The Crying Nazi just sued antifa for allegedly framing him in Charlottesville

Charlemagne

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2017
15,432
2,482
113
THE CRYING NAZI JUST SUED ANTIFA FOR ALLEGEDLY FRAMING HIM IN CHARLOTTESVILLE

The Crying Nazi just sued antifa for allegedly framing him in Charlottesville

By Tess Owen Jan 2, 2018

Christopher Cantwell, one of the white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville as part of the now-infamous “Unite the Right” rally in August, is facing up to 20 years in prison for allegedly attacking protesters with mace. But now he is trying to turn the tables on his accusers, claiming they used mace on themselves as part of an antifa plot to “maliciously punish, discredit, vex and harass him.”

The complaint was filed Thursday by Cantwell’s lawyer Elmer Woodward. Cantwell’s complaint names two people who testified in court against him — Emily Gorcenski and Kristopher Goad — claiming they were part of a “cluster” of antifa who attempted to spray him with mace.

The complaint describes Cantwell and his allies as “The Monumentals” who were simply protecting public property and exercising their First Amendment rights.

“Antifa was also enjoying rights guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Virginia,” the document states. “As is their pattern and practice, antifa attacked the Monumentals. Two antifa subsequently swore out false and fraudulent criminal warrants against plaintiff, a Monumental slated to speak at the Aug. 12 rally.”

Cantwell figured prominently in a VICE News documentary about the events in Charlottesville, and in an interview he showed off an arsenal of weapons and expressed racist views. He referred to the black victims of police shootings as “savages” and criticized Ivanka Trump for marrying Jared Kushner, who is Jewish. “We’re not nonviolent,” he said. “We’ll fucking kill these people if we have to.”

The complaint acknowledges that Cantwell used pepper spray to defend himself, but argued that he did not hit Gorcenski and Goad, contrary to what they testified in court. Cantwell is seeking $75,000 in damages. He did not respond to a request for comment from VICE News.

The lawsuit is the latest turn in the legal aftermath of Charlottesville, where white supremacists and neo-Nazis marched ostensibly in support of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee on the campus of the University of Virginia. The march devolved into a violent clash that left one protester dead after an avowed neo-Nazi drove a speeding car into a crowd.

Cantwell posted tearful video of himself after Charlottesville police issued a warrant for his arrest, which in turn earned him the nickname “The Crying Nazi.”

Cantwell was ultimately charged with one count of felony use of tear gas by a Charlottesville Grand Jury. He is currently out on bail but faces five to 20 years in prison if convicted.

His pretrial hearing is scheduled for Jan. 31 and his trial is slated for Feb. 12.

Both Gorcenski and Goad testified as government witnesses in earlier proceedings against Cantwell, alleging he sprayed them with mace during a torch-lit white supremacist march that took place the night before the Unite the Right rally.

Cantwell refers to Gorcenski, a transgender documentarian from Charlottesville, by male pronouns and her former male name, and describes her as a “media relations assistant to antifa.” When she was cross-examined during Cantwell’s trial, Gorenski said that she is not part of antifa and went to the University of Virginia’s campus on Aug. 11 to film the rally, not participate in the protest.

Cantwell describes Goad, a resident of Richmond, Virginia, as a “violent political activist, supporter, and adherent of antifa.” “Goad has a disco mustache, had longish hair and wore a blue jean jacket,” the complaint adds.

The complaint also refers to a few other unnamed individuals, including “Beanyman,” “a short white male with a beard,” and “Undersleeves,” someone who was wearing “an orange long-sleeved shirt under a short-sleeved blue t-shirt.”

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/j5vg9x/the-crying-nazi-just-sued-antifa-for-allegedly-framing-him-in-charlottesville?utm_source=vicenewsfb
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,067
0
0
The lawsuit is the latest turn in the legal aftermath of Charlottesville, where white supremacists and neo-Nazis marched ostensibly in support of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee on the campus of the University of Virginia. The march devolved into a violent clash that left one protester dead after an avowed neo-Nazi drove a speeding car into a crowd.
[/URL]
Credit where credit is due:

a) Doesn't claim the car directly collided with Heyer or that the car collision was the proximate or foreseeable cause of Heyer's death (a rarity for a journalist to take care on this issue).

However, still muffs it:

a) The violence happened the day after the march. The march itself didn't "devolve" into anything.

b) The Friday march (which was not permitted) had involved only an estimated 400 neo-nazis, KKK members, and white supremacists. The "unite the right" (permitted) protest the next day (Saturday) included some participants from these groups, as well as white nationalists, southern traditionalist conservatives, historical conservationists, free speech advocates, and a smattering of others not aligned with any group (including the curious and the media). The protest did not include an organized march. The permit was issued for a demonstration at a public park. The counter protesters (whose gathering had not been permitted) chose to relocate from their gathering point in order to confront the protesters en masse at the permitted site. Inexplicably, the response of the City to potential physical confrontation by the the counter protesters was to rescind the court ordered permit, declare the protest to be an unlawful assembly, and then create an exit from the permitted site that actually ensured the groups would come into direct physical conflict. Poor policing of the confrontation is what "devolved" into violence between the groups (as Charlottesville itself seems to have recognized by the firing of the police chief). The counter protesters then proceeded to march throughout the city core, chasing and in some cases confronting the protesters who had dispersed from the park in an unorganized way.

c) The "ostensible" reason for the protest was both accepted by the courts (who ruled in favour of the demonstration permit application) and by the ACLU who supported the application. It's a little disingenuous to to use the word "ostensible" when the reason has already been scrutinized by the courts.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
102,087
28,913
113
Credit where credit is due:

a) Doesn't claim the car directly collided with Heyer or that the car collision was the proximate or foreseeable cause of Heyer's death (a rarity for a journalist to take care on this issue).

However, still muffs it:

a) The violence happened the day after the march. The march itself didn't "devolve" into anything.

b) The Friday march (which was not permitted) had involved only an estimated 400 neo-nazis, KKK members, and white supremacists. The "unite the right" (permitted) protest the next day (Saturday) included some participants from these groups, as well as white nationalists, southern traditionalist conservatives, historical conservationists, free speech advocates, and a smattering of others not aligned with any group (including the curious and the media). The protest did not include an organized march. The permit was issued for a demonstration at a public park. The counter protesters (whose gathering had not been permitted) chose to relocate from their gathering point in order to confront the protesters en masse at the permitted site. Inexplicably, the response of the City to potential physical confrontation by the the counter protesters was to rescind the court ordered permit, declare the protest to be an unlawful assembly, and then create an exit from the permitted site that actually ensured the groups would come into direct physical conflict. Poor policing of the confrontation is what "devolved" into violence between the groups (as Charlottesville itself seems to have recognized by the firing of the police chief). The counter protesters then proceeded to march throughout the city core, chasing and in some cases confronting the protesters who had dispersed from the park in an unorganized way.

c) The "ostensible" reason for the protest was both accepted by the courts (who ruled in favour of the demonstration permit application) and by the ALCU who supported the application. It's a little disingenuous to to use the word "ostensible" when the reason has already been scrutinized by the courts.
Still defending nazis, Bud?
 

anon1

Well-known member
Aug 19, 2001
10,782
2,739
113
Tranquility Base, La Luna
The American Civil War 2.0?

:applouse::applouse::applouse::applouse:

Can we go burn down the White House again?
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,067
0
0
To Bud, every law suite against the Neo nazis is a conspiracy theory.
Beaver, you'd do so much better to actually read what I post and respond to what I actually say. My comments were about the accuracy of the reporting, not about the merits of the law suit. Do you want to talk about that, or just spout silly catch phrases that are worse examples of logic than the conspiracy theories you seek to criticize?

Frank's insistence on responding to my posts, knowing I have him on ignore, is silly enough. Piggybacking on Frank just elevates the silliness to another level.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,256
8,221
113
Beaver, you'd do so much better to actually read what I post and respond to what I actually say. My comments were about the accuracy of the reporting, not about the merits of the law suit. Do you want to talk about that, or just spout silly catch phrases that are worse examples of logic than the conspiracy theories you seek to criticize?

Frank's insistence on responding to my posts, knowing I have him on ignore, is silly enough. Piggybacking on Frank just elevates the silliness to another level.
You are the fine one to talk about "actually reading a post before responding". You definitely did not do so when I did a copy and paste from the article that OP posted in the other thread. So do not be hypocritical when you start making that allegation!! To this end stop "spouting the silly phrases" in the first place. Obviously to your extremist mind this reporting is "fake". We know that you will not accept what was reported in the article due to your partisan views on politics. This particular guy is garbage and deserves to be in jail. Obviously, he is going to try and blame the Antifa for all the violence and state that he was the innocent guy. Using teargas is unacceptable on all fronts.
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,067
0
0
You are the fine one to talk about "actually reading a post before responding". You definitely did not do so when I did a copy and paste from the article that OP posted in the other thread. So do not be hypocritical when you start making that allegation!! To this end stop "spouting the silly phrases" in the first place. Obviously to your extremist mind this reporting is "fake". We know that you will not accept what was reported in the article due to your partisan views on politics. This particular guy is garbage and deserves to be in jail. Obviously, he is going to try and blame the Antifa for all the violence and state that he was the innocent guy. Using teargas is unacceptable on all fronts.
Beaver, don't get yourself so worked up over arguments you can't possibly win.

In this instance, we don't have to talk specifically about Heyer's death because this reporter didn't overstate the evidence.

However, as to my criticisms of the reporting, please point out where I have failed to correctly summarize the facts I cite about: a) the march, b) the protest and counter protest, or c) the policing and political backdrop to the violence. If you can't, you should just go lie down for while, and start fresh in a new thread.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,484
6,987
113
Beaver, you'd do so much better to actually read what I post and respond to what I actually say. My comments were about the accuracy of the reporting, not about the merits of the law suit. ....
Of course you didn't mention the lawsuit because you agree that these guys are not white supremacists but victims of 'antifa' and the deep state.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
30,256
8,221
113
Beaver, don't get yourself so worked up over arguments you can't possibly win.

In this instance, we don't have to talk specifically about Heyer's death because this reporter didn't overstate the evidence.

However, as to my criticisms of the reporting, please point out where I have failed to correctly summarize the facts I cite about: a) the march, b) the protest and counter protest, or c) the policing and political backdrop to the violence. If you can't, you should just go lie down for while, and start fresh in a new thread.
You have posted some irrelevant arguments and think that you are winning. Get real this individual sprayed the victims with mace. He also made some disgusting threats about Blacks and Jews. Accept that and move on as the full court case is set for the end of this month. Those are serious charges. I do not see what arguments you are winning with your pointless statements.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
53,880
11,790
113
Toronto
Still defending nazis, Bud?
He is embarrassing himself in defense of Trump.

There are times when even an ardent supporter should back off. Unfortunately Bud's blind loyalty does not allow himself to see that this is one of those times.

Stop embarrassing yourself. The guy is a Nazi and he was charged. Do not try to come up with maybes or what ifs.
 

FAST

Banned
Mar 12, 2004
10,064
1
0
Strange laws in the US

He is embarrassing himself in defense of Trump.

There are times when even an ardent supporter should back off. Unfortunately Bud's blind loyalty does not allow himself to see that this is one of those times.

Stop embarrassing yourself. The guy is a Nazi and he willfully drove the car into her. That is why he was charged. Do not try to come up with maybes or what ifs.
He was charged because he was a Nazi,... who drove a car into her,... !!!

And actually,... he did not willfully drive his car into her,... but who cares about reality and facts.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
62,484
6,987
113
...

And actually,... he did not willfully drive his car into her,... but who cares about reality and facts.
Speaking of reality and facts......

I'm sure that's why the DA upgraded the charges.
 

shack

Nitpicker Extraordinaire
Oct 2, 2001
53,880
11,790
113
Toronto
He was charged because he was a Nazi,... who drove a car into her,... !!!

And actually,... he did not willfully drive his car into her,... but who cares about reality and facts.
My post does not say that. I corrected it (I realized that it was a different "very fine Nazi") without seeing your post.
 

Bud Plug

Sexual Appliance
Aug 17, 2001
5,067
0
0
He is embarrassing himself in defense of Trump.

There are times when even an ardent supporter should back off. Unfortunately Bud's blind loyalty does not allow himself to see that this is one of those times.

Stop embarrassing yourself. The guy is a Nazi and he was charged. Do not try to come up with maybes or what ifs.
Non sequitur. Try again.
 

FAST

Banned
Mar 12, 2004
10,064
1
0
Speaking of reality and facts......

I'm sure that's why the DA upgraded the charges.
I agree that he hit the victim,... and resulted in her death,... but to say he intentionally targeted her,... not a lawyer,... but is that not required,... ???
 

FAST

Banned
Mar 12, 2004
10,064
1
0
My post does not say that. I corrected it
,..."The guy is a Nazi and he willfully drove the car into her"

If not related,... learn how to use punctuations.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts