Image 01 Image 03

Email Sent to George Washington U. Law Deans Calls for Jonathan Turley’s Removal

Email Sent to George Washington U. Law Deans Calls for Jonathan Turley’s Removal

“I hope that all of the Deans at GWU Law and the students will recognize that he is not serving in the best interest of our country and is a detriment to the success of your school’s future reputation”

Professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University stood out during the impeachment inquiry hearing on Wednesday by citing history and law, rather than acting as a member of the resistance.

As a result, there is already an effort underway to remove him from his position.

Jennie Taer writes at the Sara Carter blog:

Leaked Email: Threat Sent To GW Law Deans Calls For Prof. Turley’s Removal

The email speaks for itself calling Turley a ‘sad excuse of a man.’

The email opened, “I hope this message finds you all well, ladies and gentleman. Aside from Mr. Turley, of course.”

“I am writing you all after listening to Jonathan Turley’s disgraceful statement defending the corrupt and impeachable actions of President Trump at the House Judiciary impeachment hearing today. I know you all cringe inside knowing that you are affiliated in some way with Turley and have to work or study at the same institution in which he is employed,” the email read.

Turley was the Republican witness at Wednesday’s hearing. He made clear in his testimony, however, that he never was a Trump supporter.”By no means should he be considered a Republican. If anything, his legal and political philosophies entertain the more Liberal stance,” a former student of Turley’s told this reporter.

“He is defending the indefensible and I hope that all of the Deans at GWU Law and the students will recognize that he is not serving in the best interest of our country and is a detriment to the success of your school’s future reputation. His actions today were spineless and shameful. He is clearly a lackey for the Trump Administration,” the email says.

The email’s writer concludes, “I trust you will act appropriately and reprimand this sad excuse of a man.”

Taer notes in her report that a George Washington University student did not send the message.

For the last three years, the left has made it explicitly clear that they will target and destroy anyone who stands in the way of their efforts to remove Trump. It is no surprise that Turley would be singled out by the left after his testimony which included moments such as this:

Larry Elder is joking here, but there is a grain of reality in his question based on recent history:



Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Diversity but not dissent. Truth to power when there are no consequences. Today’s fascist left.

Comanche Voter | December 5, 2019 at 12:11 pm

It’s absolutely clear. Professor Turley is guilty of wrong think. He needs to be sent to a re-education camp, presided over by Professor Ilsa Beyotch of Buchenwald Karlan. She’ll set him straight!

Ilsa–err Professor Karlan–will set up the camp on the campus at Palo Alto. Turley will be beaten, and put on a diet of bread and water until he repents.

An un-signed email- well, that’s gutsy!

Another example of elites thinking the world revolves around them. Getting ready for the train wreck.

Yet again we see it. In The Coming of the Third Reich (2003), historian Richard J. Evans explains how, in the early days of National Socialist Germany, Stormtroopers (Brownshirts) “organized campaigns against unwanted professors in the local newspapers [and] staged mass disruptions of their lectures.” To express dissent from Nazi positions became a matter of taking one’s life into one’s hands. The idea of people of opposing viewpoints airing their disagreements in a civil and mutually respectful manner was gone. One was a Nazi, or one was silent (and fearful).

Today’s fascists call themselves “anti-fascists.” Just like the Nazis, they are totalitarian: they are determined not to allow their opponents to murmur the slightest whisper of dissent. Forcibly suppressing the speech of someone with whom one disagrees is a quintessentially fascist act.

    DaveGinOly in reply to fscarn. | December 5, 2019 at 11:07 pm

    In Munich in 1920, guess what party adopted a platform consisting of these planks:

    “We ask that government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within the confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: … an end to the power of financial interest. We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad extension of care for the aged. We demand…the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state, and municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our system of public education…We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents…The government must undertake the improvement of public health — by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor — by the greatest possible support for all groups concerned with the physical education of youth. [W]e combat the…materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of The Common Good Before the Individual Good.”

Maybe it’s time to start sending emails to the Stanford dean–quid pro quo

    CorkyAgain in reply to Obie1. | December 5, 2019 at 1:45 pm

    Get real. Any such emails would go straight into the wastebasket.

    Rick in reply to Obie1. | December 5, 2019 at 3:08 pm

    The harridan prof is a snowflake just like the Stanford law students, ensconced in their elitist dorm. She had to cross the street to get to a safe place when confronted with the prospect of walking past a Trump hotel. Again, the world would be a better place if it did not contain the Stanford law school.

I fear that the current crop of leftists are uninterested in finding a peaceful resolution of this political conflict. They are gleefully playing with fire, and once the fuse is lit, the outcome is impossible to predict.

    redc1c4 in reply to fast182. | December 5, 2019 at 1:35 pm

    it’s not hard to predict: a whole bunch of them, and some of us, will die… what happens to the survivors is a different question.

    DaveGinOly in reply to fast182. | December 5, 2019 at 11:09 pm

    “So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot.”
    George Orwell

Adam Schiff denies sending the email.

    No, but he coordinated with the email sender… and then denied knowing xer identity… but he’ll charge anyone who outs xer with an ethical violation and contempt of Congress…

    No, but Schiff coordinated with the email sender, but now denies knowing the identity of the sender, but will charge anyone who reveals the identity with an ethical violation and a contempt of Congress indictment.

Sigh, “…he is not serving…,” well if you take everything out of context that would be a correct statement.

I believe it is made clear the Mr. Turley is a Professor.
That is employment not service.
He is neither in an elected nor a “government issue” (GI, military for the un-informed) service to our Country.

Dear Mr. Turley, I would advise you to reconsider your “liberal stance” if your peers demand “correct thought” for employment in this Country.
You apparently will be out of employment.

p.s. Mr. Turley (not much longer Professor) you might consider actual service to your Country.

Morning Sunshine | December 5, 2019 at 12:35 pm

isn’t this very purpose of Tenure?

How Turley can support the left is beyond me. Wake up Professor, the train has left the station

One email is kind of pathetic, unsigned, isn’t it?

Should I expect Schiff, Pelosi, CNN, or ANY Democrat to condemn that email which is actually a warning to others who may tell a truth that challenges the official narrative? The Democrats remind me so much of the USSR from my younger years.

    Milhouse in reply to TX-rifraph. | December 5, 2019 at 3:02 pm

    Why would anyone expect them to condemn one random piece of anonymous hate mail? Has Trump ever condemned any of the truly vile antisemitic and racist hate mail that some of his supporters routinely send to anyone who says anything bad about him? No, he doesn’t, because it’s got nothing to do with him. So why should they react to this, even if it were to come to their attention in the first place?

      SeekingRationalThought in reply to Milhouse. | December 5, 2019 at 3:16 pm

      The far right is a small fringe of the Republican Party and the Conservative movement and therefore doesn’t merit a response from the leadership. At least they don’t merit a response each time they rear their ugly heads. There is no upside for the country in a response which would only raise the far rights profile. On the other hand, the “progressive” and fascist wing of the Democrat Party represents at least 20% of its, dwindling, support. It would behoove Democrat and “progressive” leaders (perhaps a pair of oxymorons) to speak out against their fascist friends, if only out of a desire to preserve the racket that pays their bills. They won’t. In part because they are slow-witted, but mostly because they need the fascists in order to maintain their careers and income in the short-term. God forbid they should have to find productive work. They never have and never will care about the long-term.

        When it is truly their friends who express such vile sentiments they ought to condemn them, and it’s to their shame when they don’t. When they treat the despicable Al Sharpton as a respected elder statesman, when they invite the likes of Michael Moore, Linda Sarsour, or Sean King and give them honored seats at their events, when they put Omar and Tlaib on committees and refuse to censure them, that’s to their shame. But when some random stranger, who has no connection whatsoever to them, writes something hateful, it would be very odd to expect them to take any notice of it, just as odd as it would be for Trump to do so to the horrible people who have put themselves uninvited in his corner.

      tom_swift in reply to Milhouse. | December 5, 2019 at 3:51 pm

      No, he doesn’t, because it’s got nothing to do with him.

      I’d say a House committee hearing about his impeachment has rather a lot to do with him.

        Milhouse in reply to tom_swift. | December 5, 2019 at 4:15 pm

        Huh? What has that got to do with hate mail sent by his supporters? He correctly takes the attitude that these people have nothing to do with him, he didn’t ask them to support him, and the fact that they support him doesn’t make him responsible for what they do. I don’t see why the Dems shouldn’t take the same attitude with those among their supports who are similarly an uninvited fringe. (As opposed to those whom they invite and honor, whose hatred they should indeed condemn, and don’t.)

All the malignant pathologies of contemporary Leftism/Dhimmi-crat ideology are contained in this noxious screed – infantilism, obnoxiousness, incivility, vindictiveness, intolerance, sanctimony, self-congratulatory and self-perceived moral superiority, and, of course, the totalitarian’s innate desire to vilify and to punish all of those who hold or express alternative viewpoints and opinions.

Never Trumper Paul Mirengoff of Powerline Blog, who seems unable to distinguish between the ‘royal we’ and to put context into Trump’s request (Mueller had testified as to campaign interference the day before), is not impressed with the three professors.

Professor Turley is liberal – and he is true to his principals. I read his blog daily and it makes me think. Does he sway my opinions, sometimes, but it’s because his arguments are so clearly though out and presented clearly. Just because you may not agree with someone doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t listen to them. I respect him.

This is what is missing from the Demoncrats/Liberals today. You cannot disagree with them and discuss an issue rationally. It is now a scorched earth/personal destruction warfare. It’s not gonna get better until we restore responsibility for our actions and our words.

Regarding the professor yesterday that brought Barron into the discussion, as Neil Bortz used to say, ‘sucks to be you’.

By itself I doubt if Professor Turley‘s testimony yesterday will cost him his job (tenure or no tenure). But I think it could start a cascade of unfavorable events that he may not have anticipated. Turley probably should get ready to watch his professional opportunities shrink, his lectures and speeches disrupted by communist protestors, and even his life threatened. I also think a #MeToo accusation against Turley is probably in the queue.

And to be honest I really would not feel sorry for him if it did happen. Turley is a leftist’s leftist, and the situation he will likely find himself in will be partly his own fault. I don’t think lefty academics like him realize that they can’t keep pushing left wing government and policies without getting the totalitarianism and terrorism that naturally comes along with it.

    inspectorudy in reply to Recovering Lutheran. | December 5, 2019 at 2:46 pm

    Turley is gay so a “Me Too” charge would get really hairy. No pun intended. Other than a charge by a young male student most wouldn’t have much impact.

      Milhouse in reply to inspectorudy. | December 5, 2019 at 2:58 pm

      Huh? If Turley’s gay, it’s a well-kept secret.

      J Motes in reply to inspectorudy. | December 6, 2019 at 7:21 am

      Prof Turley made reference to his mad wife, his mad children, and his mad dog during his statement to the House Judiciary Committee this week’s impeachment hearing. Just to confirm what I was sure I heard him say, I looked at Wikipedia to see what his family status is: “Turley lives in Washington, D.C., with his wife and four children. He owns a Goldendoodle.”

      Modern vocabulary is so twisted around these days that I have to wonder if you are referencing some new definition of gay. Or are you implying that he is closeted with a beard of a family? Four kids seems like a lot more “covering up” than would be required. Have you any evidence to support your claim?

Must change their name to “Dystopian University.” When speaking the truth becomes a revolutionary act.

For those of you who do not think we are at war with the left, this will make you see light. Just like the Kavanaugh inquisition, the left no longer has any limits on their hate. BDS, TDS, boycotts, smearing, threatening, shaming, violence and the misuse of government power and resources are just a few of their weapons. What does our side offer in return? Shrugs, “No comment”, or a handful of patriots who fight back. Where are the Collin’s, Murkowski’s, Romney’s of the Demorat party? They do not have any but we do. We can count on these three to stab any issue that involves Trump in the back. I simply cannot see how McConnell and the House R’s can be civil after seeing the things the left says and does daily about their party! Shun the SOB’s!

What’s the story here? That some random person sent hate mail? How is that newsworthy?

    It will be reported on the news, not because of any truth found on the pages, but because it allows the news media to repeat endlessly the lies and distortions included within (just like most smears).

    Note that the letter-writer did not include any arguments against Prof. Turley’s testimony, just a mindless shriek of flinging adjectives against a wall before demanding a law professor to be removed from his post for advocating in favor of constitutional protections for the Executive branch of our government.

    I’m quite glad the letter-writer is not a student at GW. I would hope any of their students would be smarter than that.

    Aarradin in reply to Milhouse. | December 5, 2019 at 9:25 pm

    You really are simple, aren’t you?

SeekingRationalThought | December 5, 2019 at 3:03 pm

As a graduate of the GW law school, Professor Turley is the only thing that gives me any pride or hope for the institution. I have scaled back my gifts to the University based upon its “politically correct” actions. Should they fire Professor Turley, they will be dead to me and my other schools will benefit.

Progressivism is a religion. And a religion looking to dominate and produce a caliphate an utopia can brook no dissent. There shall be no heretics in their paradise.

“Off with their heads!“ The Red Queen shouted.

    tom_swift in reply to Sally MJ. | December 5, 2019 at 6:19 pm

    Ahh, point of order, the one ranting about heads is the Queen of Hearts in Wonderland. The Red Queen is a somewhat milder-tempered character in Through the Looking-Glass.

Have much respect for Turley. He made big decision y- day. He turned in his Jew card. Prob for ever.

Welcome to the Republican Party, Professor Turley.

Well, I guess now we’ll get to see if Jonathan Turley has more intellectual honesty than Juan Williams. Williams lost one of his reporting jobs over saying something non-critical about Bush, I believe. Williams nevertheless stayed true to his liberal-left leanings.

Turley has always had left leaning politics, but has retained the ability to separate his opinion from the facts. I’m curious to see if his opinion and demeanor change in the future.