Antifa Prosecution Chokes at Trial; Virginia Attorney General Candidate Shannon Taylor’s Key Witness Proven Liar

Charlottesville Antifa and their supporters at the University of Virginia and the Prosecutor’s office have finally gotten a little piece of what they deserve.

After seven years of specious lawsuits and criminal charges against dozens of men who dared to stand up to Antifa, the corrupt local government, and the University of Virginia (UVA), one judge has finally seen through Charlottesville’s campaign of lies.

On August 22, Judge H. Thomas Padrick finally dismissed the charges against Jacob Joseph Dix, a dashing 29-year-old truck driver from Ohio. Mr. Dix had been accused of “burning an object with intent to intimidate”—an absurd application of an unconstitutional law that only exists to harass Whites—for taking part in the tiki-torch procession on UVA’s campus on August 11, 2017.

At Mr. Dix’s trial June 4–6, his lawyer Peter Frazier convinced 8 out of 12 jurors to vote not guilty, resulting in a mistrial. This was a stunning outcome, given the bigotry and ignorance that prevails in Charlottesville. It speaks to the weakness of the prosecution’s case and the competence of the defense.

Before the trial even began, the case was in trouble. Both the original judge and the Albemarle prosecutor’s office (“Commonwealth’s Attorney” in Virginia’s propagandistic terminology) had to step aside for (highly likely) conflicts of interest.

Henrico County prosecutor Shannon Taylor was brought in. Ms. Taylor is currently running for Attorney General of Virginia. More on her later.

The Nature of Political Trials

Before I get into the details, you should be aware: as with all jury trials, the facts don’t really matter. Especially in political trials like that of Mr. Dix. What matters is lawyers’ ability to drive their points home to the jury. The point of a trial isn’t to scientifically determine the truth. It is to see which side is more convincing.

We haven’t gone so far from the old “trial by combat.” The only difference is that the winner isn’t the better swordsman, it’s the better wordsmith. Many jurors feel that whoever is more convinced of their own rightness will speak better and therefore must be in the right.

This is dangerous, because “liberal” careerists (like Shannon Taylor or Albemarle prosecutors Jim Hingeley and Lawton Tufts) are supremely convinced of their own rightness. They have no trouble making brazen and unfair attacks against a defendant because they are not of a philosophical disposition that cares about truth or rightness. They take the system’s morality as an assumption and fight for it.

That’s the way it is. There’s no point in hoping for more discerning juries or more fair-minded prosecutors. This is the game, and we have to play by their rules. Fight fire with fire.

With that in mind, let’s examine the key rhetorical points of each side.

The Defense

Defense lawyer Peter Frazier destroyed the credibility of the prosecution’s key witness, malicious Antifa ringleader Edward (“Emily”) Gorcenski. He took a strong moral position and argued clearly and effectively. He is responsible for the case’s eventual dismissal. There’s no doubt his overall framing won the case.

Emily G.’s Twitter photo, August 2017

He did so by arguing five main points:

1) The state has no evidence of malicious intent.

2) The defendant said things protected by the First Amendment; he didn’t hit or attack anyone.

3) The cops didn’t arrest anyone for carrying a torch. They didn’t tell anyone that carrying a torch was illegal, because they themselves didn’t think it was.

4) The statute does not even apply to the allegations.

5) Antifa was at fault. The planners tried to keep the march secret to avoid Antifa attacks. This is proven by the May 2017 tiki-procession in Charlottesville carried out by many of the same people. That one was secret. No antifa came. No violence happened.

Mr. Frazier cannot be commended enough for his excellent handling of the facts and his skill at cross-examination.

Antifa Goon Wrecked in Cross-Examination

I recently obtained the trial transcript—and it’s no surprise that the mainstream media did not report the details of this trial. Antifa ring-leader Edward Gorcenski was brutally humiliated in cross-examination. I winced reading it.

It culminated in this electrifying exchange:

[Frazier]: You saw him for about five seconds in the dark seven years ago and you’re here to say in court that this is that man?

[Gorcenski] Yes. It was lit. It was lit by street lights. It was lit by torch light. To the best of my knowledge that is that person.

[Frazier] Based on what you’ve read on the Internet.

[Gorcenski] Based on what I saw on the Internet. Based on what I investigated. Based on the news reports that I have read that this is that man. [my emphasis]

[Frazier] No further questions, Judge.[1]

The entire case is hearsay! The prosecution’s primary witness could not even say that he SAW the defendant there. And this case made it through multiple motions to dismiss, it had the first judge thrown off for conflicts of interest, it had the whole Albemarle prosecutor’s office thrown off for conflicts of interest, AND STILL it went to trial! Albemarle County Virginia is a bloody joke. Totally abusive. Outrageous.

How about we put the prosecutors and their moneymen and the whole UVA administration on trial? That would actually be fair.

But that was not the only humiliation. There’s more. MORE! Gorcenski admitted to releasing the time and place of the tiki-procession to “maybe four or five” journalists.[2]

He also admitted to being an FBI informant:

[Gorcenski] There was a lot going on that day, and, in fact, the FBI had contacted me that day and we had talked about the rally as well.

[Frazier] The FBI contacted you?

[Gorcenski] Yes.[3]

He claimed that this was merely “because as a media organizer the goal was to get the community message out.”[4] But it’s obvious from the rest of his testimony that his real goal was to ensure that his political enemies were denied their right to free assembly.

Frazier also confronted Gorcenski with this Tweet that he wrote just four days before the tiki-procession:

“Biological essentialism is a fascist vector, and fascism must be crushed. Fascism is an act of first violence and violence is justified to stop it.” Edward Gorcenski (Emily G.) on Twitter, August 7, 2017[5]

So he defines another position—that biology is central to who we are—as “fascist” by its very nature, and thus, violence is justified against people whom he deems to hold such beliefs.

It is thus fair to deduce that Mr. Gorcenski’s intent on August 11th was to attack his political enemies. And furthermore that his contact with the FBI and with the media was for the purpose of inciting his Antifa comrades. It would not be the only example of Antifa-FBI collusion.

This argument could have been made more aggressively if the judge had allowed other Gorcenski tweets to be entered into evidence, for instance:

“One story that hasn’t been told about #Charlottesville is how our intel networks dramatically outclassed both the alt-right’s and the cops’.” August 19 2017

Ok, so yes. Antifa is engaged in extrajudicial mass-surveillance of its political enemies. It does the dirty work that even the FBI cannot be seen doing.

At another point in the cross-examination Gorcenski very nearly admitted to trying to manipulate the prosecutor’s office for his own political ends:

[Frazier] I said can you explain why at no point in any of those discussions [with the police] that you didn’t—that you didn’t mention Jacob Dix?

[Gorcenski] Yes, I can explain that. The case—the Commonwealth Attorney indicated to me that— 

[Frazier] Which Commonwealth Attorney

[Gorcenski] The previous Commonwealth Attorney for Albemarle County, Robert Tracci indicated to me—

[Prosecutor]: Objection—

THE COURT: Sustained[6]

Very interesting. So Gorcenski was lobbying the former prosecutor to bring charges against his political enemies? Was he also lobbying the current prosecutor, the one who actually brought the charges?

Yes! He didn’t say so in court, but he has elsewhere. On a podcast Gorcenski bragged that he had convinced the prosecutor to bring these charges against people like Mr. Dix.[7]

I’m gonna go ahead and suggest that this is yet more evidence for my theory that Antifa, UVA and the Albemarle County prosecutor’s office conspired to bring these fake and evil prosecutions. And that the prosecutors are covering it up.

Let’s keep reading!

[Frazier] You didn’t mention Jacob Dix’s name to those police any time, did you?

[Gorcenski] I can’t recall if I did or did not. At one point I submitted a dossier of evidence to UVA PD that included some of the people that had been identified in the torch march. I do not—

[Frazier] Not identified by you.

[Gorcenski] Not identified by me, but just general. Some of them identified by me, but some of them generally. And I don’t recall off the top of my head whether or not Jacob Dix was in there. But if I were to guess—

TAYLOR: Object—

[Gorcenski] —I would say that he was not.[8]

Prosecutor Taylor then objects to her own witness for being “unresponsive.” LOL. That’s not why you objected, you liar! Your witness was too responsive. He was giving away the game! He was accidentally revealing an extrajudicial espionage operation by Antifa to push the courts into prosecuting political enemies.

Why do these judges always have to interrupt when things get interesting?

Edward Gorcenski’s disastrous testimony ruined the case. The defense decided against even calling a single witness, because they were so confident that the jury would see through it. And, despite the media’s lies about the Charlottesville 2017 tiki-procession, their confidence was justified. Eight jurors voted for acquittal.

Prosecutor Taylor is now running for Virginia Attorney General. Much of her campaign propaganda focuses on her record of “fighting extremists.” She even included footage of the tiki-procession in a campaign ad.

She must have known that she choked at trial. She sent her underlings to Mr. Dix’s motion-to-dismiss hearing, knowing all was lost.[9]

Like all politicians in democracy, she didn’t care about doing the right thing. She wanted to put Jacob Dix in prison to further her political career.

The Defense’s One Weak Concession

There is one part of Mr. Frazier’s rhetoric that I must respectfully critique. In his opening statement, he excused Antifa for discovering and leaking the time and place of the tiki-torch procession. This leak was the only reason that any conflict happened in the first place. As usual, the Alt-Right tried to keep the event secret to avoid Antifa harassment and violence. As had happened many times before.

Speaking of the “left-wing counter-protesters” (i.e., Antifa), Mr. Frazier said of Antifa:

Word got out and they posted it on a leftwing website saying, hey, something’s going down at UVA tonight, organize, let’s—let’s counter-protest. … That’s a classic counterprotest and they did it specifically because they knew the torch demonstration was coming. And, again, God bless them. Like they are totally allowed to do that.[10]

I can only assume that he said this as a rhetorical concession. “See, I’m a fair guy, I’m playing fair.” In a just country, this would be a good stance. Perhaps even today with some jurors, this might work. I do not doubt Mr. Frazier’s good intent, I only criticize this tactic, because it gives away too much to an evil and immoral prosecution.

It is not Antifa’s “right” to be spies and traitors. That’s what this person was. They treacherously worked their way into a position to find where the protest would happen. They then published that information with the intent that violent thugs would attack us. Their purpose was to deny us the right of free assembly.

And given Mr. Gorcenski’s revelations about his contacts with the complicit FBI and the media, who is to say that one of their agents did not leak that information to Antifa?

This would fit the pattern. When Antifa shows up, there is a fight. When the Alt-Right shows up, there is not. This has been going on for years. To suggest otherwise is obviously untrue. This needs to be drilled into people’s heads—especially jurors. Antifa is a malicious and terroristic nationwide gang. Anytime they exercise “their rights,” it is only ever to strip everyone else of theirs.

If it had not been for that—for Antifa’s violent history—we would have simply announced the torch-vigil openly and invited others to counter-protest. We did just that in April 2017 at a protest at the White House (against Trump’s bombing of Syria). Of course, masked Antifa goons stalked us, screamed at us, threatened us, and attacked us. So sorry if we didn’t send them an invitation to the torch-march a few months later.

That people have to arrange secret protests is only because of the U.S. government’s toleration of this domestic terrorist group. Those are the criminals. Antifa, its corporate backers, and the authorities who make it impossible for Americans to demonstrate openly, because they make it impossible for us to meet Antifa’s force with justified force of our own. In a fair fight—or even in a rather imbalanced one—Americans beat Antifa scum.

This has to be repeated. It is not good enough to skirt around the Antifa problem. You have to confront it head-on. It starts in rhetoric. Then the courts. Then the streets. That progression mirrors the personal preparation required: first in spirit, then in mind, then in body.

The Prolix and Mendacious Prosecution

Edward Gorcenski’s awful testimony wasn’t prosecutor Taylor’s only problem.

Her argument was trash. At least in terms of logic. There is no point in discussing her laborious and twisted reasoning. Her only strategy was to flood the jury with confusing and even contradictory facts and then bamboozle them with word-tricks—typical of politically motivated, careerist prosecutors.

Her closing argument centered on one line: “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.”

This was a good argument for her, because it could easily trick the jury. She was essentially saying “rights have limitations,” as if that could somehow prove the defendant guilty. She talked about how you can’t scream “fire” in a movie theater. Duh. Everybody learned that in middle-school. Her goal was to attack a position that no one on our side ever took, and thereby to dupe the jury. It was a strawman argument.

Contrary to her claims, no one on our side was arguing that “free assembly” and “free speech” allow you to form a mob, mask up, carry weapons, and scream death-threats outside someone’s house. The defense was not arguing that or anything like it. In fact, the only people who have ever done that are… oh right. Antifa.

No, Shannon, you disingenuous harpy. The Constitution is not a suicide pact. In fact, it provided for its own dissolution. Because the founding fathers—not being like today’s hack-politicians who worship “the Constitution” as immutable—were modest enough to assume that it would not last forever.

However, in the modern (frankly, Jewish) interpretation—the Constitution IS INDEED a suicide pact. Just not in the way that Prosecutor Taylor meant.

It is a suicide pact for White Americans.

To wit:

1) The U.S. government’s multi-billion-dollar domestic espionage apparatus makes a mockery of your Fourth Amendment right to “be secure in your possessions” and free from “unreasonable search and seizure.” This apparatus is controlled by, and run primarily in the interests of, American Jews.

2) The citizen is forced to pay for endless, undeclared wars, which—since 1945 alone—have killed tens of millions of people with whom Americans have no quarrel. These wars—including now the ones in the Ukraine and Palestine—are big fat milk cows for often-Jewish financiers and cynical war profiteers. They are justified and promoted by the press, lobbyists (AIPAC, JINSA) and “neoconservative” paid hacks in the elite media (Max Boot, Michelle Goldberg, Jennifer Rubin, Bret Stephens) and in the Biden administration (Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, Ukraine war architect Victoria Nuland). It should go without saying that Jewish influence is heavy in all of those areas.[11]

3) We are also forced to pay for millions of racial aliens to settle in our homes, murder our sons and rape our daughters—while powerful Jews and their gentile lackeys live in luxury in New York, DC and Los Angeles. Jews have been instrumental in bringing this about.

4) Cops and soldiers kneel while Jewish-corporate Antifa riot and beat and kill people. Conditions in the streets have been set by Jewish influence on police policy, favoring Antifa and criminals and brutalizing normal people.

The Constitution’s only purpose today is to support and justify Jewish rule.

This cannot be undone by going back to the values of 1776. The emphasis on individual rights and freedoms has led to the domination of money and greed. It has ripped our people away from their inborn sense of community and responsibility to others. It has crippled us in our fight to regain our own freedom. It has degraded our moral sense.

Americans’ attachment to this long-dead Constitution is inexcusable. The fixation on money, greed and personal comfort has become outright satanic.

We need a new constitution that puts community first—racial community—and individual freedom second. That is the socialist way. And it should not be hard to convince people of that in this supposedly Christian country.

This Jewish-dominated political order of bribery and blackmail must be destroyed. There is no alternative.

Happy but not Satisfied

Judge Padrick’s dismissal is too little, too late. He should have taken responsibility and dismissed the charges months ago. The fact that this politically motivated charge ever got to trial is itself an outrage.

If Americans are ever going to free themselves, we have to learn from this. While we should be happy for Mr. Dix, we should not be satisfied. This outcome was not good enough. We demand more.

The fundamental problem in our country is not a lack of arguments, but a lack of moral conviction. Like political prosecutors, we all need to be uncompromising. No defensive remarks, no apologies, no concessions. Stake out the moral high-ground and force them to assail you there.

You need to internalize that. It isn’t your political opinions that are “racist” and “repugnant.” It’s the Jews’. They are by far the most powerful faction in American politics. They are therefore responsible for the deplorable condition of our people and our country. For all the murders and wars and fentanyl and money-scams and depression and hopelessness.

You didn’t do that. They did. And worst of all, by censorship, doxing and intimidation, they have avoided having to answer for their deeds.

Jacob Dix should be commended for having the guts to see this through to the end. Peter Frazier should also be commended as the first lawyer in Virginia to step up and do the right thing. And do it well. That took the kind of bravery that far too few people have shown. Getting the case dismissed was a small, but important victory.

The next trial is that of Augustus Invictus on October 8 through 11. If you are interested in helping him and the other Charlottesville defendants, you should donate to the Free Expression Foundation. You could mention that you would like your donation to prioritize filing subpoenas against Antifa and their UVA backers.

For anyone to be brought up on charges for standing against those powers is an outrage. The whole U.S.-Jewish power-elite is evil. Antifa is evil. Charlottesville is evil.

In a just country, Jacob Dix would not be on trial, but Edward Gorcenski, the UVA gang of pseudo-academics and liars, and the Albemarle County prosecutor’s office, most especially that corrupt sneak Jim Hingeley and his attack-dog, Lawton Tufts. And also their money-backers, billionaires Sonjia Smith and George Soros and Soros’ lapdog Tom Perriello.

And ultimately, that is our goal. Not to beat these monstrous prosecutions. But to put the prosecutors on trial.

Gregory Conte is an activist on behalf of the White Race and is the author of Sieg Heil: German for Beginners.

 

---

[1] Dix trial transcript pg 183, 11 to 21, emphasis added.

[2] Ibd. pg 149 line 20 to 152.

[3] Ibd. pg 148 line 1 to 6.

[4] Ibd. pg 152 7 to 8.

[5] see also Dix trial transcript pg 175 line 22 et seq.

[6] Dix trial transcript pg 180, line 19 et seq., emphasis added

[7] see here. 46:56 in podcast transcript, 53:00-53:20 in audio.

[8] Dix trial transcript pg 181 line 9-21, emphasis added

[9] Dix motion to dismiss hearing transcript, August 22, 2024, pg 2

[10] Dix trial transcript pg 24, 13-15, pg 25 line 8-11.

[11] On Jewish neoconservatives: see Kevin MacDonald, “Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement.”