1 Trending: NYT Columnist Wants Democrats To ‘Drain’ Trump Allies’ Bank Accounts To Save ‘Democracy’

2 Trending: Democrats Care Too Much About Power To Distance Themselves From Terrorism Apologists

3 Trending: America’s Future Is Either Mass Immigration Or Mass Deportations

4 Trending: Democrats Need To Keep Women Angry To Win Elections

Defense Lawyers For The SPLC Appear To Bizarrely Undermine The SPLC In Court

The defense brief, saying explicitly that the government’s informant was ‘taking SPLC records and privileged information,’ is corroborating government claims. They just said in court that documents obtained by prosecutors are real.

Share Article on Facebook

Share Article on Twitter

Share Article on Truth Social

Share Article via Email

The Southern Poverty Law Center is defending itself against criminal charges in federal court by admitting a bunch of things, but that’s not even the strangest development. Attacking the government’s case this week, the SPLC is attacking itself. They don’t appear to have noticed, but neither have the media.

The New York Times just covered this story straight, with no apparent ability to perceive irony, and see if you can guess where this is going from just the headline:

The SPLC’s lawyers, defending an organization that famously used paid informants for years to infiltrate targeted groups, are outraged that the government is using the SPLC’s informant as an informant, because informants are self-interested and deceitful, so using an informant is dirty. It’s like watching a snake eat its own tail. In a statement to the Times (that they repeated to CBS News), lawyers Abbe Lowell and Addy Schmitt said that the informant had “every incentive to tell the government what it wants to hear,” because he benefitted from his relationship with federal law enforcement. The use of informants is sleazy, say the lawyers defending the SPLC over its longtime use of informants.

Take a moment to really savor this: In a case that centers on the SPLC’s longtime use of paid informants, including the well-paid informant discussed in this defense brief, the SPLC’s lawyers just said that informants can’t be trusted. They specifically, explicitly, and repeatedly attack the credibility of a longtime SPLC informant, whose intelligence-gathering work inside a neo-Nazi organization sat at the center of the SPLC’s claims about American hate groups. If the government’s informant isn’t trustworthy, the SPLC itself can’t be trusted, because the government’s deceitful informant was the SPLC’s own major informant. You can’t attack one without hitting the other.

So lawyers hired to defend the SPLC are arguing in a public forum that SPLC informants are shifty and devious liars, and you shouldn’t believe a word they say. What an interesting moment.

The........

© The Federalist