CommentsONE MAN’S OPINION-At first glance the question seems incongruous. Publisher Sutton called for the KKK to ride again at night, slaying socialists and communists. "Seems like the Klan would be welcome to raid the gated communities up there," Sutton wrote. By “up there,” Sutton meant Washington D.C.
In contrast Gov. Newsom is merely fighting for the right of California to discriminate against troublemaker Jews who would “refuse Jesus Christ.”
There has been near universal condemnation of Publisher Sutton and not a word about California’s prejudice.
The Power to Enforce Bigotry Makes the Difference
If publisher Sutton should set forth with a bunch of buddies in pick-up trucks, loaded rifles and lynch ropes and head for Washington D..C, do you all reckon that they’ll be “gittin’ too far”? Sure, Publisher Sutton is inflammatory, but no state power rests behind his racism.
Not so with California.
The full force of the State of California is lined up behind Gov. Newsom’s support of the proposition that a troublemaker Jew who would “refuse Jesus Christ” has no civil rights due to State Constitution Art VI, Sec 10. (HELP v Sup Ct, # S227630, 8-12-15). What happens to people who offend a judge or a governor like Attorney Richard Fine did in 2010 when he brought to light the millions of dollars of illegal compensation Los Angeles County Superior Court judges were receiving? They disbarred him and threw him in jail for fourteen (14) months.
What Makes California’s Governor Different from the Alabama Publisher?
Publisher Sutton’s KKK will never storm the gated compounds of the socialists-communists, but when the State is involved, very bad things happen to innocent people. Supposedly, today’s Jews should be happy that they are not Attorney Dexter Jacobson who turned up dead in 1991 with a bullet in his head when he was about to squeal on corruption in bankruptcy court in Northern California. For some strange reason, no one in authority really cared that Attorney Jacobson was murdered and his computer with the incriminating data had been stolen.
Then, there was the Los Angeles Jewish attorney who was disbarred by default in a State Bar proceeding which was held while he had been ordered to appear in federal court on some pretext. (It is unlikely this policy is limited to Jews. It may merely be fortuitous that the general bigotry came to light with respect to a Jewish attorney.)
The Real Mystery with Judge Torribio
Why did Judge Torribio admit to his bigotry and to his falsification of evidence by relying on Art VI, Sec 10? Upon learning that he was ruling in favor of a Jew who would refuse Jesus Christ, Judge Torribio held a private sidebar with the attorney who had provided this damning indictment of opposing counsel and after verifying that the attorney was indeed a troublemaker Jew, Judge Torribio changed his ruling -- but first, he falsified the evidence to support his new order. Although given a chance to dispute any portion of the narrative, Judge Torribio defended his conduct as proper.
The John McCain Approach
John McCain showed another way to react to bigotry when a woman at one of his campaign rallies said that Obama was an Arab.
“A woman came up to McCain at a rally and said, ‘I can’t trust Obama. I have read about him, and he’s not, he’s not — he’s an Arab.’ Her comment prompted McCain to immediately shake his head and take the microphone from her.
“‘No ma’am,’ McCain said. ‘He’s a decent family man, a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues, and that’s what this campaign is all about.’” (Time Magazine, August 18, 2018)
In contrast, Gavin Newsom is defending Judge Torribio, the Commission on Judicial Performance, State Bar and presumably the rest of our State Government by fighting to keep the discriminatory policy. Gov. Newsom is so committed to the policy that he refuses to discuss ending the discrimination. But as we learned when California refused to defend Prop 8 in court, the Governor has no duty to fight in favor of discrimination.
“The governor, like any litigant, has complete discretion over his own litigation strategy, including whether or not to appeal an order,” counsel Andrew Stroud wrote for Schwarzenegger. “Here, the governor exercised his discretion and decided not to file an appeal.” (Mercury News, Sept 8, 2010.)
So, let’s be clear that Gavin Newsom is voluntarily defending the position that Calif Const Art VI, Sec 10 authorizes discrimination against Jews.
Would this Be the Time to Remember Martin Niemöller
While people like to recite Niemöller, the reality is that as long as the attacker is powerful, bystanders duck for cover. Publisher Sutton is a nobody and everyone knows they will receive kudos for trashing him, but no one will go against the Governor and the California Chief Justice. Later Niemöller said:
“First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a socialist.
“Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a trade unionist.
“Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Jew.
“Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.”
The psychological reason for silence in the face of state-sponsored prejudice is that people fear the power of the government will turn against them personally. People know that if they oppose bigotry among the powerful, they will become targets. A 6'2" blond, blue-eyed Aryan who stood up for Jews would likewise have ended up in a concentration camp. The psychology is the same – the only difference is how far along these train tracks America will go.
(Richard Lee Abrams is a Los Angeles attorney and a CityWatch contributor. He can be reached at: [email protected]. Abrams’ views are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of CityWatch.) Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.
