The University claims it’s been nothing but cooperative with the Berkeley Patriot, and that the Patriot lost Wheeler and Zellerbach Halls due to not following the rules.

But that’s a falsehood.

Here are the actual email exchanges so you can read them for yourself and see the truth of the University’s stonewalling and bureaucratic brinksmanship. The emails are presented in chronological order. Identifying information of students and non-public personnel has been redacted out of respect for their privacy, and we’ve annotated some key points.

Join us at Free Speech Week and help us #DefundBerkeley.

 

  • Rusty Esq

    The correspondence was not far off what I expected. Interim (warning, interim) Vice Chancellor responded asking for the contract to be signed. The details of the force majeure weren’t clear in these shots. The Vice Chancellor looked like he was side stepping it (accountability/risk I’d hazard probably, as he’d likely foot the bill if things went pear shaped).
    Deadlines weren’t met. It wasn’t clear if they were communicated (most probably not), but, as someone who has been impacted constantly by late submissions, it increases risk and anxiety, greatly. If the interim Vice Chancellor didn’t communicate that, you’ve got the higher ground.
    The insurance company also knocked you back. That’s basically a showstopper right there. I’m not sure what you expected. Again, the interim vice chancellor should have advised of risks and timeframes with insurance. Could there have been contingency for alternate insurance? As it was recommended with 1,5h to go, I think yes. However, like most of this, I can only offer my experience on similar negotiations.
    This event was known about a month ago right? And paperwork was being submitted about a week before? Did I get that right?
    I love what Milo’s doing. I am extremely grateful for this defence of free speech. However, I don’t see a smoking gun. I see you dealing with an average joe of average competence who is going through the motions. As somebody who has fulfilled that role professionally, I still say there’s no smoking gun. Pissed off people on both sides? Yes. Inconsistent implementation of rules that was hamstrung by a 3rd party? Yes. Poor advice on deadlines and tardy negotiation? Yes. It smells of inexperience. Been there, done that myself.

    I love your work Milo, but, this is not as clear cut as you think it is. If you want to learn from
    this, you need to recognise your errors as well as the universities. The insurance company has you by the balls, sorry.

    • Jesse James

      Nope. It is never clear cut, especially because they are in California. The Communist Common-other-people’s-wealth of California. Or CCC for short. Even if it was completely clear cut, a California judge would never side with them, and likely grant excessive legal fees to Berkeley.

      This was obviously intentional. That said, a California judge will just laugh it off. These idiots are talking about seceding from the union.

      • (((NunuyaBizinizz)))

        The california judges can do what they want, but the further this goes up the chain the harder the hammer will come down on all involved once a proper ruling comes down, and Gorsuch on the supreme court guarantees it WILL eventually come down.. hard.

        • Jesse James

          Wellll, you forget that Cali falls under the 9th circuit court of appeals. Their most “Conservative” judge is a libertarian who leans Democrat. LOL They will find some way to keep the case in limbo, and ensure that the SC will not take the case due to some “higher legal calling” like not overtaking state’s rights. Wouldn’t that be like the Democrats to fight for “state’s rights” when it comes to them seceding from the Union for not getting what they want. LOL

          • @Menace

            This could have the same impact as refusing to bake a cake, so don’t be too quick to discount it.

          • GTKRWN

            Muslims also refuse to bake cakes for a faggot’s wedding. Liberals coincidentally have done nothing to stop these muslim bakeries, have not sued a single one out of existence, or even said a single unkind word about them. Coincidentally.

            It’s almost as if liberal activists judges aren’t actually defending the rights of anyone they pander to endlessly for votes, but are just pushing anything to help their own agendas…

    • Rob Patriot

      The force majure part of the contract would’ve ensured that the $65,700+ would’ve been refundable if the leftist brainwashing center (not calling it a school) cancelled the talks, not the police or the speakers or the club or Milo’s company, but just the leftist brainwashing center.

      They wanted the 65 grand back, because these things get cancelled by the venue all the time, and then you’re out the money.

  • Jordon Hayward

    If this was a leftist event they would bend over backwards to accommodate. They are just trying to make it hard through bureaucracy. They obviously did things they knew would negatively impact the ability of the students to pull off the event.

  • Drake kron

    Bureaucracy is the left’s most consistently used tool.

  • Dante Alighieri ????

    I’ve never read so many written words whose sole purpose is to keep someone else from speaking. (But I’m sure the irony is lost on them.)
    They are drowning in their own quicksand.

  • Hairatic Rick

    This will not go well for UCB. A real judge will destroy them. Does Cal have any real judges? Lets see what happens before going to war with those psyadelic pussies.

  • Hairatic Rick

    Gas up the helicopters! free ocean view helicopter rides for the Alt-left. ????⁉

  • Patti York

    They want EXACT details of times and dates and travel arrangements of EACH speaker? Leads me to think that they want ALL that info for nefarious reasons.

    • GTKRWN

      We want to know their flight number, when it lands, and the hotel they’ll be staying in.
      It’s all just a coincidence, you stupid goyim.

  • wile_e_coyote1

    42 U.S.C. 1983: Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
    (R.S. § 1979; Pub. L. 96–170, § 1, Dec. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 1284; Pub. L. 104–317, title III, § 309(c), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat.

  • (((NunuyaBizinizz)))

    Milo: Please sue for punitive damages for violation of civil rights.
    Only when they face 7 or 8 figures in damages will they can the right people.

  • Steve O

    It would be interesting to review the email correspondence relevant to liberal speakers.

  • Cecil_Harvey

    Time for Milo to launch that campaign he talked about, to have UC Berkeley’s Federal Funding pulled!