Friedrich von Eisler:

"It is neither unfounded nor withdrawn. To begin with, it was not only Innsbruck, but also Vienna. If permission had been given beforehand for both, the Reichmarschall would not have asked for permission after doing it, saying he'd abort it if he didn't get it. Then when challenged about it, he would not have given the answer that "times of crisis demands action". He would have said "I had already received permission", and it wouldn't have taken this long for me to hear about it first. This is why I have my doubts about von Essen's claims as well.

Even if you had, and you could prove it, and you could convince me that you're all so dimwitted that such an important point could just slip your mind for so long, it is absolutely clear from Herden's behaviour that, at the time, he did not believe that he had received permission to do it, but went ahead and did it anyway. So when he admitted that he feels completely justified in granting himself a special right to break the law, any law, whenever he wants, he wasn't lying. He's a criminal. Brandenburg-Bohemia doesn't associate with criminals. Brandenburg-Bohemia doesn't fund criminals. We have what you in the Osterreich seem to know only from distant stories: honour and principles."