Trump Son-In-Law’s Paper Outlines ‘A Complete Crackdown On Dissent’

| Educate!

Above Photo: A man holds a sign during a protest for the shooting death of Walter Scott at city hall in North Charleston, S.C., Wednesday, April 8, 2015.  Scott was killed by a North Charleston police officer after a traffic stop on Saturday. The officer, Michael Thomas Slager,  has been charged with murder. (AP Photo/Chuck Burton)

AlterNet‘s Sarah Lazare (12/6/16) quotes Jim Naureckas on a call for an FBI crackdown on protesters appearing in the New York Observer (12/2/16), the paper owned by Trump son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner:

Jim Naureckas, editor of Extra!, the media watchdog magazine of Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting, told AlterNet that [Austin] Bay’s op-ed is one of the most disturbing things he has seen since the election. “To have the incoming ruler’s son-in-law using his paper to call for the federal police to investigate protests against the ruler, that is pretty far gone,” he said. “It struck me as a ‘first they came for the communists’ moment.”

“He ties up this conspiracy of protesters, people seeking recounts and George Soros into one vast conspiracy that the FBI ought to get to the bottom of,” Naureckas continued. “It shows you the outlines of how you would justify a complete crackdown on dissent. It’s frightening.”

 

Trump’s son-in-law’s paper calls for “a thorough probe of the protests—to include possible ties to organizations demanding vote recounts”—that “continue to mar the presidential election’s aftermath.”

Trump’s son-in-law’s paper calls for “a thorough probe of the protests—to include possible ties to organizations demanding vote recounts”—that “continue to mar the presidential election’s aftermath.”

  • rgaura

    Why should´t this be investigated? Republican operatives crossed state lines to riot in Florida in 2000 (or was it 2004?). They should have been investigated and charged. If there has been illegal incitement to riot by political operatives, this should be investigated. Recounts are legal, and should be mandatory in close elections or if there is a whiff of fraudulent action. We should not allow colour revolution ops in the US.

  • mwildfire

    But they’re not calling for an investigation into possible election fraud–they’re calling for an investigation into anyone protesting or calling for a check on the result.

  • DHFabian

    The turning point was the 1980s. The US has continued moving in this direction, toward what can accurately be called a totalitarian state (“of or relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state”). Meanwhile, years of work have gone into splitting Americans apart by class, race, and ideology to ensure that this time, there will be no people’s push-back.

  • Catalyst

    The “Brooks Bros riots” named for the Republican aides and campaign staff wearing shirts and ties, in the effort led by Trumps cohort for 4 decades, Roger Stone, to stop the recount in Florida 2000 and get Bush elected. They succeeded. Stone publicly admits his part in organizing this, he also states it is the one thing in his lengthy dirty tricks career he regrets, because it led to the Iraq war and the loss of many American lives. Apparently it is not illegal for political hitmen to start riots to pervert election outcomes, but it is for people to march and protest against the Trump and the destruction and havoc he will wreak on the US. What is amazing is that anyone could think its’ ok for Russia to interfere in our elections and choose our POTUS. They are doing the same in Europe, the head of MI6 has publicly spoken out and warned people, but the idiots just bury their heads in the sand it seems. Trump actually told a group of supporters yesterday that he doesn’t need their vote now. An admission he said whatever he had to, to get votes and win an election by fair means or foul and now he has what he wants, he will do what he likes and the people are powerless to stop him. Every word, tweet and action since election day has proved his point.

  • rgaura

    The Russian hack meme has yet to be substantiated. Yet we know, from Hillary´s own emails, that she was aware of Saudi and Qatari funding for ISIS. Her campaign manager is a registered agent of Saudi Arabia. She accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia for her `Foundation.´ Saudi princes bragged that they funded her election campaign by paying 25% of the exorbitant cost. Her closest aide has worked for the muslim brotherhood. Hillary knew the Benghazi attack was an attack by terrorist/allies to whom she was running arms, yet she lied to the whole world about some dumb propaganda video.

    I wonder that more people are not worried about Saudi Arabia´s influence on our elections. Much of which is documented, and illegal.

    Russia has been a constructive actor on the international stage. They respect other nations sovereignty, promote negotiations and business among nations on a mutually beneficial basis. They do not have bases all over the world, not sanctions against 40% of the worlds countries, as does the US. They do not kill women accused of adultery, or homosexuals, as does Saudi Arabia. They are not bombing Yemen, against international law. They have not caused the huge refugee movements across north africa and europe, as have NATO and Saudi Arabia by their illegal war in Syria.

    I am no defender of Trump. He does seem to be a bit of a loose cannon. Yet, I give him credit for representing the general public revulsion of the carnage of endless, illegal wars represented by ms clinton, and also revulsion for the fraud allowed the financial actors that have devastated our communities and economy.