Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Migrant Caravan Spooks Trump and Threatens Trade, SCOTUS Protects Trigger-Happy Cops (Again), Iranians Love Fake McDonalds: Reason Roundup

Plus: Market doesn't react well to looming trade war and bikini-barista suit explores meaning of "anal cleft."

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 4.3.2018 9:32 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

STRINGER/REUTERS/Newscom

Migrants marching toward U.S. border want asylum. A group of Central American migrants marching toward the U.S.-Mexico border has presented the perfect fodder for President Trump's warnings about border security and alt-right fears about hordes of invading brown people. On Tuesday morning, the president warned on Twitter that a "caravan of people from Honduras" was "heading to our 'Weak Laws' Border" and "Congress MUST ACT NOW!"

A few details about the migrant "caravan":

  • It was organized by immigration advocacy group Pueblo Sin Fronteras.
  • The journey began near the Guatemalan border on March 25 and will span some 2,000 miles by the time they reach the U.S. border, the stated destination.
  • The group says members will be applying for asylum.

Without directly mentioning the migrant situation, Mexico Interior Minister Alfonso Navarrete tweeted on Monday that he had spoken to Kirstjen Nielsen, U.S. Homeland Security secretary, and they had "agreed to analyze the best ways to attend to the flows of migrants in accordance with the laws of each country."

What does this have to do with trade? From Reuters:

Mexico must walk a delicate line with the United States as the countries are in the midst of renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) along with Canada. At the same time, Mexican left-wing presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has an 18-point lead ahead of the July 1 election, according to a poll published on Monday. A Lopez Obrador victory could usher in a Mexican government less accommodating toward the United States on both trade and immigration issues.

Trump—who mentioned NAFTA in his Tuesday morning tweet—has been calling on Mexican authorities to stop the Central American group before they reach the U.S. border. But if the Central Americans entered Mexico legally, they are generally allowed to go around the country at will and Mexican authorities can't legally stop them. The Mexican Senate's Human Rights Commission Chair is urging the country to protect the migrants' rights.

The big Caravan of People from Honduras, now coming across Mexico and heading to our "Weak Laws" Border, had better be stopped before it gets there. Cash cow NAFTA is in play, as is foreign aid to Honduras and the countries that allow this to happen. Congress MUST ACT NOW!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 3, 2018

Many of the migrants are from Honduras, "which which has high levels of violence and has been rocked by political upheaval in recent months following the re-election of U.S.-backed president, Juan Orlando Hernández in an intensely disputed election," reports Reuters.

Maria Elena Colindres Ortega, a member of caravan and, until January, a member of Congress in Honduras, said she is fleeing the political upheaval at home. "We've had to live through fraudulent electoral process," she said. "We're suffering a progressive militarization and lack of institutions, and … they're criminalizing those who protested."

A border patrol chief in the Rio Grande Valley told the news agency they weren't worried: "Not to be flippant, but it's similar numbers to what we are seeing every day pretty much."

SCOTUS WATCH

A Monday Supreme Court ruling shields an Arizona cop from being sued by a woman he shot (reversing the Ninth Circuit's decision). Police were called to the scene because a woman was allegedly hacking at a tree with a knife. When they arrived, they found Amy Hughes in her front yard with her roommate. She was holding a kitchen knife. All three officers drew their guns. When Hughes was ordered to drop the knife and didn't, one of the officers filed multiple shots at her.

Hughes lived, and sued for $150,000 in damages. "The court's decision came without ordering full briefing or argument, a rare step indicating that the majority thought the case easy to decide," notes NPR. The court's (short, unsigned) opinion said it wasn't even clear that the officer was guilty of excessive force, but even if he was he couldn't be held liable in civil court because he has qualified immunity, since shooting Hughes didn't violate "any clearly established statutory or constitutional right" that "a reasonable person could have known" about.

"Evidently, the right not to be gunned down by the police is not nearly specific enough for the Court to take notice," Above the Law Executive Editor Elie Mystal writes.

We can't hold cops accountable for their actions, because right now it is perfectly legal for cops to shoot you for any reason or no reason at all. Prosecutors aren't willing to stop them, judges aren't willing to stop them, and politicians are certainly not willing to stop them. The Supreme Court… they don't even want to HEAR it. They don't even want to argue about it anymore. If a cop shoots you, the Supreme presumption is that you deserved it — and even if you didn't, your life is not protected by "clearly established law."

I don't know what set of facts could convince the current Court to break qualified immunity, the majority doesn't even seem to be intellectually curious about the facts. They're more worried about the keeping state actors free from civil liability than they are about stopping the killings and brutality.

Judge Sotomayor did write a dissent, signed by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, warning that the majority decision sent the message that cops can "shoot first and think later."

FREE MARKETS

How bootleg fast food conquered Iran (Mash Donalds, anyone?). "Forty years ago, opening KFC franchise in Tehran was a sign of progress. Today, it's against the law," reports Atlas Obscura. But even after religious clerics took control, "most Iranians maintained an appreciation for Western culture, whether that meant banned literature or McDonald's-style burgers. If there was one thing the government couldn't suppress, it was taste. "

These days, knock off fast food franchises bearing similar names—Pizza Hot, Mash Donalds, Sheak Shack, Kentucky House—and logos, and menus (to an extent) of American fast-food counterparts are popular.

In the end, the restaurant owners play a balancing act: imitating Western chains enough to draw Iranians who want to try those brands, but not so closely that the government accuses them of corrupting and Westernizing the country.

QUICK HITS

  • President Trump "joined his personal attorney on Monday in asking a federal judge to order into arbitration a lawsuit" filed by Stormy Daniels, "a move that would put the proceedings behind closed doors rather than in front of a jury."
  • Immigration judges now have case quotas.
  • The stock market is not reacting well to a looming U.S.-Chinese trade war.
  • The Washington city of Everett argues that "anal cleft" is easy to define in an appeal on a federal injunction to block the city's attempted dress code for bikini baristas.
  • Reality Winner, who leaked national Security Agency docs to the media in 2017, is looking forward to subpoenaing documents from the CIA, Homeland Security, and security firms targeted by Russian hackers.
  • The Supreme Court rejected an appeal from anti-abortion activists over a ban on releasing videos they secretly recorded with Planned Parenthood officials and other abortion providers in 2014 and 2015.
  • "A case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court threatens to [allow] worldwide damages for infringement of U.S. patents," warn the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the R Street Institute.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: A True but Nonobvious Proposition?

Elizabeth Nolan Brown is a senior editor at Reason.

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (113)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    You had one job, Elizabeth.

    1. $park? leftist poser   7 years ago

      Alt-text?

  2. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    ...a move that would put the proceedings behind closed doors rather than in front of a jury.

    Hush money doesn't mean what it used to.

  3. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    Immigration judges now have case quotas.

    The conveyor belt of justice just picked up speed.

  4. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    The stock market is not reacting well to a looming U.S.-Chinese trade war.

    Since when do Americans let the market decide anything's worth?

  5. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    The Washington city of Everett argues that "anal cleft" is easy to define...

    They've pored over hundreds of photographic evidence to hone their skills.

    1. Zeb   7 years ago

      It may be easy to define, but I don't think it means what they think it does. The term they were looking for is "intergluteal cleft". "Anal cleft" would be something very few people want to see in public.

      1. This Machine Chips Fascists   7 years ago

        No shit!

        1. Citizen X - #6   7 years ago

          Hopefully.

  6. sarcasmic   7 years ago

    the majority decision sent the message that cops can "shoot first and think later."\

    More like a confirmation of what we already know.

    1. H. Farnham   7 years ago

      I really had to give Sotomayer and RBG some credit for their dissent. Disappointing that they were the only two.

      1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

        Sotomayer's dissent was solid. Broken clock, something something.

        1. sarcasmic   7 years ago

          She seems to be right on quite a bit more than expected.

          1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

            When it comes to police, I agree. When it comes to the entirety of the First and Second Amendment, not so much.

            1. Chipper Morning Baculum   7 years ago

              Most of the Supremes come from a privileged background and probably never had to deal with a cop before. Sotomayor is the only one that comes from a poor background, I believe. Because of this, she has been excellent on police and 4th Amendment issues.

              This case shows that the whole concept of a Supreme Court is ridiculous. 9 people, many frankly not that bright, deciding things for 300 million? Absolutely preposterous.

              1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

                Most of the justices, actually do not come from privileged backgrounds. Thomas grew-up poorer than Sotomayor in the segregated South. Alito and Scalia were both the children of immigrants and grew-up in ethnic ghettos.

                Sotomayor's opinions are not that different from Scalia's positions regarding the 4th Amendment. But, I think you are right that she has taken positions that the other justices have merely flirted with. I'm not sure if that is due to her background or her political persuasion, though.

        2. chipper me timbers   7 years ago

          She was on the right side of Citizens United too. She has been surprisingly not-awful compared to other recent appointees Kagan and Alito and Roberts.

  7. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    Reality Winner-

    Stop right there.

  8. LynchPin1477   7 years ago

    So are links just not a thing anymore?

    1. $park? leftist poser   7 years ago

      Yes, this is what there is now.

    2. This Machine Chips Fascists   7 years ago

      And don't come around looking for satisfaction in the evening either. They got nuthin.

    3. Just Say'n   7 years ago

      Are you not entertained?

  9. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    The Supreme Court rejected an appeal from anti-abortion activists over a ban on releasing videos they secretly recorded with Planned Parenthood officials and other abortion providers in 2014 and 2015.

    Luckily the courts ruled that the First Amendment is not yet viable and available for termination.

    1. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   7 years ago

      As Michael Hihn has explained several times, occasionally rights come into conflict with each other and it's up to the judiciary to draw boundaries. I'm glad that in this case, the fundamental Constitutional right to access abortion care seems to have prevailed over so-called "undercover journalism."

      1. John   7 years ago

        If I am talking to you, I give up my right to keep what I am saying private. This is a basic law of privilege. For example, if I go blab to someone what I told my attorney, I have waived my attorney-client privilege and cannot assert it when that person tells someone else or if I am subpoenaed and asked about what I said.

        There is no conflict of rights here. Those people said what they said and they have no right to demand the other party keep their conversation secret. It is funny as hell to watch you retards swear up and down that Trump's NDA with Stormy Danials is not enforceable but then here claim that Planned Parenthood can get the courts to effectively enforce an NDA where none existed. If Stormy Daniels can tell the world about Trump's dick in spite of an NDA, then these people can release these videos where there never was an NDA.

        Hihn is a dangerous retard. He is one of the dumbest people on earth. But he makes up for it by being fanatical and having absolutely no morals or principles. Try not to follow his lead even as a troll.

        1. BestUsedCarSales   7 years ago

          He also keeps quoting Heller out of context.

        2. Bee Tagger   7 years ago

          You make a good point about the hypocrisy with Stormy Daniels, but we're also in a post-hypocrisy world so you are probably just wasting your time.

        3. CatoTheChipper   7 years ago

          It is futile to use reason to refute an unreasonable troll.

          The troll has no interest in argumentation based upon facts and reason. To others, the refutation is obvious, and usually not very interesting.

          Sadly, it's probably best to ignore the trolls, or reply very few words that identify the troll as such.

  10. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    "A case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court threatens to [allow] worldwide damages for infringement of U.S. patents," warn the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the R Street Institute... arguing against extraterritorial damages.

    We are going to win the patent trade war.

    1. WoodChipperBob   7 years ago

      And right after that, we're going to win the patent troll war. Or lose it. Which it is depends on which side you're on.

    2. Jerryskids   7 years ago

      But what about the copyright trade war? Disney's been winning a string of battles to get copyright extended to "life of the author plus heat death of the universe", will they ever lose one?

  11. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    "...most Iranians maintained an appreciation for Western culture, whether that meant banned literature or McDonald's-style burgers. If there was one thing the government couldn't suppress, it was taste. "

    Good or bad taste?

    1. This Machine Chips Fascists   7 years ago

      How do you say "Bulging Eyes Chicken" in Farsi?

  12. $park? leftist poser   7 years ago

    But if the Central Americans entered Mexico legally, they are generally allowed to go around the country at will and Mexican authorities can't legally stop them.

    So why keep going?

    1. Get lit   7 years ago

      Because if you physically reach the US your asylum claim has a better chance of succeeding?

    2. Just Say'n   7 years ago

      I was under the impression that Mexico's immigration laws are rather stringent. Maybe this is being done because the cameras are on them. Nonetheless, if you were given the choice wouldn't you rather go to the US than Mexico?

      1. $park? leftist poser   7 years ago

        According to part of what I copied, they entered Mexico legally. Although I guess it could be an actual question from Ms Brown.

        And sure, I'd rather be in the US than Mexico, but I'm also not interested in forcing bakers to bake me a cake.

        1. John   7 years ago

          They entered Mexico legally for the purpose of transit. If they stay, Mexico will deport them. Mexico is letting them in for the specific purpose of them traveling to the US and overloading the US immigration system. It is, while not a technical act of war, a hostile act on Mexico's part, akin to harboring criminals from US Justice or counterfeiting US dollars.

          1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

            Come on, John, be fair here. I agree with the general point that this is dirty pool by Mexico, but it is not a "hostile act" by Mexico. It's the same shit that they've been doing for a while now. They are real tough when it comes to enforcing their own borders, but allow people to pass through if they are just trying to get into the US. It's wrong, but it's not different from Mexico's attitude toward the US in general. This is a country that was part of the non-aligned states during the Cold War. Mexico is not an 'ally', but they're certainly not an 'adversary'. They are like 'frenemies' or something

            1. John   7 years ago

              What if we did something for the specific purpose of screwing up the government of Mexico? In fairness to Mexico, Eric Holder sending guns to Mexican drug gangs so that when they were used in murders Holder would have a stronger argument for gun control was a hostile act on the US part towards Mexico. So we are not without sin here. But, neither are they.

              1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

                I'm not defending Mexico or its actions, I'm just saying that they are not 'hostile actors'.

              2. LynchPin1477   7 years ago

                I'm not clear how this is screws up the US government. Our immigration system is a mess because of US policies and politics. If Mexico legalized drug production that would make the WoD harder, but that would the fault of the US for fighting the WoD.

              3. Jerryskids   7 years ago

                I see somebody didn't remember the Alamo. Mexico might still be a little touchy on the subject of having half their country stolen by the US.

                1. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

                  I see somebody didn't remember the Alamo. Mexico might still be a little touchy on the subject of having half their country stolen by the US.

                  The Alamo took place during the Texas Revolution, not the Mexican War. Texas wasn't even annexed to the US until 1845.

                  1. Kivlor   7 years ago

                    The Alamo took place during the Texas Revolution, not the Mexican War. Texas wasn't even annexed to the US until 1845.

                    Do you think that Mexicans don't view Texas as having been taken from them by the US?

            2. damikesc   7 years ago

              Come on, John, be fair here. I agree with the general point that this is dirty pool by Mexico, but it is not a "hostile act" by Mexico. It's the same shit that they've been doing for a while now.

              ...which is a hostile act. Start taxing remittances 100% until they cut that shit out. It wouldn't be an act of war, either.

          2. $park? leftist poser   7 years ago

            They entered Mexico legally for the purpose of transit.

            I see.

  13. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   7 years ago

    Migrants marching toward U.S. border want asylum. A group of Central American migrants marching toward the U.S.-Mexico border has presented the perfect fodder for President Trump's warnings about border security and alt-right fears about hordes of invading brown people.

    Wow, the alt-right is totally despicable aren't they? Where's their compassion?

    I say let the migrants in and give them immediate citizenship! #NoBanNoWall

    1. Get lit   7 years ago

      They're seeking asylum and doing so according to the current laws. I realize the part of your brain that deals with sympathy and compaasion is damaged or maybe you'd have made the effort understand the situation a little better before playing your worn out game.

      1. $park? leftist poser   7 years ago

        So you're dumb enough to fall for obvious troll. I guess that explains why you didn't understand my question.

        1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

          Oh shit, it's getting lit!

      2. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

        sympathy and compaasion

        Easy to be sympathetic and compassionate when you don't have to live in the shitty barrios they create.

        1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

          That's nonsense. Barrios have some solid food. I'd rather a Mexican ethnic ghetto than the generic yuppies that now populate most major cities

          1. Kivlor   7 years ago

            Exactly! The high rate of violent crime and rampant racism in these ghettos is nothing compared to the enrichment they provide our society through selling Americanized food!

          2. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

            Not surprising that the go-to response in these cases is always "MUH ETHNIC FOOD".

            The reality is that you don't need a trash-strewn barrio to get decent Tex-Mex. We have the recipes now.

            I'd rather a Mexican ethnic ghetto than the generic yuppies that now populate most major cities

            Oh, bullshit. If that was the case, you'd be living there already.

            1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

              My response is not "muh ethnic food" nor am I making some tired plea for 'diversity'. I am saying that the dismissive attitude toward ethnic ghettos is moronic. If you visit any ethnic ghetto or grew-up in one, such as me, you will see that they are not black holes of crime. Most of them are family-oriented communities. You can take issue with illegal immigration, but it is another thing to have animus toward immigrants.

              1. chipper me timbers   7 years ago

                ^this

              2. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

                My response is not "muh ethnic food" nor am I making some tired plea for 'diversity'.
                That's nonsense. Barrios have some solid food.

                Come on.

                If you visit any ethnic ghetto or grew-up in one, such as me, you will see that they are not black holes of crime.

                My dad's family is Mexican and lived in a barrio. I saw first-hand what trash-heaps they are--and yes, their neighborhood was a black hole of crime.

                Most of them are family-oriented communities

                Sure, the daughters typically start getting molested after their quinceneara.

          3. Ecoli   7 years ago

            I agree. Let's do a one-for-one swap with our southern neighbors and deport every woody woodpecker haircut wearing, skinny jeans sporting, pretend lumberjack to Mexico where they don't have to battle the evil second amendment.

    2. DJF   7 years ago

      Someone getting asylum is authorized to get full welfare benefits.

      So all American taxpayers will get the bill.

  14. Just Say'n   7 years ago

    "The Supreme Court rejected an appeal from anti-abortion activists over a ban on releasing videos they secretly recorded with Planned Parenthood officials and other abortion providers in 2014 and 2015."

    Free speech is good, but not if they besmirch the God of Planned Parenthood with truth.

    1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

      Holding my breath for a right up about how this is an affront to free speech, but then I remembered that this is the same publication that makes a "libertarian" *wink* *wink* case for continuing federal funding for Planned Parenthood.

      1. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   7 years ago

        I read in Vox that PP only gets around $500 million annually. I'm a libertarian and I value fiscal restraint, but I have no problem with that amount.

        1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

          Come on, man. Give it a rest.

        2. DJF   7 years ago

          Then be a libertarian with your own money and stop stealing from the taxpayers.

    2. H. Farnham   7 years ago

      I honestly haven't read anything about the case. Is it an issue of privacy laws? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for ending federal funding for PP, but I could see this as a situation where ends don't justify the means. If I didn't consent to being filmed, I wouldn't want the tapes released either.

      1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

        And yet we have seen the media cycle obsessed over undercover videos of Cambridge Analytics. It's not like undercover videos are something unusual that never occur. This is a purely political prosecution and it doesn't make so called 'free speech defenders' look all that great when they balk at defending the pro-life activists.

        1. H. Farnham   7 years ago

          I dunno. I try to look at a situation as being right or wrong independent of the surrounding political discourse or the ensuing ramifications; that slips towards moral relativism. I don't think people should be allowed to publicly disseminate secret video from private settings. It would set a bad precedent that would surely be taking advantage of by government authority.

          1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

            That's a fair position, but wouldn't you, at least, want such a law to be applied equally? Because clearly it is not being equally enforced in this scenario.

            1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

              Consider animal right stings that occur regularly in California and are released to the public. California has never tried to silence their videos. I find it exceptionally strange that people who once argued for the legalization of gay marriage under the notion that the government should treat all unions equally are perfectly fine with the government treating speech unequally. Marriage isn't even a natural right

              1. H. Farnham   7 years ago

                Animal rights activists are the worst. I don't typically like to slander groups of people collectively, but for them I'll make an exception.

              2. Mickey Rat   7 years ago

                Was there not a court ruling in the past couple months that state laws against identity fraud for animal rights activists gaining access to farms and ranches?

                We are getting very situational interpretations of the law. It is a sign of a corrupt judiciary.

            2. H. Farnham   7 years ago

              Oh yeah, I definitely agree it should be applied uniformly. But, have to stick by my principles regardless.

  15. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    The court's (short, unsigned) opinion said it wasn't even clear that the officer was guilty of excessive force, but even if he was he couldn't be held liable in civil court because he has qualified immunity, since shooting Hughes didn't violate "any clearly established statutory or constitutional right" that "a reasonable person could have known" about.

    Clearly established constitutional rights are suddenly a thing to be concerned with? Does that mean the enumerated ones are inviolable now?

    1. Mickey Rat   7 years ago

      As an appeals court SCOTUS is more concerned with procedure than with the facts of a case. The Court is not supposed to be responsive to bloody shirt appeals.

  16. Fist of Etiquette   7 years ago

    A group of Central American migrants marching toward the U.S.-Mexico border has presented the perfect fodder for President Trump's warnings about border security and alt-right fears about hordes of invading brown people.

    I agree with the author. This has all the makings of a false flag operation by the Trump Administration.

    Why doesn't Mexico accommodate them? Is the only reason Mexico opened its southern border because it knew these immigrants were just passing through?

  17. Ken Shultz   7 years ago

    "A border patrol chief in the Rio Grande Valley told the news agency they weren't worried: "Not to be flippant, but it's similar numbers to what we are seeing every day pretty much."

    My understanding is that this is an annual protest. They've been doing this every year for years.

    One more try . . .

    The morning Trump tweeted his outrage against Amazon, threatening them with taxes and accusing them of ripping off the Post Office, Amazon's stock rose 1.1%. Investors don't seem to have paid much attention to Trump's tweets at all.

    Moral of the story?

    Things don't become important because Trump tweets about them. To believe otherwise is to make an ass of you, not me.

    1. Jerryskids   7 years ago

      Actually, Trump tweeted about Amazon the other day, this morning he tweeted that the Post Office's denial that they lose money on every Amazon package was wrong, because he knows. For some reason Trump didn't supply a citation or a source for his knowledge, but I'm pretty sure we all know his source. And one article with the term "anal cleft" is enough.

  18. Ken Shultz   7 years ago

    Pure speculation here:

    Andrew McCabe raised $554,520 for his legal defense fund on gofundme.

    http://www.gofundme.com/andrew.....efensefund

    Does this tell us something about the likely content of the Justice Department Inspector General's report before it comes out? Does it recommend criminal charges?

    1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

      It tells us that there are an astoundingly large amount of people that are gullible.

      1. CatoTheChipper   7 years ago

        Or, it may show that quite a few people who suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome put the money where their mouths are.

    2. Weigel's Cock Ring   7 years ago

      He knows he's been selected by the cabal to be the fall guy and therefore he's royally fucked. He's going to go down in history as the Negro Nixon's G. Gordon Liddy.

    3. John   7 years ago

      Maybe it is that. Or maybe McCabe is just a crook and is just going to pocket the money. Remember, there are no regulations of go fund me accounts. It is buyer be ware. So if he is never charged and just keeps the money, there is nothing any of the rubes who gave him the cash can do about it. I give it better than 50 50 that is what happens. It is just McCabe ripping off the rubes or laundering some bribe from someone for keeping his mouth shut. The guy is pure scum.

      1. Jerryskids   7 years ago

        George Soros just has a lot of employees.

      2. Ecoli   7 years ago

        I think McCabe should partner up with the Clinton foundation and make some real money.

  19. Weigel's Cock Ring   7 years ago

    It's always wonderful when the Weigeloids are all off "working" on some Journolistic assignment. It's like a super early weekend.

    1. Zeb   7 years ago

      So Citizen X and Crusty aren't the same person after all?

      1. Citizen X - #6   7 years ago

        No, no, we're both Weigel's minions, working hard as part of a vast Journolistic conspiracy to call Mikey names on the internet.

  20. I can't even   7 years ago

    "Migrants marching toward U.S. border want asylum."

    Asylum from what? Was there a war down there I didn't here about? Or asylum from the consequences of their own shitty voting habits?

    1. Jerryskids   7 years ago

      Many of the migrants are from Honduras, "which has high levels of violence and has been rocked by political upheaval in recent months following the re-election of U.S.-backed president, Juan Orlando Hern?ndez in an intensely disputed election,"

      It's them goddamn Russians interfering in their elections they want asylum from.

    2. Eidde   7 years ago

      "Hmmm...says here you went through a third country (Mexico) before applying for asylum. Denied."

      1. Eidde   7 years ago

        Or is the Mexican government going to set an example of Compassion and Generosity?

  21. Citizen X - #6   7 years ago

    Reality Winner, who leaked national Security Agency docs to the media in 2017, is looking forward to subpoenaing documents from the CIA, Homeland Security, and security firms targeted by Russian hackers.

    I hope Reality Winner is also looking forward to receiving a bunch of paper that is nothing but black redaction lines.

  22. Citizen X - #6   7 years ago

    The stock market is not reacting well to a looming U.S.-Chinese trade war.

    But it's going to be so easy to win!

    1. Jerryskids   7 years ago

      If China gets its way about buying oil in yuan rather than USD, you'll see a yuge drop in the number of dollars we're exporting. That's a win, isn't it?

  23. Citizen X - #6   7 years ago

    Zombie raccoons!

    This is how the end begins, y'all.

    1. $park? leftist poser   7 years ago

      The Ohio Department of Natural Resources said it doesn't sound like rabies, but rather a disease called distemper.

      If only there had been a way to be sure.

  24. EscherEnigma   7 years ago

    So Libertarian candidate Justin Jones for Arkansas house made the news. By calling fags (his word choice) disgusting and claiming that "HIV is created by homosexuality".

    1. Just Say'n   7 years ago

      Nothing says "view people as individuals" quite like smearing an entire group of people based upon their sexual preferences or religious beliefs (I'm looking at you Gary Johnson).

      1. Kivlor   7 years ago

        If it's just a preference, it shouldn't be a big deal at all when someone finds it disgusting, right? I mean, if you find smoking disgusting, are you a bad person for voicing it? Are libertarians opposed to it? What about broccoli? Thai food? Pond scum? Politicians?

        There's nothing for a libertarian to condemn in what the guy said, if we take at face value the claim that "homosexuality" is a "preference". If anything, wouldn't we expect that heterosexual people would be disgusted by it, because if not, they wouldn't be heterosexual?

    2. Kivlor   7 years ago

      Meh. To be fair, degeneracy is disgusting to most people, and although HIV isn't "created" by homosexuality, we can observe that it seems to have a startling connection to male homosexuals...

      ~67% of people with HIV in the US are men engaging in sex with other men.
      ~63% of new HIV cases are homosexual men.
      ~82% of all men who have HIV engage in sex with other men.

      An additional 3% can be attributed to men having sex with men and doing drugs, with a further 3% being attributed to drug use.

      Homosexual men make up less than 2% of the population. Roughly 15% male homosexuals in the US have HIV

      Pretty disgusting, when you think about it.

  25. John   7 years ago

    You are a dangerous moron but make up for it by being fanatical and ignorant.

  26. Kivlor   7 years ago

    An oppressive regime. Lawlessness. Hundreds of random murders.

    I've got a novel idea: Why don't we grant the American public asylum from the people who made this mess and come from a culture of oppression, lawlessness and rampant random murder?

  27. Kivlor   7 years ago

    GayJay doesn't say much of anything, because he's usually too stoned. Aleppo? What's Aleppo?

    Bueller? Bueller?

  28. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano thinks he's getting that gun ban.

  29. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    Is that why you lie constantly?

  30. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    How many things -- far more common -- is Trump sp totally stupid on ... almost every fucking day?

    Far less than you, Dumbfuck Hihnsano.

  31. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano says "prove it," gets his own posts jammed up his ass.

  32. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano says "prove it," gets his own posts jammed up his ass.

  33. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    PISSED that I keep repeatedly owning him like Kunta Kinte because he can't read the documents he links and can't stand that his own words come back to haunt him.

    And it's called "bullying" when I call him out...because he thinks mean words is the equivalent of being sent to a concentration camp and gassed. Guess I'll just have to keep making him my bitch.

  34. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano still can't specify which rights are in conflict and how they conflict. That's what he keeps running from.

  35. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano has another strokeout because I owned his ass like Kunta Kinte.

  36. Red Rocks White Privilege   7 years ago

    Dumbfuck Hihnsano pimping his gun ban again.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How the NCAA Helped Trump Score Big on Transgender Issues

Billy Binion | 7.2.2025 5:34 PM

Under the 'Big, Beautiful Bill,' Car Companies Won't Be Fined for Failing To Hit Arbitrary Fuel Efficiency Goals

Joe Lancaster | 7.2.2025 5:15 PM

The 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Keeps Most of Joe Biden's Energy Subsidies

Jeff Luse | 7.2.2025 4:44 PM

Florida Plans To Deputize 9 National Guardsmen as Immigration Judges To Increase Deportations

Autumn Billings | 7.2.2025 4:08 PM

The Tax Bill Rewards States for Higher Rates of Food Stamp Fraud

Eric Boehm | 7.2.2025 3:25 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!