Did Trump Administration Use Natzi WorshiperTo Defend Press Ban

Why did the Justice Department entrust Michael Velchik with defending Trump’s exclusion of CNN, MS NOW, and Politico? The Boston Globe reported that Velchik wrote a Harvard paper from Hitler’s perspective. The instructor refused to grade his submission and required another one. Velchik later described Mein Kampf as his favorite recent book, called parts of it “fascinating,” and praised Hitler’s oratory and understanding of propaganda. His reported misogynistic remarks are equally disturbing. He wrote that Wuthering Heights reminded him why he did not usually read books written by women. He also said he was glad a female character in another novel was hanged and generalized about what women needed to learn. Velchik’s court filing raises further questions about his judgment and competence. It repeatedly misspells the controlling Sherrill precedent as “Sherill,” omits possessive apostrophes in phrases including “Plaintiffs conduct” and “Plaintiffs inability,” and contains the unfinished sentence “they have received adequate.” More seriously, the brief asks a trial judge to reject binding appellate precedent, stretches a ruling concerning restricted presidential spaces to cover the entire White House complex, and denies retaliation while identifying the outlets’ reporting as the reason for their exclusion. Trump repeatedly and inaccurately calls Democrats communists. Hitler was a fascist dictator and leader of the Nazi Party. Applying Trump’s guilt by association rhetoric, should Republicans be called Nazis because his administration selected a lawyer who praised Mein Kampf? Demand that the Justice Department disclose who selected Velchik, whether his reported statements were reviewed, and who approved this error riddled constitutional filing. Congress must investigate why this attorney was trusted with defending an attack on press freedom.