Jump to content

Alaska Assistant Attorney General in "DezNat" Trouble


Recommended Posts

We have previously had a few discussions about DezNat:

September 2019: DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism?

December 2020: DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism? - Part 2

November 2020: Fair Mormon's new YouTube branding strategy

April 2020: Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 3

June 2021: Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 4

Here's another story:

Quote

Alaska assistant AG who heads civil rights cases is accused of running Mormon extremist Twitter account that calls for BLM protesters to be jailed, decries the Civil Rights Act and says a drag queen 'demon' should be 'burned to death'

  • Alaska Assistant Attorney General Matthias Cicotte was accused of running a racist social media account under the alter ego J. Rueben Clark
  • He used the account to 'share racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic messages'
  • Cicotte served as the chief corrections counsel for Alaska's attorney general and is said to have been the head on numerous civil rights cases 
  •  The Alaska Department of Law has initiated a probe into the allegations

Oi.

Quote

An Alaska assistant attorney general has allegedly been running a racist, Mormon extremist social media account under an alter ego, an investigation by The Guardian revealed.

According to the news outlet, Matthias Cicotte is a supporter of the 'Deseret nationalists' extremist group and has posted racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic messages on the Twitter account @JReubenCIark.

The real J. Reuben Clark, who died in 1961, was a leader in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a former ambassador to Mexico; he's reviled by some for holding allegedly racist and anti-Semitic views. 

Sadly, I feel that I saw this coming.  We as Latter-day Saints cannot take an unfiltered, laissez-faire, shoot-ready-aim approach to our communications.  The scriptures have all sorts of exhortations about being patient, longsuffering, etc., and also about controlling our words and our thoughts.  Alas, I don't think the DezNat guys have been thinking these things through.

Quote

Cicotte, meanwhile, serves as the chief corrections counsel for Alaska's attorney general and has reportedly been the head on numerous civil rights cases. 

It is not clear what specific cases he worked on.

He is accused of publishing since-deleted tweets arguing that some races are naturally more intelligent than others and one that disapproves of the influence of Jewish women and the alleged decline of white men.

He also said in previous tweets that all Black Lives Matter protesters should 'all be in prison or worse' and that 'people who perform or abet sex change operations on kids get the death penalty'.  

The Guardian says the @JReubenClark account was 'one of the earliest and most prominent accounts to promote Deseret nationalism on Twitter'.

As with pretty much everyone on the planet, this guy seems to have a variety of thoughts and opinions, some of which I think are worth considering, but a considerable number of them come across as patently or arguably problematic.

A sampling from the article:

45727695-9811121-image-a-17_162688899154

"Angry yentas didn't rule?"  What does that mean?  I took it as a reference to Yenta the matchmaker from Fiddler on the Roof.  But it also has a generic meaning of "a person, especially a woman, who is a busybody or gossip."

Is the article characterizing this Tweet as "anti-Semitic?"

45727667-9811121-image-a-13_162688890883

45727661-9811121-image-a-15_162688896970

45727715-9811121-image-a-3_1626892779469

45727681-9811121-image-a-18_162688923262

Thoughts?  

Quote

The newspaper allegedly identified Cicotte as the owner of the account through a series of photos of his home.

He also reportedly shared personal and biographical details, such as his the length of his marriage, identity of his criminal law professor, ownership of his minivan, and information about his weight loss journey, that helped the newspaper allegedly confirm his identity.    

Yeah.  If you are going to post risible and provocative stuff anonymously online, be prepared to have your privacy invaded.  I don't approve of doxxing, but plenty of others do.

Better to either A) moderate your words, B) post under your IRL name, or C) A and B.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

45727695-9811121-image-a-17_162688899154

Wow.  J Reuben Clark isn't just some DezNat guy.  He's like the Kingpin of DezNat.  

My friend who has been radicalized and posts with the Deznat hashtag retweets him nearly every day.  And I've noticed that other Deznat participants engage with him quite often.

Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Given he is a public servant and his opinions on races, etc are relevant in cases he handles, I think he should be fired or put where he can do no harm. If he can’t control his bias enough not to let it out where he thinks he can get away with it anonymously, then he likely cannot control it enough to prevent it from influencing his work, imo. 

I agree with this.  I'd be surprised if he doesn't resign.  And I certainly can't imagine he would win reelection with this nastiness on his record.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

We have previously had a few discussions about DezNat:

September 2019: DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism?

December 2020: DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism? - Part 2

November 2020: Fair Mormon's new YouTube branding strategy

April 2020: Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 3

June 2021: Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 4

Here's another story:

Oi.

Sadly, I feel that I saw this coming.  We as Latter-day Saints cannot take an unfiltered, laissez-faire, shoot-ready-aim approach to our communications.  The scriptures have all sorts of exhortations about being patient, longsuffering, etc., and also about controlling our words and our thoughts.  Alas, I don't think the DezNat guys have been thinking these things through.

As with pretty much everyone on the planet, this guy seems to have a variety of thoughts and opinions, some of which I think are worth considering, but a considerable number of them come across as patently or arguably problematic.

A sampling from the article:

45727695-9811121-image-a-17_162688899154

"Angry yentas didn't rule?"  What does that mean?  I took it as a reference to Yenta the matchmaker from Fiddler on the Roof.  But it also has a generic meaning of "a person, especially a woman, who is a busybody or gossip."

Is the article characterizing this Tweet as "anti-Semitic?"

45727667-9811121-image-a-13_162688890883

45727661-9811121-image-a-15_162688896970

45727715-9811121-image-a-3_1626892779469

45727681-9811121-image-a-18_162688923262

Thoughts?  

Yeah.  If you are going to post risible and provocative stuff anonymously online, be prepared to have your privacy invaded.  I don't approve of doxxing, but plenty of others do.

Better to either A) moderate your words, B) post under your IRL name, or C) A and B.

Thanks,

-Smac

Good grief. I am frequently amazed at the utter lack of circumspection of many of our political leaders. It leaves me scratching my head that he would think he could get away with this kind of social media tripe and still be viewed in good standing in the community. Where is his head? And this says nothing of the awful, sophomoric, and judgmental statements made. Oh the webs we weave! He'll be outta' there in 5,4,3,2... ; (

Link to comment

From this Guardian article:

Quote

Online, Cicotte, under the moniker J Reuben Clark and the Twitter handle @JReubenCIark, has expressed extreme positions on race, criminal justice and religion.

Since-deleted tweets archived by anti-fascists reveal that he advocated various extreme positions including the summary imprisonment of Black Lives Matter protesters; vigilante violence against leftwing groups; and a punishment of execution for acts including performing gender reassignment surgery.

The JReubenCIark account was also one of the earliest and most prominent accounts to promote Deseret nationalism on Twitter using hashtags like #DeseretNationalism and #DezNat.

Deseret nationalists or DezNats are a loose association of rightwing Mormons. Previously they have been noted for harassing perceived enemies online, such as progressive Mormons, LGBTQ Mormons, former Mormons and political progressives.

Some who identify with the movement wish to recreate Deseret, the region which is now much of the interior of the western United States, which Mormons sought to have admitted to the union, and effectively ruled between 1862 and 1870.

Some DezNats advocate the creation of a theocratic secessionist Mormon state, and some have proposed that this be a white ethnostate, a desire which is reminiscent of the proposals of some white nationalists for a white ethnostate in the Pacific north-west.

From the link in the last paragraph (an archived 2017 article published by the "Deseret Nationalist Association") :

Quote

Mormonism in Utah is dying, and the driving force of this is Utah’s growing non-white population. The vast majority of immigrants coming into Utah aren’t Mormon, and are diluting our implicitly white, Mormon culture.
...
White Utahns who enjoy Utah’s more conservative, Mormon culture will have to embrace ethno-nationalism if they want it to survive. If we don’t fight to defend our White majority here in Utah we will lose the Mormon identity that has been the defining characteristic of this state for generations.

Yeesh.  Didn't these guys serve missions?  In my immediate family (parents, siblings, siblings-in-law) we have served in Argentina, Samoa, Texas (Spanish-speaking), Brasil, the Philippines, Taiwan, Alaska, Florida, Venezuela, Vanuato, Navajo Reservation, Romania, Missouri, Zimbabwe, and a few more.  My dad served as a branch president for a Spanish-speaking branch in Orem.  My brother is bishop of a Polynesian ward.  My stake has a Spanish ward and a Japanese ward.  We have tens of thousands of missionaries throughout the world.  There are more Latter-day Saints outside the U.S. than in it.  

White nationalism, as with any other form of racism, is not compatible with either the doctrines or the culture of the Church:

Quote

Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.

I hope we can get past this stuff.

Quote

The account regularly advocated vigilante action against political opponents.

In June 2017, JReubenCIark concluded a thread on how best to respond to the left’s characterizations of conservatives with the remark: “If brute violence is the only way to be free of them, what do they expect us to do?”

This does indeed sound like a justification for politically-motivated violence.  Very disturbing to see this coming from A) a member of the Church, B) a lawyer, C) an assistant state attorney general.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment

Given his ranking as well as the apparent popularity of DezNat among a segment of church members, I hope we get a public statement that has…not teeth…but weight, consequences are discussed in as at least spiritual, if not membership issues (not suggesting discipline if no actions have been taken). This level of prejudice such comments willlikely be dismissed as PC by offenders, but for those getting attracted to it, it may warn them off.

Is it for sure him?  Haven’t read your links…and should…but does it discuss how he was discovered?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Given his ranking as well as the apparent popularity of DezNat among a segment of church members, I hope we get a public statement that has…not teeth…but weight, consequences are discussed in as at least spiritual, if not membership issues (not suggesting discipline if no actions have been taken). This level of prejudice such comments willlikely be dismissed as PC by offenders, but for those getting attracted to it, it may warn them off.

Is it for sure him?  Haven’t read your links…and should…but does it discuss how he was discovered?

Sure looks like it's him.  From the Guardian article:

Quote

Matthias Cicotte, whose job means he works as the chief corrections counsel for Alaska’s attorney general, has acted for the department of law in a number of civil rights cases.

But evidence from his Twitter output allowed Cicotte to be identified by anti-fascist researchers, whose evidence was confirmed and augmented by a Guardian investigation.
...
The account is pseudonymous, but it left a trail of evidence regarding Cicotte’s identity which were archived by antifascist activists.

The moniker not only references a prominent 20th-century Mormon leader and attorney, but is the name of Brigham Young University’s law school, from which Cicotte graduated in 2008.

The account revealed a number of biographical details that match Cicotte’s, from the length of his marriage, to the identity of his criminal law professor, to his frequent moves, to the dates of his various stints in higher education, to his ownership of a Minivan, to the date of his house purchase.

There are other clues based on the course of his life or contemporaneous events. In August 2020, the account’s owner remarked that he had been overweight but lost a significant amount of weight, which matches a long chronological sequence of photographs obtained from his wife’s Facebook page.

The most compelling evidence comes from photographs posted by the account, presenting them as depictions of the interior of the owner’s house. One reveals a distinctive patterning on the brickwork, and another a similarly distinctive pattern on wood paneling in a kitchen.

The first matches a fireplace pictured in two photographs of Cicotte’s house posted to the realtor.com website; the second matches several pictures of Cicotte’s kitchen on the same site. The pictures of the kitchen also reveal a matching layout and countertops to the image posted to Twitter.

In a telephone conversation that took place after he had viewed the photographs posted to Twitter, Ellsworth Warner, who lived in the house until 2014 when it was sold to Cicotte, said, “Yep, it is the same house,” and identified the cabinets as having been installed by his mother, Renee Warner.

Another description of the disposition of his house on Twitter also matches satellite images.

Online anonymity is getting harder and harder to maintain.  And perhaps good riddance to it.

Thanks,

-Smac

Link to comment

This goes way beyond problematic. I approve of doxxing in this instance and many others.

58 minutes ago, smac97 said:

As with pretty much everyone on the planet, this guy seems to have a variety of thoughts and opinions, some of which I think are worth considering, but a considerable number of them come across as patently or arguably problematic.

“Which of those thoughts do you think are worth considering?” I ask in abject horror.

Edited by The Nehor
Link to comment
1 hour ago, smac97 said:

We have previously had a few discussions about DezNat:

September 2019: DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism?

December 2020: DezNat (Deseret Nation) = White Nationalism? - Part 2

November 2020: Fair Mormon's new YouTube branding strategy

April 2020: Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 3

June 2021: Deznat (deseret nation) = White nationalism? - Part 4

Here's another story:

Oi.

Sadly, I feel that I saw this coming.  We as Latter-day Saints cannot take an unfiltered, laissez-faire, shoot-ready-aim approach to our communications.  The scriptures have all sorts of exhortations about being patient, longsuffering, etc., and also about controlling our words and our thoughts.  Alas, I don't think the DezNat guys have been thinking these things through.

As with pretty much everyone on the planet, this guy seems to have a variety of thoughts and opinions, some of which I think are worth considering, but a considerable number of them come across as patently or arguably problematic.

A sampling from the article:

45727695-9811121-image-a-17_162688899154

"Angry yentas didn't rule?"  What does that mean?  I took it as a reference to Yenta the matchmaker from Fiddler on the Roof.  But it also has a generic meaning of "a person, especially a woman, who is a busybody or gossip."

Is the article characterizing this Tweet as "anti-Semitic?"

45727667-9811121-image-a-13_162688890883

45727661-9811121-image-a-15_162688896970

45727715-9811121-image-a-3_1626892779469

45727681-9811121-image-a-18_162688923262

Thoughts?  

Yeah.  If you are going to post risible and provocative stuff anonymously online, be prepared to have your privacy invaded.  I don't approve of doxxing, but plenty of others do.

Better to either A) moderate your words, B) post under your IRL name, or C) A and B.

Thanks,

-Smac

I wonder how he got caught.  Considering how native heavy Alaska is I'm surprised.  I do hear from childhood friends politics have changed up there a bit, the Alaska militia started to have an "atomwaffen" flaver to it.  

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

From this Guardian article:

From the link in the last paragraph (an archived 2017 article published by the "Deseret Nationalist Association") :

Yeesh.  Didn't these guys serve missions?  In my immediate family (parents, siblings, siblings-in-law) we have served in Argentina, Samoa, Texas (Spanish-speaking), Brasil, the Philippines, Taiwan, Alaska, Florida, Venezuela, Vanuato, Navajo Reservation, Romania, Missouri, Zimbabwe, and a few more.  My dad served as a branch president for a Spanish-speaking branch in Orem.  My brother is bishop of a Polynesian ward.  My stake has a Spanish ward and a Japanese ward.  We have tens of thousands of missionaries throughout the world.  There are more Latter-day Saints outside the U.S. than in it.  

White nationalism, as with any other form of racism, is not compatible with either the doctrines or the culture of the Church:

I hope we can get past this stuff.

This does indeed sound like a justification for politically-motivated violence.  Very disturbing to see this coming from A) a member of the Church, B) a lawyer, C) an assistant state attorney general.

Thanks,

-Smac

You're alright Smac.

51 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Sure looks like it's him.  From the Guardian article:

Online anonymity is getting harder and harder to maintain.  And perhaps good riddance to it.

Thanks,

-Smac

>Online anonymity is getting harder and harder to maintain.

Depends.  My trail goes somewhat cold around 2018, I deactivated my social media and with the job change just ghosted.  Depending on who you are I find it's quite easy to be difficult to pin down.  Then again, I have my own tricks in addition to living a fairly quiet life.  Think one of my part time callings is treehugger, not exactly a scary thing.  Also woodland critter friend.  

Link to comment
Just now, Ipod Touch said:

So can Dr. Scratch re-post your encyclopedia entry?  :)

Calling Scratch “Uncle Creepy” for his weird obsession with all Mormon’s self-pleasuring habits and mocking and caricatured his absurdity is not really a dox-worthy offense. I guess he literally can post it but I am not giving permission if such is needed for some strange reason. He wasn’t the first to figure out who I am nor is he likely to be the last. I even have a few friends in real life who first met me after figuring out who I am. Presumably that will drive Scratch mad with envy what with his endless bewilderment about DCP and others having actual friends. I have dropped a lot of hints over the years. I am not even sure he knows who I am though. If I remember right he was teasing me with two different identities at one point and had actually found an online handle I use on another site but haven’t done much with in years and seemed to experience an absurd amount of glee as if he had potent blackmail material. Whatever makes that pathetic little sadsack happy I guess.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

This goes way beyond problematic. I approve of doxxing in this instance and many others.

“Which of those thoughts do you think are worth considering?” I ask in abject horror.

Maybe he's in favor of freeways.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

This goes way beyond problematic. I approve of doxxing in this instance and many others.

“Which of those thoughts do you think are worth considering?” I ask in abject horror.

Does your abject horror include objecting to ideas like forbidding sex reassignment surgery for children?

Obviously advocating for the death penalty in such cases is nuts. But I'm pretty sure the availability of sex reassignment surgery should be restricted to actual adults making the decision on their own initiative and for themselves alone. Although in case of conditions where a child's sex is ambiguous, early intervention might be appropriate, after competent medical and psychological advice.

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Does your abject horror include objecting to ideas like forbidding sex reassignment surgery for children?

Obviously advocating for the death penalty in such cases is nuts. But I'm pretty sure the availability of sex reassignment surgery should be restricted to actual adults making the decision on their own initiative and for themselves alone. Although in case of conditions where a child's sex is ambiguous, early intervention might be appropriate, after competent medical and psychological advice.

Not that view in the abstract unconnected to this repellant fascist. When you connect said repellant fascist I don’t want to look into those views based on his advocacy.

No, my abject horror is more that no one should be considering any of this person’s ideas. It is like that person who recently talked about Hitler saying that the children are the future. While that might be a worthy sentiment you shouldn’t go to Hitler for quotes or support on that. There are much better sources with similar sentiments from much less tainted sources. You also shouldn’t go with racist pieces of human garbage like this person for your views on anything. If they happen to be correct about anything it is coincidence but an advocate for those ideas shouldn’t garner any support from this person or accept or want their advocacy. For the same reason very few vegetarians talk up Hitler being a vegetarian. It is true and vegetarianism might have some benefits but if you turn to Hitler for support it suggests you have a lot of other REALLY abhorrent views. When smac reads this guy’s screeds and says some of his views may be worthy of consideration it makes me suspect the worst of what other abhorrent views smac might have.

”He is a horrible racist sexist fascist but he did say…..” is a bad way to begin a conversation on anything.

Link to comment
23 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Not that view in the abstract unconnected to this repellant fascist. When you connect said repellant fascist I don’t want to look into those views based on his advocacy.

No, my abject horror is more that no one should be considering any of this person’s ideas. It is like that person who recently talked about Hitler saying that the children are the future. While that might be a worthy sentiment you shouldn’t go to Hitler for quotes or support on that. There are much better sources with similar sentiments from much less tainted sources. You also shouldn’t go with racist pieces of human garbage like this person for your views on anything. If they happen to be correct about anything it is coincidence but an advocate for those ideas shouldn’t garner any support from this person or accept or want their advocacy. For the same reason very few vegetarians talk up Hitler being a vegetarian. It is true and vegetarianism might have some benefits but if you turn to Hitler for support it suggests you have a lot of other REALLY abhorrent views. When smac reads this guy’s screeds and says some of his views may be worthy of consideration it makes me suspect the worst of what other abhorrent views smac might have.

”He is a horrible racist sexist fascist but he did say…..” is a bad way to begin a conversation on anything.

I always find it interesting when people talk about how Hitler was a vegetarian, didn't drink etc.  Not only was all that propaganda, he was a total druggie as was a lot of Germany at the time.  Some people will praise anyone so long as that persons life and ideas fit their own self narrative.  

Link to comment
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Not that view in the abstract unconnected to this repellant fascist. When you connect said repellant fascist I don’t want to look into those views based on his advocacy.

No, my abject horror is more that no one should be considering any of this person’s ideas. It is like that person who recently talked about Hitler saying that the children are the future. While that might be a worthy sentiment you shouldn’t go to Hitler for quotes or support on that. There are much better sources with similar sentiments from much less tainted sources. You also shouldn’t go with racist pieces of human garbage like this person for your views on anything. If they happen to be correct about anything it is coincidence but an advocate for those ideas shouldn’t garner any support from this person or accept or want their advocacy. For the same reason very few vegetarians talk up Hitler being a vegetarian. It is true and vegetarianism might have some benefits but if you turn to Hitler for support it suggests you have a lot of other REALLY abhorrent views. When smac reads this guy’s screeds and says some of his views may be worthy of consideration it makes me suspect the worst of what other abhorrent views smac might have.

”He is a horrible racist sexist fascist but he did say…..” is a bad way to begin a conversation on anything.

Yes, you make good solid points with this. But I don't think that smac shares any of this ****'s abhorrent views. Or were you trying to pull a "reductio ad Hitlerum" on him? That was the direction I was going with respect to freeways -- Hitler's government built Autobahns/freeways, but liking Autobahns/freeways does not equate to being a Hitlerite. Any more than Trump liking oatmeal for breakfast makes Quaker Oats tantamount to manufacturing Zyklon B.

So, of course you shouldn't go to this jerk for support on anti-sex-reassignment-surgery-for-children. 

 

Edited by Stargazer
Link to comment
25 minutes ago, poptart said:

I always find it interesting when people talk about how Hitler was a vegetarian, didn't drink etc.  Not only was all that propaganda, he was a total druggie as was a lot of Germany at the time.  Some people will praise anyone so long as that persons life and ideas fit their own self narrative.  

It is a fact that Hitler was a vegetarian, at least during the last 8 years of his life. And he also didn't drink or smoke. All the evidence supports this. Why is that just propaganda? 

And what does this have to do with taking drugs? Does taking drugs disqualify one from being a true vegetarian? Plenty of hippies would disagree. I don't think that Hitler was a druggie -- he had health problems, and he did took his doctor told him to take. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, smac97 said:

We as Latter-day Saints cannot take an unfiltered, laissez-faire, shoot-ready-aim approach to our communications.  The scriptures have all sorts of exhortations about being patient, longsuffering, etc., and also about controlling our words and our thoughts.  Alas, I don't think the DezNat guys have been thinking these things through.

This is more than that. Carelessly letting out a dislike for someone’s appearance or personality is very different from referencing white supremacists’ positions and advocating to kill people. 

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, ttribe said:

I just have to interject something here - I believe the word you were looking for is "twit."  The word "****" is considered a rather vulgar reference to a woman's genitalia.

Yeah, thanks for the unnecessary interjection. You may be right, but if you're in England, the word "fanny" refers to the same thing, so don't say someone is just sitting on their fanny there. And my usage of that word is similar to how other words referring vulgarly to male genitalia are used, like calling someone a "richard". The board software likes to substitute "****" for that one. But is perfectly happy with the one I used.

He's not a mere "twit". Which means "bird brained; of low intelligence" and doesn't apply at all. I'm trying to be vulgar with respect to this guy. I'm trying to be offensive towards him.  Without going too far over the top.

I want to punch his face. But words will have to do.

OK, let me edit it out, since I'm not trying to offend everyone.

Edited by Stargazer
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...