A.M. Links: Stormy Daniels' Lawyer Says More Women May File Suit Against Trump, Conor Lamb Wins Pennsylvania Special Election, Toys 'R' Us Closing All U.S. Stores


  • Todd Kranin

    Michael Avenatti, the lawyer representing Stormy Daniels, says that other woman are contemplating legal action against President Donald Trump.

  • "President Trump boasted in a fundraising speech Wednesday that he made up information in a meeting with the leader of a top U.S. ally, saying he insisted to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that the United States runs a trade deficit with its neighbor to the north without knowing whether that was the case."
  • Democrat Conor Lamb has been declared the winner of the Pennsylvania special election for the U.S. House.
  • Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says that his country will "certainly" expel British diplomats in retaliation for Britain's expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats in the wake of the nerve agent attack in Britain on a former Russian spy.
  • Toys 'R' Us announced that it will be shuttering or selling off all of its 735 U.S. stores.
  • Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg turns 85 years old today.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

NEXT: Jeff Sessions' Immigration Lies

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Toys ‘R’ Us announced that it will be shuttering or selling off all of its 735 U.S. stores.

    Kids, get your parents to the selloff quick!

    1. Although, I’m not sure how many kids are reading AM Links to take my advice now that I think about it.

      1. They’re too busy playing Roblox before school.

        1. Toys Wr Us.

      2. How many kids play with physical toys now?

    2. Hello.

      “But it says here Trump didn’t assault you? Is that correct?”
      “I don’t understand.”
      “See, he sexualized so many women, right? Okay. But he didn’t with me. I consider that a micro-aggression.”
      “Soooo, you wanted him to assault you?”
      “Yes. No. Stop putting words in my mouth. This mouth is for other things….”
      “I bet. No further questions.”

  2. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg turns 85 years old today.

    Doesn’t look a day over 110.

    1. I wonder who Trump will nominate to replace RBG this term?

      1. Shit my grandmother is 97 and still raising hell.

        1. Is she working what government bureaucrats consider full time?

          It would seem that RBG is going downhill as the media has begun to put out more RBG is doing great stories. RBG does this everyday and that. They never show her doing those things but rest assured, RBG is fit as a fiddle. You can always count on the media to get ahead of bad news for them.

      2. Weekend at Ruth’s seems a more likely scenario. The Dems aren’t letting her go.

        1. Haha. I will keep a look out for Hillary and Bill walking on either side of RBG.

  3. Democrat Conor Lamb has been declared the winner of the Pennsylvania special election for the U.S. House.

    Someone’s got a mandate!

    1. PA Secretary of State still shows unofficial results as of today.
      Lamb: 113,813
      Saccone: 113,186
      Miller: 1,379

      So no Lamb has not been declared the winner by anyone official.

  4. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says that his country will “certainly” expel British diplomats in retaliation for Britain’s expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats in the wake of the nerve agent attack in Britain on a former Russian spy.

    In Russia, relationship poison you.

  5. Kranin
    Michael Avenatti, the lawyer representing Stormy Daniels, says that other woman are contemplating legal action against President Donald Trump.

    That’s news?

    1. Fake news.

      Only Democrats like Bill Clinton and Weiner can have bimbo eruptions.


      1. Buttplug is gonna cry!

    2. This comment is getting to be the equivalent of typing “Who?” when there’s a story about some famous person.

      1. $park? is gonna cry!

  6. “President Trump boasted in a fundraising speech Wednesday that he made up information in a meeting with the leader of a top U.S. ally, saying he insisted to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that the United States runs a trade deficit with its neighbor to the north without knowing whether that was the case.”

    “Sometimes, when there’s a space, i just say a line.”

  7. … saying he insisted to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that the United States runs a trade deficit with its neighbor to the north without knowing whether that was the case.

    That makes two of them.

    1. Trade deficit. One of my favorite oxymorons.

      1. It’s as if they believe little pieces of paper are worth more than tangible goods and services.

  8. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg turns 85 years old today.

    Silly Damon, lich queens don’t have birthdays.

  9. …other woman are contemplating legal action against President Donald Trump.

    Precedent says we don’t care if presidents rape.

  10. I don’t want to grow up, I’m a Toys R Us kid…

    1. Its (only recently shuttered) Times Square flagship was better than FAO Schwarz. Yeah, I said it. Step to me, fellow New Yorkers. I will welcome you to a world of pain.

  11. Hooray! Rejoice, fellow (justified) death enthusiasts! Looks like Oklahoma’s been reading its H&R comments. Who says we’re not making a real difference in the world by slacking off at work or sitting at home in our underwear?

    1. Hitler?

    2. The French?

    3. “slacking off at work or sitting at home in our underwear”

      For people who work from home, those two things are not mutually exclusive.

      1. Also for those of us with office doors that close.

        1. +1 Matt Lauer

        2. They’re still glass doors, X.

      2. That is me, actually. (At least primarily so.) I wanted to cover all bases.

        1. I sometimes wish I had a door to my home office, so I could keep the cats out. One of them takes over a third of my desk.

          1. Have you thought about a guard dog? You could probably write it off.

            1. Nope. Not a dog person.

              1. You just haven’t met the right dog. I say this as someone who was once a cat person and am now both.

          2. Put a large bowl at one end of your desk. The cat will curl up in the bowl instead of spreading out all over your work area. Boom, life hacked.

            1. I tried putting a nice cat bed at the end of the desk, but instead the damnimal decided to lay on my keyboard.

              1. Cats will not sleep in a cat bed. It is known. They see that you spent money on a thing for them, and they feel that you are trying too hard.

                1. They don’t want to lie on something they’re supposed to lie on. They want lie on something they’re not supposed to lie on. I second the bowl idea. Just shoo him away from it the first few times he tries to go near it. It will instantly be irresistible.

            2. The bowl option is a decent one. If that doesn’t work though, put a clean folded pair of pants where you want it to lay. If you’re not wearing them anyway…

              1. If that doesn’t work though, put a clean folded pair of pants where you want it to lay.

                That would work for the other cat. That one lays on any piece of clothing it can find. The other one not so much. This cat is just weird. It’s deaf, has no tail, yowls for attention, responds to sign language, and has terrible gas. Yes, a cat with gas. First for me.

                1. If the bowl doesn’t work, try a cardboard box. No cat can resist a cardboard box.

    4. Too easy. Needs more European mystery and red tape.

      1. Europe working on banning the export of nitrogen.

      2. Ugh, fine. I understand Oklahoma is sending its sexiest half-Cherokee cowgirl incognito to Paris, to depose Macron’s official palace mistress and seduce the EU’s secret Cold War era nitrogen technology out of him. And only the diabolical Queen Rania of Jordan can stop her!

    5. Oklahoma has not carried out an execution in more than three years.

      Not very Oklahoman to not kill people in prison for that long of a stretch. And the first guy they want to punch a ticket for is Richard Glossip, and fuck that shit, that guy shouldn’t even be in jail.

      1. Wow, yeah, that guy got screwed.

        That right there is pretty much why I’m against the death penalty. I have no problem with the idea that some people deserve to die. But there are going to be mistakes and miscarriages of justice. Whatever moral correctness or good effect the death penalty may have, it’s not worth a single innocent death.

        1. Especially because there are so many malicious cops and prosecutors who are happy to watch an innocent person die.

        2. I am pro-death penalty but only after the criminal justice system in the USA gets a huge overhaul.

          There are just too many 100% innocent people being released each year based on DNA evidence or from corruption that was exposed.

    6. Incompetent Oklahoma state employees who cannot do things that are not half-assed?


    8. The Dude abides.

    9. They’re gonna use nitrogen gas to suffocate the guy to death? Ugh.

      If they’re gonna use gas, why not carbon monoxide?

      1. Too dangerous to bystanders / executioners.

        You’re probably being facetious.

      2. I asked this last time during the discussion. Turns out nitrogen is even better, way better in fact. Suffocation itself is not at all unpleasant; it’s the carbon dioxide buildup during the usual suffocation (plus the airway constriction, if applicable) that’s the agony. With nitrogen, you just drift off very quickly to sleep without even being the wiser. And, since nitrogen is itself just deoxygenated air, completely nontoxic, you don’t need any safety protocol for bystanders. You don’t even need a chamber, just a mask. Dirt, dirt cheap, and freely available, all of it, too.

      3. Carbon monoxide poisoning induces unpleasant symptoms including headache, vomiting and chest pain.

        Inert gas asphyxiation normally produces no symptoms.

        According to the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, in humans, “breathing an oxygen deficient atmosphere can have serious and immediate effects, including unconsciousness after only one or two breaths. The exposed person has no warning and cannot sense that the oxygen level is too low.

        1. I remember there was one CSI where a bullied kid poisoned his jock tormentor by putting dry ice in the floor vent while he was passed out drunk on the carpet. (Wouldn’t have to fill the room, since CO2 is heavier than air.) I’m surprised this inert gas asphyxiation shit has never been used for any TV whodunit plot!

    10. Death penalty is still bad. First, I’m sure they’ll find a way to screw up the application of nitrogen so that the inmate dies from an extremely painful embolism or something. “Oh, we weren’t supposed to inject it? Oops. Honest mistake, LOL.”

      Second, the incredibly inconsistent application of the death penalty within any given state makes it cruel and unusual outside of any physical pain it may cause.

      Third, we know we’ve executed innocent people before and we know we’ll do it again. It doesn’t make society any safer than a sentence of life in prison, so there’s no benefit at all to even “balance” out detriment of getting innocent blood on everyone’s hands.

      1. And life in an iron box doesn’t meet your definition of ‘cruel and unusual’?

        1. It may be cruel, but it is certainly not unusual as it’s been pretty standard practice for hundreds of years.

          And it is reversible. No, you can’t give those years back, but life is pretty precious to those who have it, even if it sucks.

        2. If you’ve got a roof over your head, standard medical care, three square meals, decent clothes and an assortment of recreation opportunities, no it’s not cruel. Certainly there is cruelty in prisons, due to corruption inevitably presenting itself when some people have complete control over other people, but I don’t think most prisoners are treated cruelly. And as Zeb said, if the person is alive, they at least have a chance at being exonerated and receiving compensation for time served. The fact that exonerations with significant compensation are rare is a whole other issue.

          But what alternative is there? There are certainly people in this world who are dangerous to others. We have to do something with them to protect ourselves. I’d rather lock them up comfortably than kill them comfortably.

  12. Trump fixation withers my soul.

  13. Trump says he made up trade claims in meeting with Trudeau


    1. A conversation between Trudeau and Trump is less intelligent and productive than one between two kindergartners.

      1. I’ll show you my trade deficit if you show me yours.

        1. Sexy! But rumors are Xi’s is tiny.

  14. Atlanta Fed’s U.S. first-quarter GDP growth view drops below 2 percent
    Reuters Staff

    NEW YORK (Reuters) – The U.S. economy is on track to expand at a 1.9 percent annualized rate in the first quarter, a slower rate than previously estimated, following February’s data on domestic retail sales and consumer prices, the Atlanta Federal Reserve’s GDPNow forecast model showed on Wednesday.

    I remember when the Trump retards like Mikey, Rufus, and Sevo were touting the Atlanta Fed 5% GDP forecast for this quarter.

    1. Yup. Trump is all positive above 2%, unlike Obama’s presidency during 2011-2017 which saw -1.5% GDP in 1Q2011.
      Real GDP growth 2011-2017

      1. Trump inherited a sound economy, you idiot.

        Obama inherited a financial crisis unlike any since the 30s.

        1. Wait, I thought the Great Recession ended in 2009? So Obama inherited a market correction but still sound economy.

          You lefties and your kindergartner’s concept of the economy.

          So, Reagan inherited Carter’s sound economy? So, Clinton inherited Bush’s sound economy? W Bush inherited Clinton’s sound economy. Obama inherited W Bush’s sound economy.

          Funny how lefties always have the sound economy and Republicans just inherit it. Lefties never articulate when presidents impact the economy to make it theirs.

    2. Labfor was up .3%, the laegest increase in years. I remember when the hilltards like buttplug said labfor decline was secular and entirely due to boomers retiring.

  15. If there was a Stormy Daniels and Trump sex tape, would you watch it?

    1. Well, I regret to say that I have seen Ron Jeremy in action.

      But the doughy fat of the Dotard slobbering all over Stormy? You’ve got to draw the line somewhere.

      1. Are you overlooking the fact that $ome women actually love men with “doughy” attributes?

        1. I didn’t mean the $130,000.

          Do people even use the term “dough” for money these days?

          1. Dough, bread, cheese, cheddar, cabbage, lettuce, bacon. You could make a whole sandwich with money.

            1. A side order of clams, please. I prefer hairy ones.

              1. You sure you got the simoleons for that?

      2. I am not one of those heterosexual enough to not give a rat’s ass how gross the dude is. My hat is off to those who are.

    2. Ivanka or Melania?

      (Or Ivana; I’m not averse to exploring new genres.)

      1. Ivanka all day.

    3. If I had an urge to puke until I was heaving bile, sure. Otherwise, probably not.

      1. Body wise, I would have thought that both Melania and Ivanka were right up your alley.

      2. I saw Ivanka in person once. She might be the thinnest person I have ever seen in my life. Her calves are the size of number two pencils. Ivanka is your kind of woman.

        1. Eww. I have extremely white tastes for a brown dude, but that is a bit too much. Still would tho.

          1. Despite the allegations to the contrary, I like thin women. But at some point, it goes too far. And it is too far with her. I didn’t meet her but was maybe five feet from her and she was dressed to the nines but I didn’t find her very attractive.

            Melina, on the other hand, seems to be smoking hot, though I have never seen her in person. She has that sexy Eastern European “Fuck with me and I will stab you as you sleep” ten thousand yard star that, if you like that kind of thing, is sexy as hell.

            1. Melania is a buttaface.

              And its not just because I hate Chairman Trump – Marla Maples was gorgeous.

              1. Melina is a former model and has a beautiful face. Go back to jerking off over Lena Dunham. We are not Progs, so we don’t have to pretend ugly women are attractive for the sake of the cause.

            2. Melania is a smokeshow. Wood, would.

            3. She has that sexy Eastern European “Fuck with me and I will stab you as you sleep” ten thousand yard star that, if you like that kind of thing, is sexy as hell.

              Reminds me of this smoking hot Albanian girl I met in Raleigh a while back. Great body, cute face, and that same stare.

      3. See my thought is if the tape exists than every journalist in America will be forced to watch it. Then they will show choice clips to all the population, probably with the tag:


        1. I think there is just as much chance of there being a Hillary Huma sex tape as there is of there being a Trump sex tape. In fact, I would say there is more of a chance. Trump was a public figure and was banging this broad for fun. He was certainly smart enough not to trust her and I can’t believe he would want to risk such a tape existing and being in the hands of some bimbo he was banging for fun. So I seriously doubt such a tape exists or if it does was made with Trump’s knowledge and permission.

          Huma and Hillary in contrast are close. And Hillary lives with the certainty that no major media outlet would ever allow such a thing to be published. So, that tape might exist.

          1. Hillary Huma sex tape


            1. It would be horrific but like a trainwreck or a snuff film, part of you would have the morbid desire to watch it.

          2. I don’t know. I doubt even Hillary would want to see a sex tape of Hillary.

    4. Sure, but I suspect there would be more sobbing then usual on my part.

  16. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-…..ng-walkout

    Nothing makes you want to give up your guns like a mob of angry retards tearing things up. These idiots staged a march for gun control and ended up providing a textbook example of why private gun ownership is essential to a free society.

    1. I would love to see some teachers take their students to an anti-abortion demonstration and I expect to see this same enthusiasm for teenage activism.

      1. Imagine a Christian high school staging a walkout and showing up at an abortion clinic and jumping on cars and tearing things up. I doubt the mayor of the town would be saying how proud he was of them or they would be getting much fawning coverage in the media. The media might actually tell the truth and call it a riot rather than a protest.

        1. The media would be wailing that we’re on the verge of becoming a Fascist* Christian Theocracy.

          *They call everything they don’t like “fascist”. They don’t know what the word means but chant it all the time anyway.

          1. The media calls everything the right does fascist. It is difficult to imagine what they would say if the right actually did do something fascist.

    2. The leaders are useful idiots for the Women’s March and everyone else is going along because protests are fun.

      It’s absurd that the media are taking any of this seriously.

      1. And if they want to take it seriously, then they should also take their behavior seriously.

      2. Protests combine two of young people’s favorite things: self-righteousness and a party.

        1. And vandalism. Running around tearing shit up has always been a favorite past time of young males.

          1. Is it woke or unwoke to excuse young transmales from this assessment?

            1. I guess having the desire to tear things up is part of identifying as a male.

      3. Only the Jews are useful idiots. Maybe everyone else just doesn’t give a fuck about them or something, I don’t know.

    3. They smashed a cop car. At least there was a bit of a good outcome.

      1. They’re going to get a new one, and it probably won’t be the kids paying for it.

    4. And scores of schoolchildren’s heads being exploded is a textbook reason for why guns should be banned.

      Such selective concern you have.

      1. Yeah Tony, because some nut in Florida shoots someone, some guy living five states away should have to give up his guns. I am sure that will help things a lot. At some point, how do you not realize how stupid you sound?

        1. We have to draw a line somewhere, as even you agree, even if you don’t realize it because your brain is too pickled by pedestrian rightwing propaganda to think clearly about this subject or any other. Should people be able to have as many grenades as they want? Very handy for self-defense.

          1. Yes Tony, you are a democrat. So you are all about disarming black people.

          2. ” Should people be able to have as many grenades as they want?”

            Yes. Fuck off now.

          3. Stupid Tony. Grenades are terrible for self-defense. Pretty handy for a well-regulated militia to have access to, however.

          4. “Should people be able to have as many grenades as they want?”

            Yes people should be able to have those and it a guaranteed right in the Constitution.

      2. Hey Tony, remember when the Socialist Nazis sent kids into the showers and gassed them?

        It not exploding kids heads into textbooks but the pictures were pretty sad. I seem to recall those families were disarmed by government too.

        Such selective concern you have.

        1. Problem is in this country it’s the rightwing would-be genociders who want all the guns.

          1. You mean like the bernie bro who tried to assassinate members of congress?

            1. Yes Steve Scalise, the only victim of gun violence of the Trump administration so far.

              1. It would have been more if not for armed people during a softball game.

              2. And don’t forget the bernie bro in seattle. The 5 cops assassinated in dallas. Still it’s a mere shadow of the 100MM deaths/century intrinsic to the philisophy.

                1. Don’t look to me to defend Bernie bros.

                  1. But that’s what you’re doing defending gun control.

                    1. For all I know the Bernies are against gun control. I dunno, they’re weirdos. And they were mostly Russian dupes anyway.

                    2. Bernies are the heart and soul of the progressive movement.

          2. When did the Republican party members or Libertarians in the USA commit genocide?

          3. rightwing would-be genociders

            All 50 of them.

      3. You’re not concerned when PP does it.

  17. Donald made up facts that gave him leverage during a negotiation with someone who didn’t know any better.

    Isn’t that a pretty typical tactic?

    1. Trudeau’s just a prettier, progressive version of Trump. Both idiots.

      1. Too many caveats to hold enough interest! Maybe Congressman John Lewis is just a blacker, stupider, progressive version of Rand Paul who has way more of a chin on him when shit gets real.

    2. You would believe those two idiots would negotiate without their trade experts around.

      Well, Chairman Trump would but not Trudeau.

      1. To be fair, Trudeau doesn’t really have anything to trade.

        Canada can have Canadians that undermine the US Constitution back. Jim Carrey, Michael Moore, etc.

        Sorry Rufus.

        1. They have water, timber, and Canadian Club. I can make the poutine myself.

          1. Crown Royal. I forgot about Crown.

            DAMN YOU CANADIANS and your delicious whiskey!

      2. Chairman Trump

        I do not understand the use of this term. Has Trump suddenly morphed into a dictator? The last I had heard is that his admin is busy repealing stifling regulation, which is the opposite of what communist dictators do.

    1. Owning enough rental properties to support yourself is a job. Owning a rental property is a pain in the ass.

    2. I don’t know what kind of mind tricks it takes to convince oneself that living like a poor person when you don’t have to is supposed to be “rewarding” but hey whatever floats your boat.

      1. I never understood that either. Yes, you should live responsibly and have some plans for the day you can’t or don’t want to work anymore. But, saving can become a fetish too. The fact is that when you get older you really don’t need as much money. You don’t have kids to raise, you are not as active or as interested in doing as many things. You enjoy money more when you are young or middle age and still have the health and energy to do what you want. Moreover, saving all that money and forgoing all of those things is great assuming you live long enough to enjoy it, which is no guarantee. Everyone has known someone who saved their whole life for that perfect retirement only to drop over dead before they could enjoy it.

        1. My friends and I found a frozen corpse. It turned out that the guy went to a bar on his last day of work, walked out of the bar, and was missing for six days until we found him in a vacant lot. On that day I determined that work and retirement were vastly overrated.

      2. Maybe they confuse the largely correct idea that living like a rich person won’t necessarily make you happy with the idea that living like a poor person will make you happy.

        1. Also, living simply and spending less money doesn’t equate to living like a poor person. The main problem with being poor (in a wealthy society at least) isn’t the relative lack of material goods, but the uncertainty about the future.
          If you can be happy living simply and can set things up so you don’t have to work so much, that sounds pretty sweet to me.

  18. Michael Avenatti, the lawyer representing Stormy Daniels, says that other woman are contemplating legal action against President Donald Trump.

    What legal action is warranted just because he got some action?

    1. She is suing to get out of the nondisclosure agreement. I guess they could all sue to try to do that. I am, however, unaware of the “if the other party becomes President this deal is invalid and you get to keep the money and still go public” language in such contracts.

      1. I thought it was funny that someone mentioned that Stormy would have give the money back and that was never mentioned. Then all of a sudden the media carried a story that Stormy would be willing to give the money back.

        Another thing the media is bull shitting about is that even mentioning that there was a NDA contract and who that was between is probably a breach of that contract. They are just counting on the other party not pushing back.

        The lefties and their useful idiots are so predictable these days.

      2. It’s called the libertarian clause. All the cool kids are doing it.

    2. Trump refuses to resign, hence the cause for legal action.

    3. I don’t know what Stormy is complaining about. At least she’s alive; if she had boinked somebody in the Kennedy clan she might not be able to say that. You know the Kennedy Family Creed: dick ’em and dunk ’em.

  19. Democrat Conor Lamb has been declared the winner of the Pennsylvania special election for the U.S. House.

    But the question is, do wolves Lambs care about the opinions of sheep?

    1. Tom Wolf cares.

    2. Well he has unless you actually READ the article.

  20. Toys ‘R’ Us announced that it will be shuttering or selling off all of its 735 U.S. stores.

    I take it now is the time to buy an assault Nerf gun.

    1. GDP 1Q2018 is about to way up on those Toys ‘R’ Us closing sales.

    2. Yes. Since Jeff Bezos effectively controls all commerce within the United States, you better get it now before Bezos decides no person needs to own an assault nerf gun.

      1. Well, Wal-Mart, which has not sold actual “assault weapons” in ages, has ostentatiously announced that they will henceforth not be selling toys that look “assault weapony.” This pretty much came out of left field, and I can’t imagine that it does anything whatsoever for their bottom line. (And it’s not like the company is run by Green Party of Alameda County board members.) So unless this is some sort of elaborate troll theater to satirize the superficial and cosmetic nature of the “assault weapon” distinction, what the fuck gives?

        1. I think Libertarians need to rethink their objections to antitrust law. Every day it looks like we are going to end up with a few companies controlling nearly all of the consumer commerce in this country. Just how much consumer spending doesn’t involve Amazon, WallMart, Google, or Facebook? The problem with that is not economic. Libertarians rightly argue that the economic harm and sustainability of cartels and monopolies is less than the anti-trust proponents claim. The problem is social and political. It seems that SJWs of the worst sort infiltrate every company. And with just a few large companies controlling so much and with those companies being infiltrated by fanatics, our freedom could become a dead letter. Say whatever you want, no one will hear you because the tech giants will make sure it gets censored from the net. And sure you have a right to own guns, but the cartels that control commerce will just make it impossible to buy ammunition for them.

          1. “Just how much consumer spending doesn’t involve Amazon, WallMart, Google, or Facebook?”

            Local commercial spending?

            1. Some of it. But how much of that depends on advertising via google and facebook? Moreover, a lot of local commerce depends on Amazon for their distribution. Amazon is in the wholesale business too. And Amazon is continuing the long-term decline of local businesses. You just can’t compete with the economies of scale that an Amazon or Wal-Mart bring. From an economic perspective, that is a good thing. It is more efficient and things get cheaper. But, I don’t think having a few companies control everything is very good from a social or liberty perspective.

              1. Your argument would have some validity if markets were static and google and facebook were always and will always be market leaders. They haven’t and they won’t.

                1. JCW,

                  You are just telling me why economicly monopolies are not a big deal. That, however, doesn’t answer my point. If those companies go away they will be replaced by new monopolies who can be just as oppressive. Moreover, there is such a thing as regulatory capture. Companies that are this large and powerful have such political power that they are likely going to use their political influence to ensure that markets are not dynamic and remain static.

                  Libertarians always seem to forget the concept of regulatory capture when talking about monopolies. Apparently, regulatory capture occurs except when it involves a monopoly because monopolies are just kind like that or something.

    3. “As I rained blows upon him I realized, there has to be another way!”

  21. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov says that his country will “certainly” expel British diplomats in retaliation for Britain’s expulsion of 23 Russian diplomats

    It’s like they don’t even have Skype.

  22. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg turns 85 years old today.

    Speaking of people who need to step down from their positions in government…

    1. I don’t know. Some journalist wrote a piece last year that he did RBG’s daily workout, “and it nearly broke” him.

      Then again, maybe it’s just because he has the average fitness of a journalist. Maybe he was broken five minutes after being told to put down the flask and cigarette.

      1. She could be in a coma and she wouldn’t retire as long as a Republican is President.

        1. This is interesting. The Constitution does not provide remedy for judges “being unable to discharge the powers and duties of their office,” to my knowledge; and the framers of the 25A for some reason did not address any office but the Presidency. Am I right about this? Has anyone written about it, and what might be done? I feel like it has to have come up plenty of times before. Not everyone can fade eloquently into stoned incoherence like Justice Rehnquist.

          1. There isn’t a remedy. The remedy such as it is would be for the Senate to impeach her and remove her from office, which would never happen. If Ginsberg went into a coma with a Republican President, she would remain on the court and the court would just decide cases with 8 justices until she died and was replaced or got better and returned to work.

            1. That’s what I thought. What an odd oversight for, again, the framers of both the original document and the 25th (passed in 1967, which is both late enough to know better and shockingly late given the Edith Wilson events). It would actually be inappropriate for Congress to impeach a judge for such reasons (though of course there is no branch to check such an inappropriate decision, only their own sense of propriety). RBG, at her age, is probably unlikely to remain comatose long. But look at how long Sharon lasted. And Gorsuch, for that matter, could fall into a coma, or become brain damaged (not that this has stopped Sotomayor); and he could last 40 years in that state, as many have. These things are hardly super rare. We’ve really dodged bullets so far.

      2. Or he was some toothpick hispter blogger. What a load.

        1. There is no way in hell any 85 year old person who is not freakishly in shape could have a work out that a healthy young adult could not easily do. What a load is right. The day I see the Notorious RBG out running the Marine Corps Marathon is the day I will believe this bullshit.

          1. That would explain why she sleeps through every Supreme Court session, though. She’s worn out!

      3. average fitness of a journalist

        If this guy is any indication. I can smell the soy from here.

  23. “President Trump boasted in a fundraising speech Wednesday that he made up information in a meeting with the leader of a top U.S. ally, saying he insisted to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

    I would say that is stupid to brag about in public, but this is Justin “Peoplekind” Trudeau we are talking about.

    1. That was probably the cleverest thing he ever said, to be honest. I understand that Canadians are already well contemptuous of him across the board–not that it says much of them as a people that they ever put this guy into power by a landslide–and that the only thing he has left is ladyboners from dumb American progs who are too provincial, despite how they might like to think of themselves, to realize their sentiment is not shared by the actual denizens of their ProgAmerica Utopia.

  24. Why aren’t we addressing the elephant in the room here? We want to know what the hell happened that Heaton and Kray-kray are both suddenly out the door. Somebody knows something, and the more you try to hide the truth the more the conspiracy rumors gain traction. Did it have something to do with #MeToo? Uncovered evidence of support for Farrakhan? Undocumented residency? Falsified expense reports for that “investigative” trip to Bangkok? The stash of Celine Dion albums hidden above the ceiling tiles? You can tell us, we’re non-judgmental about these sorts of things.

    1. Who are Heaton and Kray-Kray?

      1. Andrew Heaton (made some comedy videos) and Ed Krayewski.

        1. I really need to start keeping score at home. Thanks Zeb.

    2. Heaton’s doing a Joaquin-Phoenix-I’m Not There method thing, and Eddie Kray’s following Phish around the country for a while.

  25. Connor Lamb has been pretty anti-gun control in the past. We could use more pro-gun dems.

    1. No such things as an actual pro-gun Democrat.

  26. There’s a spat ongoing between Australia and South Africa that’s interesting for a number of reasons. It involves what may be fake news–and what may be the worst reaction to it by way of a public statement from the government I’ve seen since Mugabe.

    You see, there have been reports that black South Africans have been subjecting whites farmers and their families to rape, murder, etc.–all in an attempt to scare them off their land. Australia responded to these reports by extending expedited visas to white South Africans–as if they were refugees fleeing persecution on the basis of race.

    The government of South African took offense at Australia’s visa decision and responded with this:

    “A spokesperson for international relations minister Lindiwe Sisulu, said: “There is no need to fear ? we want to say to the world that we are engaged in a process of land redistribution which is very important to address the imbalances of the past. But it is going to be done legally, and with due consideration of the economic impact and impact on individuals.”

    —-The Guardian


    I’m sure the international community will be relieved to hear that when these farmers are stripped of their land on the basis of their race, it will be done legally to address the imbalances of the past.

    1. Reason cares about libertarian issues in other countries so much they spent weeks and endless column inches covering a Russian punk band getting thrown in prison for trespassing at a church. So, they are covering this horrific violation of property rights a lot, right?

      1. The international community care so much about signaling on behalf of the Rohingya that they’re willing to do anything–up to and including saying bad things about Aung San Suu Kyi in public.

        This is from later in same Guardian article I linked above:

        Last month, South Africa’s parliament passed a motion to begin the process of amending South Africa’s constitution to allow for the expropriation of land without compensation . . . . The current land reform policy is based on the principle of “willing buyer, willing seller”, and has largely failed to result in meaningful transformation.


        You see, this “willing buyer, willing seller” horseshit wasn’t about to strip white farmers of their land on the basis of race, so obviously it’s racist.

        1. We can’t afford to buy your land at a fair price and you refuse to give it to us, so we are now going to steal it. What a tragedy.

          1. Worked for mugabe.

      2. I found the reaction of many to that incident to be inadequately nuanced. The Russian authorities clearly used their trespass as a thin excuse to prosecute anti-regime protest, but it’s not like the ladies had a right to disrupt a house of worship with a sacrilegious mocking display. I guess in retrospect this was only the latest sign that Amnesty International was degenerating into absurdity even faster than the ACLU.

        1. They committed a crime. The problem was that the sentence they were given was way out of proportion to their crime. That was an injustice. But it was pretty far down the list of worst injustices in the world. And hardly worth the attention Reason gave it.

          The other thing is that the punk band were a bunch of assholes. They were victims but they were not admirable people in any way. Yet, reason being the hipster doofuses they are, saw “punk band” and treated them like they were 21st Century Vlacov Havels

          1. Ah, I forgot about their bizarre hipsterish romanticization/ geek worship of punk music. That would explain it.

            But the silence on South Africa has no explanation. It’s just utterly bizarre. I suppose you could say that Reason does not really do foreign policy, doesn’t really pretend competence in that field–that it only dips it toe in it for “weird news” novelty purposes, and can’t be held to any standards or pattern in what it is in the “habit” of covering.

            1. It is because it is happening to white people. Defending the rights of white people isn’t going to get you that job at the Post the reason staff all covet. Also, the idea that South Africa was made free by anti apartheid efforts is a religious myth among the left. So, no one is going to talk about the whole thing ending in tragedy until long after it has happened and admitting it can’t be dismissed as just one of those things and old news.

      3. I’m sure shikha will be right on it.

    2. If some of the white farmers leave doesn’t that leave more land for the redistribution? It’s literally just free land for the people who are staying.

      It’s messed up that whites are getting preferred visa status, but since they overwhelmingly own the land, they’ll also leave a lot more land per expat. It’s a fast track to land equality.

      1. You don’t seem to fully appreciate the importance of signaling to the international community.

        It’s more important than anything–certainly more important than reality.

    3. The Apartheid regime confiscated land, too, and gave it to whites. South Africa should make every effort to return this land to its rightful heirs, even if the economy as a whole suffers for it. The Apartheiders were not like Ian Smith, where pretty much everyone agrees white rule was better even for blacks. They were some evil motherfuckers.

      Of course that is not what we are about to see here! It will be naked systemic racial oppression, and cronyism on the backs of South Africa’s poor. (The writing has been on the wall for some time.) Any hesitation in declaring South African white farmers as refugees from potential genocide is itself racist. They would probably make great immigrants too.

      1. White refugees fleeing persecution, though, support for that is gonna be . . . problematic from a progressive view.

        Did I use “problematic” correctly that time. We had a short discussion of that word yesterday?

        My understanding is that whites can’t be victims of racism because of historic power imbalances or something.

      2. The thing that is never mentioned about South Africa is that very few people lived there when the whites first showed up. There were bushman who lived there but they have long vanished. South Africa has a large black population because as the economy grew black migrated there looking for work. Apartheid started as a means of protecting white labor from competition from immigrant black labor.

        South Africa is portrayed as a story of white colonialism and native blacks having their land stolen and being oppressed by whites. There was some of that. But mostly it is a story of immigration and the white settlers being overwhelmed by black immigrants from the north and their reaction to that.

        1. Even before economic growth there was the Mfecane, when the violent rise of the Zulu under Shaka led to a chain reaction of wars and mass migrations, including into the sparsely-populated areas that the Boers and the British were in the process of colonizing.

          1. It is a long complex story that Progs are too stupid and in love with ignorance to want to know.

          2. Interesting. Seems like the cradle of humankind has been tumultuous since the beginning.

            1. Until they discovered vibranium.

        2. Is that so? I’ve never been quite sure if that’s the real story or some excuse for Apartheid.

          1. It is not an excuse. I don’t see how it justifies Apartheid.

            1. I think that the Apartheid regime made it the official history that when white settlers arrived there was no one living there and used that to justify their poor treatment of non-whites. The black people were the invaders, not them.

              I’m not well versed in the history of southern Africa, so I’m not saying you are wrong at all, just wasn’t sure.

              1. They were right that most of the blacks came later. That part is true. What they thought that meant is debatable.

        3. I am not talking about the precolonial shit. Settlement presents moral problems, of course, no matter the lifestyle of the natives; even nomadic peoples have rights. But I agree that shit cannot be sorted out. I call it prestate and leave it at that. I did though quite enjoy the recent occasion when a Khoisan woman told Julius Malema to shut the fuck up, settler, when he started in on his shit.

          Apartheid proper only started in 1948. I am talking about nonwhites who most certainly had land by any measure, in the presence of rule of law, but had it taken thereafter either by the state or through its inaction, at that time or somewhat before or after.

          1. To be clear: Rhodesia was an ordinary colony where the ordinary colonial whites’ only real problem was that they didn’t get the message when others did. South Africa was a unique, special kind of evil that they crafted for themselves.

            1. How / why did you come to know so much about South Africa? Just curious.

      3. I’ve gotten to know a handful of white Zimbabweans who got kicked out when Mugabe made their skin color illegal. They were all some hard-ass, crazy motherfuckers. Any fucks they might’ve had to give apparently got expropriated without compensation, too.

        1. You would have to be a little nuts to run a farm in rural Africa by choice.

  27. Michael Avenatti, the lawyer representing Stormy Daniels, says that other woman are contemplating legal action against President Donald Trump.

    I guess no one told them about the Clinton precedent?

  28. Download OneClickRoot for android root for PC http://bestandroidtoroot.com/a…..oot-for-pc

  29. The 8 best indoor tv antenna for rural areas the8best

  30. ezcap 284 firmware update gofirmware

  31. tecno p701 firmware gofirmware

  32. how to bypass frp on alcatel 4060a frpbypassapkpro

  33. the 8 best 144hz monitor under 300 http://the8best.com/best/the-8…..-under-300

  34. the 8 best 18 250 lens for canon lensreviewlab

  35. the 8 best french cabernet sauvignon under 100 http://the8best.com/top/the-8-…..-under-100

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.