Hoyagate: Georgetown Law Is Vatican of Trump Hatred – The American Spectator | USA News and Politics

President Trump never invoked the Insurrection Act, although some of America s most admired chief executives did just that. And yet Trump threatens democracy.

Huh?

Second, the 2018 midterm elections did not go quite Trump s way. Republicans gained two seats and held the U.S. Senate. However, amid Democrats Russia! Russia! Russia! lies, Republicans lost 41 seats in and control of the House. And yet, Trump never deployed the Insurrection Act.

Third, while Trump never unleashed the Insurrection Act, 12 presidents have done so, 19 times. Republican Ulysses S. Grant used it to suppress the Democrat-founded Ku Klux Klan, and Democrats FDR, JFK and LBJ invoked it to quell riots in, respectively, Detroit; Oxford, Mississippi; and Washington, D.C. Trump merely mentioned in 2020 doing what Lyndon Baines Johnson actually did in 1968. Trump s critics accused him of imposing a veritable Third Reich measure. He took no such action.

Such breathless, baseless lies typify the panic that Georgetown-based Trump haters foment among voters. This crowd cannot merely oppose Trump s policies or propose alternatives. So, they hallucinate pitch-black fantasies of life under an American Führer.

If these hyper-partisan lies oozed from a privately funded pressure group, like Media Matters, so what? But the fact that Georgetown Law hosts this boiling cauldron of anti-Trump venom should anger taxpayers. This pro-Democrat/anti-Republican activity raises troubling questions about the tax-exempt status of Georgetown Law and the broader university.

Does an institution poisoning one party s presumptive nominee violate the IRS requirement that 501(c)(3) organizations remain politically neutral? Georgetown and donations thereto have been tax-exempt since 1973.

In return, the IRS expects Georgetown to remain non-partisan, or at least even-handed. IRS regulations state: activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

via spectator.org

Those darn law schools. Not quite non-partisan, I would hazard. Their tax-exempt status is safe for the time being, however, I would guess.