Editor’s note: Soon after this article was filed, the Washington Post reported the White House would put the Department of Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board “on pause” and that the board’s executive director, Nina Jankowicz, had tendered her resignation Wednesday morning. Although the Post story portrays Jankowicz as the victim of a coordinated attack from the Right, there was plenty about her that the public needed to know, which the press seemed reluctant to investigate, much less share. Here is an example:
A woman who dresses like Moaning Myrtle is a fangirl, while the author of How to Be a Woman Online is a Muggle who may not know the difference between fantasy and fact. Such is the case of Nina Jankowicz, executive director of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Disinformation Governance Board.
The case against Jankowicz begins with missives by a missus of the same last name, who hails from the same town—Nina Jankowicz’s hometown—in Hillsborough, New Jersey. The case is also an indictment of a New Jersey politician whose name is a source of disinformation and the source of Jankowicz’s apprenticeship as a trafficker of disinformation. Such is the case against Woodrow Wilson, namesake of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Start with the case of Eve Jankowicz of central New Jersey, with whom I spoke earlier this month.
Regarding Eve Jankowicz of Hillsborough, New Jersey, whose letter in the Washington Post denies the Polishness of Poland’s Jews and denounces Jewish anti-Polonism as the worst type of racism, bigotry, and hatred, about this letter and a subsequent one in the Wall Street Journal by Eve Jankowicz of Skillman, New Jersey, the latter emphasizing the victims of an unknown holocaust, i.e., Polish survivors of Soviet persecution, the response was noncommittal.
Regarding whether she is the mother of Nina Jankowicz, the response was “no comment.”
Now, either Jankowicz is the non-Anglicized Jones with which every Polish American in Somerset County, New Jersey, tries to keep up, and the Eve Jankowicz I spoke to is not the Eve Jankowicz whose letters I read. Or maybe the Eve Jankowicz who attended a May 27, 2016, rally for Hillary Clinton in Edison, New Jersey, is also the Eve Jankowicz whose profile picture on Pinterest features a two-toned Donald Trump missing the top half of his head.
Maybe the words at the bottom of the picture have nothing to do with all the words by Eve about Jews and revisionist history, for the words say, “The only thing standing between Donald Trump and the White House is us.”
Maybe someone should ask Nina Jankowicz if she agrees with Eve Jankowicz, and if so, why, because calling an event contemporaneous with the Holocaust a holocaust and counting the living—non-Jewish Poles—as victims is an act of disinformation.
The distinction is important because the year in question, the year Eve Jankowicz cites as a holocaust for more than 200,000 Polish citizens, inasmuch as deliverance from slavery to freedom is a crime, coincides with the onslaught of the “Final Solution to the Jewish question.” Thus does 1942 read like a judenfrei version of Nineteen Eighty-Four, with Polish victims free in Iran and Poland free of Jewish citizens.
Does Miss Jankowicz agree with Mrs. Jankowicz’s version of history?
Does the former disinformation fellow at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars agree with the woman who says, “The vast majority of Polish Jews before or during the war did not speak Polish and did not consider themselves to be Poles by any stretch of the imagination”?
Are we to believe that 3.5 million Jewish men, women, and children were a blight unto the Polish nation, that the innocents of the blood libel were innocent of nothing, that all the Jews, without distinction, were guilty of the Crucifixion, that His blood was on them and their children?
Must we suspend disbelief and condemn every Jewish man of letters, too, from Chaim Löw to Stanisław Lem?
Must we also remember to forget the foster-father of a chiefless land, ignoring Woodrow Wilson’s connection to Poland and his disconnect with the American people?
Must we overlook Wilson’s inability to do for himself that which he insisted all peoples have a right to determine for themselves?
Does Miss Jankowicz believe that a presidency dependent on disinformation, with a dependent as president, makes the world safe for democracy?
Does she believe that the first lady is first in the presidential line of succession, free to doctor to and divine the wishes of a half-blind, hemiplegic figurehead?
Why must we witness or permit the fast undoing of our rights by Nina Jankowicz?