishes.

* At the time of his death, Dad presided over a racist empire that produced revenue of about $1 million a year, which I suppose should be considered quite a success for a man who lived almost entirely off my mother’s earnings for 20 years. He ruled his empire from his roost on a 346-acre hilltop compound near Hillsboro, W. Va. He is said to have purchased the land with money donated by “The Order,” a gang of mostly Alliance members and supporters who stole $4 million by robbing armored cars, and shot dead Alan Berg, a liberal Jewish talk-show host, on the streets of Denver. The Order was led by Robert Mathews, a young West Coast Alliance member who Dad had been grooming for great things. Mathews died, aged 31, in an explosion at a house on Whidbey Island, Wash., in 1984 after a three-day standoff with the FBI. Dad liked to portray the Alliance as a group dedicated to the welfare and salvation of the white race, and not the lucrative hate business that it became. He had various streams of income, apart from membership fees and donations from deluded donors. There was a high-brow glossy magazine called National Vanguard, which was meant to rouse intellectuals and professionals to join his cause. In addition, he had a crude monthly publication, the members-only National Alliance Bulletin, filled with venom and calls for action against the Jews and others whom he believed were undermining the white race and secretly controlling the government. He also operated National Vanguard Books, a mail-order firm offering racist and anti-Semitic literature, along with tapes of his weekly half-hour radio show, “American Dissident Voices,” which broadcast over shortwave stations that could be heard in New England, Florida, California and several states in the South. Later, it could also reach some places in Europe.

Then, there were the sales of his book “The Turner Diaries,” which inspired Timothy McVeigh to bomb the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995. The Turner Diaries, and his subsequent offering, “Hunter,” were designed to appeal to poor, grievance-nursing whites and became the how-to manual for The Order and subsequent rightwing spin-offs. Both books featured protagonists who work to halt what Dad called the “degeneration” of the white race and allowed him to ‘kill’ all the people he hated —in no particular order, Jews and rabbis, blacks and interracial couples, Communists, intellectuals and academics, gays, reporters and feminists, of course, Hollywood actors, talk show hosts, state governors, congressmen, a cardinal and a couple of bishops. They all died in gory attacks: there were exploding skulls, flying brain tissue, slit throats, knifings, shotgun blasts, hangings and bombings. Dad wrote other books, non-fiction treatises, but it was his crude fiction that earned him the big bucks and the infamy he so richly deserved. I don’t know how many copies have been sold, but in 2000, Britain’s The Guardian newspaper put the number at more than 500,000 just for The Turner Diaries.

* Dad was born in September, 1933, to an alcoholic father and a domineering mother who had trouble showing affection. When he was a young boy, his mother would pay him a small fee to find the bottles of booze his father had hidden around the house. His father died when Dad was still a youngster. Drunk, he was struck by a car…

* He spent the last two years of high school in a military-style boarding school after his mother embarked on a disastrous love affair that left her heart-broken. Dad never really experienced the warmth and emotional support that comes from having a loving home. He would entertain himself for hours, reading reams of science fiction, and play around with model rockets and chemistry sets, for which he had an extraordinary aptitude.

* While Dad earned his Ph.D at Colorado in the summer of 1962 and Mom earned her B.A. in mathematics, I continued to rock on my horse. At bedtime, I would rock with my pillow. I was about two years old when Dad started to change. From being a fun, care-free man he slowly turned into a monster. Mom says it was like a psychological switch had been thrown.

* According to Dad, he had been “an ideological virgin” until he was 30…. He said he’d hadn’t thought much about non-whites and had very little experience of them as he was growing up. “If anything, I was inclined toward the liberal position on the race question.” He recalled during a dormitory bull session as an undergraduate how he had supported the right of a person to marry or cohabit with anyone who would have him, black of white.

* He was bored with his life. He feared he was destined to work every day at something that had no real meaning and, at the same time, was fast-formulating the belief that Jews were having a massive and negative influence on America. He was convinced that they were the masterminds behind the Civil Rights Movement, and were plotting to mix blacks with whites as part of a plan to dilute the white race and create a society of half-breeds because they feared the idea of a strong white race.

* Rockwell’s views about Jews and how they were encouraging whites and non-whites to mix particularly resonated with Dad and he decided then and there that he had to help save his people from this Jewish scheme. It was more important to him than anything else — even us. He had finally found the meaning of life that he had been searching for. Rockwell’s views solidified the conclusions Dad had reached through all his hours of reading and his hatred of Jews mushroomed until he came to believe that Hitler’s final solution, the mass extermination of the Jews, was the only answer. He used to fantasize about slaughtering Jews and anyone else who supported them and their secret mission to destroy us all. It was an all-consuming malignancy that took root in his psyche and he would spend every hour from that moment until his death waging war on the Jewish people, and the blacks and left-wing students that he believed the Jews were manipulating.

* His inner rage at events in the outside world would explode into our home in the form of regular beatings that left us bruised and scarred, and in a lot of pain — he’d use a wire coat hanger, an electric razor cord, a belt, or a 2-by-4, or whatever was closest to hand. As he became more violent, I became more detached, hiding inside my head in an imaginary world where I felt safe. Sometimes, I’d reach out into the uncomfortable outer universe, looking for a sign that I was loved and lovable, but I’d always be reminded of my unworthiness and would retreat again.

* Rockwell told Dad that he had tried appealing to what he called “the winners” — the teachers and professors, doctors, lawyers and engineers, to the writers and artists, businessmen and craftsmen, and to his fellow military officers, to everyone that he considered to be “careful, responsible men and women with steady employment and stable families.” While he found that many agreed with him in principle, “almost none had the moral courage to stand up and be counted among the righteous.” In short, while they shook his hand after his speeches, Rockwell said, they would scurry away in fright when he talked about taking America back from the Jews.

* I knew beyond all doubt that there was something seriously wrong with me. I was simply bad to the core, and nothing could save me, which is why my Dad never loved me.

* One summer’s day, while Dad was out of town, I was playing down by the stream behind our house. I’d found a book of matches from somewhere and decided to entertain myself by setting individual leaves on fire and then blowing them out. It was grand fun and I did it several times until suddenly a couple of adjacent leaves caught fire and I could no longer blow them out. In a few moments the fire spread to the point that it was out of control. I got up and ran back to my house and shortly after one of our neighbors noticed the blaze and called the fire department. There was quite a large blaze raging behind the house by the time the fire truck arrived. I just stood there, watching all the commotion, in rapt fascination.

* Rockwell called publicity the “lifeblood of any political movement.” He knew that without it, no one would know that he and his Nazis existed. His publicity stunts included sending Stormtroopers dressed in ape costumes to the National Zoo in Washington, D.C., carrying placards demanding “Free our Brothers” and “We Equals Want Civil rights.”

* He pulled a similar stunt at a gay rights’ convention, pretending to be a delivery man and rushing on stage with a box labeled as an emergency shipment of 24 quarts of Vaseline.

* Mom told me later that she considered leaving him many times but he threatened to go to the dean at Mary Washington and say that she was heavily involved with his work with Rockwell, although that was a lie.

* To my delight as a kid, Dad actually did sleep with a gun under his pillow. I used to creep into his room to play with it when he was away.

* Our neighbors saw the stories and soon Erik and I were being harassed and beaten up by local kids. We became known as the “Neighborhood Nazis” and people told their children not to mix with us. Some of the papers also printed our address.

* Dad took over the operation [of the National Youth Alliance]. It was to consume the rest of his life, stealing all that he had left to give and leaving not a shred for his wife and kids. Even when he died, the only reference to us was a line in his will acknowledging that he had had two sons.

* I remember being puzzled by the two men in Dad’s office because they didn’t seem to be all that intelligent. Over the years, I would see similar people at Dad’s gatherings. It was as if he were surrounded by weirdos, mostly young men who had nothing better to do than hang out with other small-minded thugs, making themselves feel better by putting down other people.

* Dad married five times in all, but there was only one woman he truly cared about and to whom he was loyal to the end: his mother, Marguerite Pierce. She wasn’t terribly affectionate in return, which perhaps is one reason why he was never able to show love to Erik and myself. My mother was terrified of her but, to her credit, Grandma did urge Dad to think again when he told her he was dumping us for his new, all-consuming love — National Socialism.

* Alcohol played a prominent and tragic role throughout Grandma’s life. For some reason, she seemed strangely attracted to heavy drinkers — her father and stepfather were both alcoholics, and so was her first husband and her last…

* Grandma never liked Mom. When Mom and Dad were courting, she advised him to bed my mother if he must, but, for God’s sake, don’t marry her. For once, Dad didn’t listen to her. She was hard on Mom all the years I knew her. She would sweep in and immediately start criticizing Mom’s housekeeping, her personal appearance, her weight, and how the house wasn’t up to her standards of cleanliness, always upsetting Mom…

* Dad should be writing a book telling the story of “Jewish conniving from beginning to end — or present,” she said. “Tell it in an interesting, readable style. Don’t be too intellectual for the general public, but, principally, DON’T ADOPT THE STYLE OF ROCKWELL by haranguing and trying to arouse the ignorant….”

* She became interested in creative writing while in Texas and spent two years as a student at the University of Texas in Austin. In 1964, she moved to Odessa, 30 miles west of Midland, and founded a monthly social magazine called “Odessan.” I was in high school and had gone to visit her but she had nothing planned for me to do when I got there, so I ended up helping her as she chronicled the social life of influential people in and around Odessa. She would go around and visit small businesses, attend social affairs and take pictures, documenting the happenings around town and selling advertising for the magazine as a way to fund it. She edited and published the magazine for 14 years. She also managed to write two novels and a number of short stories, but she was never able to get them published.

* Dad sharing stories with me and laughing like that was the closest I ever felt to him and, in all honesty, it is the only memory I have up to that point when he interacted with me in this way. I really admired him but was also very afraid of him. He still never touched me unless it was to hurt me and never said how he felt about me, except to explain to me why he was going to hit me. The only other thing he would talk about were the racist facts of life.

* I remember another neat experience with Dad when he decided to teach me how to make a bomb.

* I think in his own way Dad wanted to have a relationship with me but just didn’t know how.

* In the summer of 1971, he had embarked on an extraordinary series of articles that delivered detailed diagrams and instructions on how to make weapons that could kill and maim, explaining patiently in a professorial tone how to use each one efficiently. The articles, under the title “Revolutionary Notes” and “Patriot’s Notebook,” appeared in “Attack!” his publication aimed at high school and college students. He wrote that they were part of a new phase in the development of the Alliance that would involve “intensive organizing using the most radical and aggressive methods we can devise.”

* Dad had been stockpiling explosives in the crawl space of our house, in readiness for the race war he hoped would start soon. Mom knew about the cache and wanted it gone. She begged him time and again to get rid of it but, as usual, he ignored her. Then something happened, I don’t know what, but suddenly Dad gathered up all the explosives and dumped them in the Potomac River. Less than a week later, while he was at work, the doorbell rang. It was the FBI with a search warrant. Luckily for Dad, there was nothing to be found.

* Dad carried a terrible rage inside him and it didn’t take much to light his fuse. He would cuss like crazy when things went wrong, which was often. The smallest thing set him off, even having to replace a light bulb would spark a blue cuss-storm. But when he was discussing his beliefs, he never raised his voice. He was thoughtful with his choice of words, articulate and persuasive. When he explained things to me I was certain that he was right because he always seemed to make perfect sense.

* His favorite tipple was Black Label beer and he would buy it in quart-sized bottles. I guess his habit was becoming pretty expensive because I remember him trying his hand at brewing his own beer at home. He had saved at least 100 empty Black Label bottles and filled them with his homemade hooch. That didn’t last long, though, because one night he came home terribly drunk and threw up all over their bed. Not surprisingly, Mom was furious and perhaps he felt some shame, because after that night, he never had another drink, at least as far as we could tell.

* Dad’s political principles waxed and waned, depending on his needs at the time… When it suited his pocket, he portrayed himself as a revolutionary who would lead the White Race to the promised land and wouldn’t hesitate to use violence to wipe his enemies from the earth.

* Dad was flexible when it came to the media, too. Like an early Donald Trump, he reviled every journalist who ever drew breath, but courted their coverage at every turn. He would eagerly take calls from print reporters, play his part in documentaries and sit for interviews — especially if there were TV cameras present. It was as if he needed the attention, like some kind of validation of his value and his views. At the same time, he’d claim that the media was controlled by Jews bent on destroying the White Race and its culture, and fulminated mightily on the matter every chance he got.

* If there is one person who could readily believe Dad’s “seeker of truth” fantasy, it was Robert S. Griffin, a tenured professor of education at the University of Vermont. He wrote a hugely controversial book on Dad, which I have cited several times in this book, and quoted verbatim large tracts of my father’s venomous views. He was rebuked by the Southern Poverty Law Center for his “tedious regurgitation” of Dad’s words, and for being nothing more than a “fawning admirer” who let my father to get away with asserting that the Alliance was not a hate group, but simply “dedicated to the welfare and progress of our people.” I found the book almost impossible to finish, although it was amusing in parts to hear Dad spin his version of events and try to justify his behavior and beliefs. However, I cannot allow Griffin get away with his portrayal of my father as some benign, absent-minded professor with a fascinating insight into how the world really is…

Griffin contacted Dad in 1997, saying he wanted to write a book exploring where “culture and society” were headed and the role my father and his views played in it. Dad let Griffin stay with him at the compound for six weeks in the summer of 1998 while Griffin asked him softball questions for 30 hours and taped his answers for posterity. The result was a book titled “The Fame of a Dead Man’s Deeds,” taken from a line in an old Norse poem, which Griffin self-published in May, 2001. It was all a matter of ego for my father, but Griffin thought Dad saw him as a fellow academic who understood his views. For a while, Griffin claimed to be “simply a conduit” for Dad’s views and dismissed the idea that he was a racist himself. He said he was only an objective observer painting a portrait of my father and called his approach “cultural anthropology,” but as time has passed, his racist colors came shining through. Or, as Griffin calls it, his “ethnic pride.” Griffin has a website on which he promotes his articles, books and random thoughts. On watching white supremacists and neo-Nazis march in Charlottesville, Va., in August 2017 to chants of “the Jews will not replace us” and the old Nazi slogan of “Blood and Soil,” Griffin said his first reaction was “elation and gratitude” at how white people had organized, “standing up for their heritage and race, standing up for people like me, standing up for me.” It didn’t seem to matter to him that the marchers wore khaki uniforms and carried flaming torches and Nazi flags. He lauded their leadership, and their “remarkable dedication and courage,” and for putting themselves in “physical peril” where “they could have been shot,” he said…

But even in his adulation of Dad, he spotted “a menacing quality” about him. “There seems to be a pressure inside him, something brewing just beneath the surface, an anger perhaps,” Griffin wrote. “There is a hardness, a coldness, a potential for violence that I feel in him, and it makes me uneasy and uncomfortable.” His discomfort clearly didn’t last long. Two months before Dad died, Griffin spoke glowingly of his attributes. “He’s the most fascinating human being I’ve ever been around — ever,” he said. “Whatever you think of him, I found him to be a man of integrity and courage and dedication. And in his eyes he is doing the most important thing he can think of with his life. Those have become standards that I’ve applied to my own life.” (4) The SPLC called on the University of Vermont to condemn his writings and investigate his classroom activities. The university declined to do so. It said it had an obligation to protect “our faculty’s right to academic freedom and freedom of speech.” Griffin sees himself in a favorable light. Anyone who says he is a neo-Nazi is merely “name calling.” He describes himself as “curious and perceptive and thoughtful…an honorable person, persevering and courageous.” His tenured position at the university, he wrote on his website, “gives me more protection from attack than anybody I can think of.”

* My first real interaction with a black person came in 4th grade. I was sitting in my seat in Mrs. Carden’s class when she told us to go to the back of the room to retrieve our mid-morning snacks and then stepped out for a minute. I had just gotten my snack when I felt a staggering blow to my right jaw. I saw stars and my knees buckled. Clarence, a much bigger and older black boy in my class, threw the punch. I was terrified. I just stood there crying, my jaw throbbing, trying to process what had happened. Clarence was a trouble-maker and had been held back a couple of times but I’d never had a run-in with him and had done nothing to incite him…

It turned out that Clarence lived in “the ghetto” and I started seeing him a lot as I explored our neighborhood. I was scared to death of him and was always on the lookout for him, wherever I went. But sometimes that wasn’t enough. I would run into him while I was alone and far from home, then he would chase me and beat me up. He seemed to delight in terrorizing me. I started to hate blacks, just like Dad, but I kept my mouth shut.

* Another data point in my view on blacks was added when my bike was stolen after I ran home one day to get a snack during my paper route. Mom said she thought she knew where it was. We got into the car and she drove straight to “the ghetto.” She drove around slowly for a few minutes and then I saw a small black kid riding my bike on the sidewalk… Afterwards, I was amazed at how Mom just knew where my bike would be and how easy it was to get it back. Maybe Dad was right? Perhaps blacks were to be feared because of how they behaved?

* Dad was always coming up with new rules. One day he decided we couldn’t have Christmas anymore because he wasn’t going to have us worshipping some Jew. Mom pitched a fit.

* He also banned sports. Mom knew we were both terribly shy and sheltered and decided it would be good for us to be involved in a team sport, to expose us to other kids our age outside of our school activities.

* Dad was still beating me in seventh grade. I hated him for it and regularly fantasized about his death. By now, I knew many people loathed and despised him because of his beliefs and activities and I often prayed that someone would murder him, but no-one ever obliged me.

* Lying was my only way of dealing with him, despite the fact that it never worked.

* For a long time, Mom had been a reluctant participant in Dad’s work. She did all of his accounting and all of his typing. He wrote a lot and it was all hand-written. Whenever he needed anything typed, he would bring it home and ask her to do it for him, and she did it straight away, despite being exhausted from her full-time teaching job and being completely responsible for keeping the house clean and handling all family affairs.

* She put on the last bandage, then said quietly, “Never again!” Mom confronted Dad and said simply that he had beaten us for the last time. He said if he ever laid a finger on either of us again, she would leave and he would never see us again.

* Dad somehow derived strength from beating us up. He was like all the bullies at school, I realized. And, just like a bully, when Mom finally stood up to him, it sapped him of his strength, much as I had found out for myself at school… It was as if he no longer felt responsible for making us into what he was not, the perfect Aryan male. We were no longer his hunk of clay for molding, and he was no longer the creator.

* Dad was down in the dumps. It seemed no matter what he wrote or how he wrote it, he couldn’t stir the masses to revolt, he moaned over lunch with Revilo P. Oliver. It was 1974 and they were sitting in a restaurant in Washington, D.C. Oliver was a controversial classics professor at the University of Illinois, a leading white supremacist, and a founder of the John Birch Society, until he was expelled for his racist views.

* After listening to Dad complain, Oliver asked if he had ever tried writing fiction. Dad admitted that it had never occurred to him. Oliver opined that Dad would never be able to get his message across to the masses because most of the people he was trying to reach occupied “the lower rungs of society” and simply did not read non-fiction. But they might well read light, action-packed fiction, he said, and promised to send Dad an example of what he was talking about. (1) A little later, Dad received by mail a book called “The John Franklin Letters,” which Oliver is believed to have penned under a pseudonym years before. It was published in 1959 by the Birch Society and detailed the bloody deeds of one John Franklin, who forms an underground military group called the Rangers dedicated to killing bureaucrats, whom he called “Buros.” (Oliver shot himself in 1994, at age 86, suffering from leukemia and emphysema).

Skimming through Oliver’s book, Dad realized how easy it would be for him to write something similar.

* The two books were products of my father’s feverish mind, his sick, secret fantasies laid bare upon the page, but he didn’t have the courage to use his real name, instead writing under the pseudonym Andrew McDonald. He dreamed that his writings would spark a race war and he often fantasized about walking the streets at night, quietly, efficiently dispatching mixed-race couples, Jews, gays, and anyone else who didn’t fit his Aryan mold, mentally mapping out the route he would take each night.

* Strangely, I never picked up Dad’s loathing of Jews. They didn’t spark fear inside me, though I’m not sure why, given Dad’s all-consuming hatred of them. Perhaps it was because I’d had no personal interaction with Jewish people up to this point. While I was certainly brimming with hate, I chose to focus it on blacks, gays, and any type of authority figure who tried to exercise control over me.

* [FBI] Agents had watched Dad for years, but in February 1985 they got approval for a pen register that allowed them to log, but not record, all calls made from and received by a specific phone number — my father’s. With the trove of numbers they collected, agents fanned out to look into the lives of scores of people who had been in contact with the Alliance. Some couldn’t be traced but others were watched and questioned, their vehicle descriptions and license plate numbers noted, and their records scoured for any trace of criminal or suspicious activity. Enquiries expanded to Seattle, Birmingham, Charlotte, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Little Rock, Philadelphia, San Diego and San Francisco and Tulsa and scores of other cities and, at one point, agents from several field offices attended a meeting in Denver to set their investigative targets, priorities and goals.

* Dad was scouring magazines, looking for a new mountain mate. He could not live without a woman for long. She didn’t need to love him, and he certainly didn’t need to love her. His requirements were simple: sexual services, cook, clean and do whatever he needed to keep his writing flowing and the Alliance operation moving forward.

* He cited as an example one of Gliebe’s more memorable merchandise purchases — $50,000-plus on boots made in China with swastikas imprinted on their soles. Gliebe called them “a great investment.” (3). He also commissioned a calendar that was supposed to highlight Aryan female beauty but actually featured strippers from a club he patronized. Alliance members were further scandalized upon learning that he had married a former stripper. Another of my father’s favorites was Kevin Strom, the sound-engineer who recorded Dad’s white separatist broadcasts. Strom supervised the building of the compound’s sound and video studios and the installation of its phone and alarm system, which was buried underground to keep it safe from government attack. Dad trusted Strom and Strom liked Dad — his own father had hanged himself when Strom was in his 20s…

* Things started to unravel for Strom when he was arrested in 2007. Police had found images of child porn on his computer, with hundreds of photos of naked girls in “sexually suggestive positions.” He was charged with possessing child pornography. Two other charges of enticing a minor to perform sex acts and intimidating a witness were dismissed at trial.

* Now I know that we are more a product of our environment than the product of our genes.

From the Southern Poverty Law Center February 6, 2014:

Recent revelations from the current NA chairman, Erich Gliebe, and his former wife paint a more deviant portrait of William Pierce as a sex-starved, manipulative sociopath. Pierce, they say, ran naked around his compound, was obsessed with pornography (an industry he routinely blamed Jews for creating) and used his membership list as a dating service, trolling for twenty-something females foolish enough to apply for a “staff position” at the NA headquarters in rural West Virginia.

In a 3,800 word essay published online and on Facebook, Gliebe’s ex-wife, Erika, alleged Pierce once tricked a young woman into a sexual relationship with him on the false promise of having a family with her. The woman eventually learned Pierce had a vasectomy more than 30 years prior.

To a handful of insiders in the racist movement, this is old news. Erich Gliebe is known to have privately made most of the disclosures found in his ex-wife’s essay for years. And many of the charges seem to have been previously substantiated.

One of the women allegedly lured into a sexual relationship with Pierce, Suzanne Flynn, outlined Pierce’s betrayal in a post on the Instauration Yahoo Group message forum in February 2003. “I had been involved with Bill [William Pierce] for almost a year before I started worrying about why I wasn’t getting pregnant, whereupon he revealed that he had had a vasectomy over 30 years ago, right after his twin sons were born,” Flynn wrote.

Pierce, at the time of his relationship with Flynn, was still married to his fifth wife, Sevdi, who lived with him in a trailer on the NA property. Flynn was ostensibly hired as Pierce’s “assistant.” The two of them took up residence in a small cabin down the road from the NA compound. “He brought me to live with him in our own house in West Virginia while his last wife was leaving him,” Flynn wrote.

In the same post, Flynn threatened to release pornographic images and videos of her and William Pierce if Erich Gliebe did not return her vehicle and other property she left at the NA compound. “If [Gliebe] would return my car and my stuff to me, then I would happily not publish anything detrimental to the NA, i.e. nude interactive pictures, videos, etc., on my website, “http://www.nsrus.com,” Flynn wrote.

Erich Gliebe has also made disturbing disclosures about Pierce’s sexual appetites over the years. In a recorded conversation with Kevin Strom in April 2005, Gliebe claimed Pierce used to walk naked around the NA property and after his death, Gliebe said he discovered Pierce’s computers were “loaded with porn.”

Posted in William Pierce | Comments Off on Sins of My Father: Growing Up with America’s Most Dangerous White Supremacist