College Republicans under investigation for 'thought crime'

[martybegan]

It appears the Student government just wanted to end the meeting so they called for an "investigation" as a stop gap measure.

College Republicans under investigation for 'thought crime'

The resolution was made after Columbia student Braxton Gutner, leader of the school’s Black Students Organization, came to the meeting to call for CUCR to be defunded.

Gutner urged students to support a petition demanding that Columbia “deem CUCR ineligible to receive [funding],” and to “redistribute” their funding to “self-identified Muslim groups,” and “people of color focused groups.”

Instead of supporting Gutner’s calls for CUCR to be defunded, student government leaders instead voted to file a complaint with the Student Conduct Office, a move which CUCR president Ari Boosalis compares to being investigated for “thought-crime.”

Lets see if the investigation comes up with anything, or if Columbia just hopes they can sweep this under the rug.

 

[Peach]

It appears the Student government just wanted to end the meeting so they called for an "investigation" as a stop gap measure.

College Republicans under investigation for 'thought crime'

The resolution was made after Columbia student Braxton Gutner, leader of the school’s Black Students Organization, came to the meeting to call for CUCR to be defunded.

Gutner urged students to support a petition demanding that Columbia “deem CUCR ineligible to receive [funding],” and to “redistribute” their funding to “self-identified Muslim groups,” and “people of color focused groups.”

Instead of supporting Gutner’s calls for CUCR to be defunded, student government leaders instead voted to file a complaint with the Student Conduct Office, a move which CUCR president Ari Boosalis compares to being investigated for “thought-crime.”

Lets see if the investigation comes up with anything, or if Columbia just hopes they can sweep this under the rug.

Not being investigated for a thought crime, but unfairly looking at sanctions for bringing in a "Pizzagate"conspirator and EDF speaker. I think both are slime, but the 1st Amendment gives the college Republicans every liberty in this instance. Don't like them? Do not go watch them speak.

 

[martybegan]

It appears the Student government just wanted to end the meeting so they called for an "investigation" as a stop gap measure.

College Republicans under investigation for 'thought crime'

The resolution was made after Columbia student Braxton Gutner, leader of the school’s Black Students Organization, came to the meeting to call for CUCR to be defunded.

Gutner urged students to support a petition demanding that Columbia “deem CUCR ineligible to receive [funding],” and to “redistribute” their funding to “self-identified Muslim groups,” and “people of color focused groups.”

Instead of supporting Gutner’s calls for CUCR to be defunded, student government leaders instead voted to file a complaint with the Student Conduct Office, a move which CUCR president Ari Boosalis compares to being investigated for “thought-crime.”

Lets see if the investigation comes up with anything, or if Columbia just hopes they can sweep this under the rug.

Not being investigated for a thought crime, but unfairly looking at sanctions for bringing in a "Pizzagate"conspirator and EDF speaker. I think both are slime, but the 1st Amendment gives the college Republicans every liberty in this instance. Don't like them? Do not go watch them speak.

Yes, the title was a bit of a stretch, but it was what the site used.

It's still a combination of attempted intimidation by the leader of the BSO followed by feckless punting by the student government.

 

[Peach]

It appears the Student government just wanted to end the meeting so they called for an "investigation" as a stop gap measure.

College Republicans under investigation for 'thought crime'

The resolution was made after Columbia student Braxton Gutner, leader of the school’s Black Students Organization, came to the meeting to call for CUCR to be defunded.

Gutner urged students to support a petition demanding that Columbia “deem CUCR ineligible to receive [funding],” and to “redistribute” their funding to “self-identified Muslim groups,” and “people of color focused groups.”

Instead of supporting Gutner’s calls for CUCR to be defunded, student government leaders instead voted to file a complaint with the Student Conduct Office, a move which CUCR president Ari Boosalis compares to being investigated for “thought-crime.”

Lets see if the investigation comes up with anything, or if Columbia just hopes they can sweep this under the rug.

Not being investigated for a thought crime, but unfairly looking at sanctions for bringing in a "Pizzagate"conspirator and EDF speaker. I think both are slime, but the 1st Amendment gives the college Republicans every liberty in this instance. Don't like them? Do not go watch them speak.

Yes, the title was a bit of a stretch, but it was what the site used.

It's still a combination of attempted intimidation by the leader of the BSO followed by feckless punting by the student government.

Which equals -0- next to the 1st. They need an EDUCATION in respecting the liberties of others. Let them speak as any other speaker not advocating violence or other illegal acts(.)

 

[martybegan]

It appears the Student government just wanted to end the meeting so they called for an "investigation" as a stop gap measure.

College Republicans under investigation for 'thought crime'

The resolution was made after Columbia student Braxton Gutner, leader of the school’s Black Students Organization, came to the meeting to call for CUCR to be defunded.

Gutner urged students to support a petition demanding that Columbia “deem CUCR ineligible to receive [funding],” and to “redistribute” their funding to “self-identified Muslim groups,” and “people of color focused groups.”

Instead of supporting Gutner’s calls for CUCR to be defunded, student government leaders instead voted to file a complaint with the Student Conduct Office, a move which CUCR president Ari Boosalis compares to being investigated for “thought-crime.”

Lets see if the investigation comes up with anything, or if Columbia just hopes they can sweep this under the rug.

Not being investigated for a thought crime, but unfairly looking at sanctions for bringing in a "Pizzagate"conspirator and EDF speaker. I think both are slime, but the 1st Amendment gives the college Republicans every liberty in this instance. Don't like them? Do not go watch them speak.

Yes, the title was a bit of a stretch, but it was what the site used.

It's still a combination of attempted intimidation by the leader of the BSO followed by feckless punting by the student government.

Which equals -0- next to the 1st. They need an EDUCATION in respecting the liberties of others. Let them speak as an any other speaker not advocating violence or other illegal acts(.)

But who needs the lesson more, the one trying to suppress the speech, or those who decided to just ask for an investigation hoping it would all go away?

To me the one pushing for the punishment is a lost cause, the ones who decided to punt are the ones that need to be convinced to stand up for the speech of others.

 

[Peach]

It appears the Student government just wanted to end the meeting so they called for an "investigation" as a stop gap measure.

College Republicans under investigation for 'thought crime'

The resolution was made after Columbia student Braxton Gutner, leader of the school’s Black Students Organization, came to the meeting to call for CUCR to be defunded.

Gutner urged students to support a petition demanding that Columbia “deem CUCR ineligible to receive [funding],” and to “redistribute” their funding to “self-identified Muslim groups,” and “people of color focused groups.”

Instead of supporting Gutner’s calls for CUCR to be defunded, student government leaders instead voted to file a complaint with the Student Conduct Office, a move which CUCR president Ari Boosalis compares to being investigated for “thought-crime.”

Lets see if the investigation comes up with anything, or if Columbia just hopes they can sweep this under the rug.

Not being investigated for a thought crime, but unfairly looking at sanctions for bringing in a "Pizzagate"conspirator and EDF speaker. I think both are slime, but the 1st Amendment gives the college Republicans every liberty in this instance. Don't like them? Do not go watch them speak.

Yes, the title was a bit of a stretch, but it was what the site used.

It's still a combination of attempted intimidation by the leader of the BSO followed by feckless punting by the student government.

Which equals -0- next to the 1st. They need an EDUCATION in respecting the liberties of others. Let them speak as an any other speaker not advocating violence or other illegal acts(.)

But who needs the lesson more, the one trying to suppress the speech, or those who decided to just ask for an investigation hoping it would all go away?

To me the one pushing for the punishment is a lost cause, the ones who decided to punt are the ones that need to be convinced to stand up for the speech of others.

Both. No need for an investigation, the College Republicans have the liberty to have the men speak(.) One I read might not be able to come to the US in person due to criminal convictions, but there was no threat to the university involved.