Latest news with #SilentSam
Chicago Tribune
3 days ago
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Jonathan Zimmerman: Liberals have also censored history
In 1874, during the brief era of Reconstruction, white people staged a racist uprising in New Orleans. Angered by the presence of African Americans in law enforcement and other government posts, members of the Crescent City White League stormed the local customs house and killed 11 police officers. Two years later, a contested presidential election led to the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the South and the end of Reconstruction. In 1891, New Orleans erected a memorial to White League members who died in the 1874 riot. And in 1932, the city affixed a plaque to the memorial stating that the 1876 election 'recognized white supremacy in the South and gave us our state.' But you can't see the memorial — or its plaque — in New Orleans any longer. It was taken down in 2017, following years of protest by civil rights advocates. I've been thinking about that episode over the last few months, as President Donald Trump's administration steps up its efforts to purge our historical landscape of anything remotely negative about the United States. In March, it ordered the Smithsonian Institution to eliminate 'improper, divisive or anti-American ideology' from its museums. And in my hometown of Philadelphia, over a dozen displays about slavery at Independence National Park — including an exhibit describing George Washington as an enslaver — have been flagged for review. Like other liberal historians, I'm outraged by Trump's cowardly attacks on our guild. A nation that really believed in its 'greatness' — a term the president loves to use — wouldn't be afraid to confront its worst chapters. But I think my fellow liberals have been complicit — to borrow the term du jour — in historical censorship too. Nobody on my side of the political aisle objected when the New Orleans monument came down. Instead, we celebrated a victory over hate and bigotry. I'm not saying that racist memorials should remain on their pedestals. But when they're pulled down, they should be placed somewhere else where we can see them. Otherwise, we won't learn the awful history they embody. Consider the fate of Silent Sam, the Confederate statue that stood for over a century on the campus of the University of North Carolina. It, too, was built to extol white supremacy: At its unveiling in 1913, a UNC trustee said that Confederate soldiers had 'saved the very life of the Anglo Saxon race in the South.' But in 2018, demonstrators pulled down SIlent Sam. And when UNC Chancellor Carol Folt proposed that the statue be displayed in a museum, the university erupted in yet more protest. In a statement, the university's psychology department said that preserving Silent Sam in any form on campus would 'create a hostile learning environment for black students.' The monument 'undermines our shared community values of equality, respect, and acceptance of all people,' the department added. A few months later, Folt caved and declared that Silent Sam would be removed from campus. Its presence at UNC — even in a museum — posed a threat to the 'well-being of our community,' she said. Sound like anyone you know? In his fulminations against allegedly 'divisive' history, Trump insists that it threatens the entire American community. By casting the United States 'in a negative light,' Trump warns, historians are promoting 'a sense of national shame.' Instead, we should be 'instilling pride in the hearts of all Americans.' In other words: smiley faces only, please. Some things are just too troubling to see. So let's take them down, or blot them out, so we can all feel better. False equivalence alert: Trump is clearly seeking to suppress knowledge of white racism, while the statue protesters were trying — in good faith — to protect nonwhite races from hateful symbols. And he's the president, of course, so he has vastly more power than anybody else. But the upshot is exactly the same: History gets censored. And we condescend to Americans when we imagine they can't handle it. We see a similar dynamic in the ongoing debate over book bans in schools and libraries. I am appalled by recent efforts by right-wing ideologues to remove works by Toni Morrison, Maya Angelou and many others. But where were my fellow liberals when schools were dropping 'The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn' because it uses the N-word 200 times? Sitting on their hands or cheering from the sidelines, as another reminder of racism bit the dust. That was the 'good' kind of censorship, because we did it. And we are good. But every act of historical suppression is bad news, for all of us. That's why I was glad to read that the New Orleans monument will be part of forthcoming exhibit at the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles. The exhibit 'reflects on the histories and legacies of post-Civil War America as they continue to resonate today' by displaying 'monuments in the exhibition will be shown in their varying states of transformation,' a museum news release declares. That's precisely why we need to see these symbols: to understand who we are, how we got here and where we need to go. We are in a state of transformation, too, and we must not look away. That's what Trump wants us to do.
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Guilty pleas revealed in Sons of Confederate Veterans campaign finance case
The State Board of Elections has revealed its first criminal convictions — two guilty pleas to a misdemeanor charge — in the six years after state lawmakers made campaign finance investigations secret. That outcome drew little praise from a campaign finance watchdog whose complaint to the elections board prompted the case. He says it took too long and resulted in too little. In January, two leaders of a political action committee for the Sons of Confederate Veterans pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of accepting cash contributions in excess of $50. They were ordered to pay a $100 fine and court costs, according to a letter the board sent to Bob Hall, the retired executive director of Democracy NC. Court records show Mitchell Flinchum of Burlington, the PAC's treasurer, and Thomas Smith of Raleigh, the PAC's assistant treasurer, pleaded guilty to the misdemeanors on Jan. 23. Neither the board nor prosecutors announced the convictions at the time. Hall did not find out until he received a letter known as a 'closure notice' from the board that was dated May 16, nearly four months after the convictions in Wake County District Court. 'It's a pitiful settlement, but at least they admitted to engaging in criminal activity,' Hall said in a news release Tuesday. Hall filed a lengthy complaint against the nonprofit North Carolina division of the Sons of Confederate and its Heritage PAC in January 2020. He did so after The Daily Tar Heel, the UNC-Chapel Hill student paper, revealed evidence of illegal donations to the PAC. The nonprofit had struck a secret $2.5 million deal with the UNC System to take possession of the controversial Silent Sam statue memorializing Confederate soldiers at UNC-Chapel Hill, which protesters tore down. A judge later pulled the plug on the deal. Prior to the 2018 law, the board would make public complaints and election records associated with them, until it found possible criminal conduct, Gary Bartlett, the board's executive director from 1993 to 2013, told the N&O last year. At that point, the board withheld information until a public hearing before the board that included testimony from witnesses. Transparency from such hearings, which legislators ended, helped give the public confidence that campaign finance cases were being handled appropriately, Hall and other government watchdogs have said. A public hearing would have shed light on claims Sons of Confederate Veterans members made that they were pressured to make cash donations to the PAC and that they had been listed as the source of other donations they did not make, Hall said. 'It would have triggered tax investigations and racketeering investigations by the federal investigators, it very much could have done that,' Hall predicted. Smith could not be immediately reached for comment. Mitchell declined to talk about the case. 'As far as I'm concerned it's settled,' he said. 'I'm glad after all of it to hopefully have it in the past.' Efforts to interview state elections officials and Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman about the outcome of the Heritage PAC case were unsuccessful. Patrick Gannon, a spokesman for the board of elections, said in an email that the board did not see a concern with issuing its notice of the case's outcome last week. 'Campaign finance investigations are confidential under state law,' he wrote late Tuesday afternoon. 'From our perspective, the case was open until just recently, and we provided notice of the status to the complainant.' The board's letter to Hall said that it investigated the nonprofit and its PAC for roughly a year, turning over its findings to the State Ethics Commission for its recommendation. Requiring that referral was another change to campaign finance investigations from the 2018 legislation. The commission's recommendations are also confidential. The commission's review added two months to the case, the board's letter showed. In June 2021 the board referred the case to the Alamance County district attorney to investigate Flinchum and to Freeman in Wake County to investigate Smith. The case was later consolidated in Wake County. Freeman asked the SBI to investigate further. When asked about the length of time it takes to resolve elections board cases referred to her, Freeman said the elections board is hampered by a lack of funding and staff and the SBI's financial crimes unit is taking longer to do its work. Hall criticized Freeman's handling of the case, and others in recent years that did not lead to criminal charges, in his news release. 'It's disappointing that the District Attorney took so long to accomplish so little,' Hall said.
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
NC Sons of Confederate Veterans leaders guilty of campaign finance misdemeanors
Two individuals affiliated with the North Carolina Division of the group Sons of Confederate Veterans pled guilty earlier this year to misdemeanor campaign finance violations committed in their role as leaders of an affiliated PAC, according to a 'closure notice' issued by the State Board of Elections last Friday. Meanwhile, the person who filed the complaint that gave rise to the prosecution — veteran campaign finance watchdog Bob Hall — is criticizing the settlement of the matter as 'pitiful.' The case stems from the political controversy that surrounded the removal of the so-called 'Silent Sam' statute from the campus of UNC-Chapel Hill in 2018, and the subsequent back-and-forth that took place between UNC officials, state lawmakers, and private groups that sought to preserve and take control of the statue after it was torn down during a campus protest. In January of 2020, Hall filed a lengthy and detailed complaint with the Board of Elections in which he provided evidence that the North Carolina Division, Sons of Confederate Veterans, along with individual leaders of the group and affiliated organizations were involved in illegally financing the NC Heritage PAC. That PAC, in turn, donated thousands of dollars to an array of Republican officeholders and candidates. Last Friday's notice reported that 'NC Heritage PAC Treasurer Mitchell Flinchum and NC Heritage PAC Assistant Treasurer Thomas Smith each pled guilty to one misdemeanor count of accepting monetary (cash) contributions in excess of $50 in violation of N.C.G.S. § 163-278.14(b). Both defendants were also ordered to pay the costs of court and a $100 fine.' The notice stated that it was notified of the plea arrangements by the Wake County District Attorney's office in January and that the complaint that gave rise to the investigation is now closed. In a news release publicizing the closure of the case and the convictions, Hall lamented the size and scope of the penalties. 'It's a pitiful settlement, but at least they admitted to engaging in criminal activity,' said Hall, who had asked for dissolution of the PAC and the disgorgement of tens of thousands of dollars of PAC contributions that benefited Republican politicians. Hall directed criticism at Wake County District Attorney Lorrin Freeman for the modest nature of the punishment meted out. 'It's disappointing that the District Attorney took so long to accomplish so little,' Hall said. 'The way large amounts of cash moved in and out of SCV-related operations is highly suspicious and likely violated tax and anti-corruption laws in addition to a felony statute against filing false campaign finance reports.' The original complaint identified $28,500 in contributions to several GOP politicians — including Agriculture Commissioner Steve Troxler and Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger — that Hall argued were unlawful and should have been redirected to the state Civil Penalty and Forfeiture Fund. Hall's statement also quoted a pair of dissident Sons of Confederate Veterans members as being critical of the outcome. Robert 'Smitty' Smith, a SCV member who helped the State Board of Elections document the illegal contributions, said, 'The fine is basically nothing – it's like there's no consequences for all they [SCV leaders] did.' 'It's crazy that it took so long and they get away,' said Chadwick Rogers, another SCV member who witnessed the illegal activity by SCV leaders that others labeled 'money laundering.' Rogers said the punishment should have included SCV losing its charity status.
Yahoo
10-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump and Republicans love free speech – as long as it agrees with them
Republicans may claim to be the party of free speech, but Donald Trump is making it clear that anyone who disagrees with him will be silenced – including college students who protest the war in Gaza. In a Truth Social post Tuesday, the president threatened to pull federal funding from universities that allow 'illegal protests,' and vowed to arrest, expel and/or deport so-called agitators. A spokesperson for the Trump administration did not answer questions about what protests the president is deeming 'illegal,' although it's hard not to see this as a reaction to the pro-Palestinian protests we saw last year. Student protest is vital to American democracy. It is within these young people's right to speak their mind about issues on and off their campuses. I fear what it means for our First Amendment rights as a country if universities comply with Trump's demands. Opinion: Did you vote for Trump? Do you support his actions and policies now? Tell us. Trump is doing this, he says, because the kids have gotten too radical. Earlier this year, in an executive order to 'combat anti-Semitism,' the president threatened the student visas of anyone who participated in 'pro-jihadist protests.' People are allowed to disagree with the federal government's way of doing things. They are allowed to protest wars they don't want, just as they are allowed to protest Trump, gun violence or racism. While Republicans have called themselves the party of free speech for years, they now seem like they won't be happy until everyone who speaks out against them is silenced. That's why the Associated Press lost access to the White House when it refused to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the 'Gulf of America' like Trump wanted. It's why the Trump administration is now handpicking who's allowed in the White House press pool. It's why Republicans are being told to cancel voter town halls and running scared instead of answering questions and defending the agenda they'll have you believe is a mandate. Opinion: Republicans would rather hide from their voters than face them and defend Trump All of these things, along with the student protest announcement, sends a message: There will be consequences for speaking out. Trump is clearly afraid of what happens when the protests come for him. If protests weren't effective, then the administration wouldn't be trying to keep them from happening. I have seen firsthand how student protests can lead to change, how a group of young people can shape a university, a town, a nation. After the 2017 "Unite the Right" rally on the University of Virginia's campus, calls grew for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to remove 'Silent Sam,' the Confederate monument that sat at the front of the university's campus. The night before classes began in 2018, Silent Sam would be torn from his pedestal, landing face down in the dirt where he belonged, never to be put up again. In the years since, a patch of grass has filled out the space where this participation trophy used to be, and my alma mater is better for it. That is progress, and it would not have happened without the outcry, the literal blood and sweat of student activists. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Student activists were also responsible for change at the university following the denial of tenure to acclaimed New York Times journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones in 2021. Following a heated protest at the school's Board of Trustees meeting, the UNC Black Student Movement put out a list of demands for the university. While not all their demands were met, there were still changes – proof that students can, in fact, shape the way their universities operate. While UNC-CH is far from perfect, these student protests made our university reckon with its history and present missteps. Now, I fear future generations won't be able to have those conversations at all because Republicans are afraid of having them. Free speech advocates quickly voiced their concern about Trump's post. 'President Trump needs to stand by his past promise to be a champion for free expression,' the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) said Tuesday. 'That means doing so for all views ‒ including those his administration dislikes.' It's true – if we don't stand for free speech as a country, what do we stand for? Trump's move to criminalize protest is a move to criminalize our freedom to say what we want. To try to curb conversations on college campuses will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on universities and the nation. But I guess trying to erase thought and conversation through governmental action is how the Republican Party now protects free speech. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump wants to charge protesters. What free speech? | Opinion
Yahoo
10-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump and Republicans love free speech – as long as it agrees with them
Republicans may claim to be the party of free speech, but Donald Trump is making it clear that anyone who disagrees with him will be silenced – including college students who protest the war in Gaza. In a Truth Social post Tuesday, the president threatened to pull federal funding from universities that allow 'illegal protests,' and vowed to arrest, expel and/or deport so-called agitators. A spokesperson for the Trump administration did not answer questions about what protests the president is deeming 'illegal,' although it's hard not to see this as a reaction to the pro-Palestinian protests we saw last year. Student protest is vital to American democracy. It is within these young people's right to speak their mind about issues on and off their campuses. I fear what it means for our First Amendment rights as a country if universities comply with Trump's demands. Opinion: Did you vote for Trump? Do you support his actions and policies now? Tell us. Trump is doing this, he says, because the kids have gotten too radical. Earlier this year, in an executive order to 'combat anti-Semitism,' the president threatened the student visas of anyone who participated in 'pro-jihadist protests.' People are allowed to disagree with the federal government's way of doing things. They are allowed to protest wars they don't want, just as they are allowed to protest Trump, gun violence or racism. While Republicans have called themselves the party of free speech for years, they now seem like they won't be happy until everyone who speaks out against them is silenced. That's why the Associated Press lost access to the White House when it refused to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the 'Gulf of America' like Trump wanted. It's why the Trump administration is now handpicking who's allowed in the White House press pool. It's why Republicans are being told to cancel voter town halls and running scared instead of answering questions and defending the agenda they'll have you believe is a mandate. Opinion: Republicans would rather hide from their voters than face them and defend Trump All of these things, along with the student protest announcement, sends a message: There will be consequences for speaking out. Trump is clearly afraid of what happens when the protests come for him. If protests weren't effective, then the administration wouldn't be trying to keep them from happening. I have seen firsthand how student protests can lead to change, how a group of young people can shape a university, a town, a nation. After the 2017 "Unite the Right" rally on the University of Virginia's campus, calls grew for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to remove 'Silent Sam,' the Confederate monument that sat at the front of the university's campus. The night before classes began in 2018, Silent Sam would be torn from his pedestal, landing face down in the dirt where he belonged, never to be put up again. In the years since, a patch of grass has filled out the space where this participation trophy used to be, and my alma mater is better for it. That is progress, and it would not have happened without the outcry, the literal blood and sweat of student activists. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. Student activists were also responsible for change at the university following the denial of tenure to acclaimed New York Times journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones in 2021. Following a heated protest at the school's Board of Trustees meeting, the UNC Black Student Movement put out a list of demands for the university. While not all their demands were met, there were still changes – proof that students can, in fact, shape the way their universities operate. While UNC-CH is far from perfect, these student protests made our university reckon with its history and present missteps. Now, I fear future generations won't be able to have those conversations at all because Republicans are afraid of having them. Free speech advocates quickly voiced their concern about Trump's post. 'President Trump needs to stand by his past promise to be a champion for free expression,' the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) said Tuesday. 'That means doing so for all views ‒ including those his administration dislikes.' It's true – if we don't stand for free speech as a country, what do we stand for? Trump's move to criminalize protest is a move to criminalize our freedom to say what we want. To try to curb conversations on college campuses will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on universities and the nation. But I guess trying to erase thought and conversation through governmental action is how the Republican Party now protects free speech. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump wants to charge protesters. What free speech? | Opinion
