Reason Roundup

Scott Daniel Warren Is Free (for Now) After Jury Can't Reach Verdict on Charges for Aiding Migrants

Plus: Amash says the "two-party system is hurting America," Zuckerberg gets deepfaked, Wonkette's lame defense of Harris, and more...

|

Criminalizing kindness? An Arizona man on trial for giving food, water, and shelter to migrants is free for now after jury members could not agree on a verdict and were dismissed by the federal judge presiding over the case.

College instructor Scott Daniel Warren had been charged with conspiracy to transport and harbor undocumented immigrants, a felony that could come with 20 years of prison time. His attorneys argued that he was just providing "basic human kindness" to people on a perilous journey across the Arizona desert. From the Associated Press:

Outside the courthouse, Warren thanked his supporters and criticized the government's efforts to crack down on the number of immigrants coming to the U.S.

"Today it remains as necessary as ever for local residents and humanitarian aid volunteers to stand in solidarity with migrants and refugees, and we must also stand for our families, friends and neighbors in the very land itself most threatened by the militarization of our borderland communities," Warren said.

Glenn McCormick, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Arizona, declined to comment on whether Warren will face another trial. The judge set a July 2 status hearing for the defense and prosecution.

AP goes on to note that "border activists say they worry about what they see as the gradual criminalization of humanitarian action." Migrant deaths in "Arizona's scorching deserts" number in the thousands since the mid-1990s, AP says.

Warren is part of a group called "No Más Muertes," or No More Deaths. Since his arrest in January 2018, "at least 88 bodies were recovered from the Ajo corridor of the Arizona desert," he told reporters outside the courthouse yesterday, accusing the feds of targeting "prosecutions to criminalize humanitarian aid, kindness and solidarity."


ELECTION 2020

Wonkette pushes the Harris campaign line that people hate her merely because she was a prosecutor (and that she shouldn't have to explain herself about it). Others kindly point out that it's not what she was but what she did in that position that matters. At National Review, Jim Geraghty elaborates on this theme:

What is interesting here is the adamant insistence that somehow Harris is being wronged by having her record as a prosecutor challenged, and that questioning that record is somehow inherently unjust or out of bounds, that something has gone terribly wrong with our political and journalism worlds when Harris feels the need to defend her past decisions and actions.

Meanwhile, at the polls:


AROUND REASON

Peter Suderman writes about the recent riff between Rep. Justin Amash (R–Mich.) and other members of the House Freedom Caucus, of which Amash was a founding member:

You can certainly read Rep. Justin Amash's recent criticisms of President Trump and the vast majority of elected Republicans who back him as attacks against a president that Amash believes has failed the nation and the office—or on the GOP for its willingness to go along with the same—and you wouldn't be wrong to do so.

But it would be a mistake to assume that's all Amash is doing, or even that is it necessarily the most important aspect of his critique. Amash isn't just a NeverTrump pundit with a congressional office; his target is larger than Trump and the party stalwarts who back him. Rather, he is taking aim at the binary choices offered by the Republican/Democrat duopoly, the unthinking partisanship it seems to require, and the ways that partisanship has made Congress less willing to exercise its constitutional duties as a co-equal branch of government. Amash isn't just taking on Trump; he's making a systemic critique of the two-party system.

Whole thing here. And on cue from Amash:


QUICK HITS

  • Must-read of the day:

  • Facebook will leave up a "deepfake" video of Mark Zuckerberg.
  • Yujing Zhang, the Chinese woman arrested for entering Mar-a-Lago on false pretenses, will serve as her own lawyer, despite having "struggled with legal concepts and spoken English" during proceedings, as the New York Post described it.
  • The drug war never dies, it just takes new forms.
  • When even @TheTweetOfGod gets suspended…

Advertisement

NEXT: Someone Yet Again Trying to Vanish Post Criticizing New Britain (Conn.) Volunteer Commissioner Ken Haas

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. Facebook will leave up a “deepfake” video of Mark Zuckerberg.

    Thicker skin than Pelosi?

    1. Hello.

    2. Skin gets thinner as you get older.

      At this point, I can see people sitting behind Pelosi.

      1. That would appear to imply that you have seen her naked.

        1. I can see through her head.

    3. Koch Brothers Team Up With George Soros, Patreon and Airbnb to Fight Online Extremism

      http://archive.is/QmUeg

      Libertarian-fucking-moment.

      1. Fantastic news. And a great illustration of my fundamental message — the future of libertarianism lies in allying with progressives and Democrats, especially now that they are moving toward the Koch / Reason position on immigration.

      2. note to self: don’t ask Soros to fund my Airbnb-for-Nazis startup through my Patreon account

  2. The Passive Conservative response to Big Tech censorship is reminiscent of the Star Trek episode about a simulated interplanetary war, in which designated casualties marched meekly into extermination booths. So much better, they reasoned, than fighting a messy REAL war!

    That single-minded determination and ferocity, coupled with its control over so many institutions, gives the Left an almost unchallenged ability to write and rewrite the rules. It doesn’t even PRETEND to value the principled consistency Passive Conservatives place above all else.

    1. Ignore The Never Trump Losers Who Are OK With Liberals Winning
      David French is the poster-scold for the Surrender Caucus, a fussy man who is always at the ready with some hitherto unknown conservative norm, rule or principle that boils down to you not being allowed to effectively resist the massive attack on your liberty and prosperity by our garbage elite. These conservative norms, rules and principles are pretty remarkable in that they only apply to limit our options and actions – they never apply to protect us from our enemies.

      I have my own conservative principle regarding conservative principles, and it goes like this: Any conservative principle that makes me poorer or less free is a pretty crappy conservative principle and I’m not going to do it.

      1. Not the Never Trumpers. They are no threat to the elite because, at their hollow core, they support the existing power structure. That’s why they are so blind to the manifest corruption of the institutions that they are a part of and are therefore invested in. That’s why these saps were so easily suckered by the RUSSIA TREASON COLLUSION!!!! scam. And that’s why Trump and those of us who support him terrify them – because, unlike the Conservative, Inc., cabal, we have nothing to lose if the whole teetering edifice of our crummy ruling class collapses under the sheer weight of its lies and incompetence.

        1. I propose guillotines.

        2. But they have no place in the conservative future we’re going to build on the ashes of the liberal elite that we are going to destroy by any means necessary. We choose to win.

          Finally, both sides have decided to completely obliterate the other. I can’t wait to see how this turns out.

          1. “Finally, both sides have decided to completely obliterate the other. I can’t wait to see how this turns out.”

            Ten percent of the country on each side trying to destroy each other while the rest of us sit back and hope for a meteor.

          2. Finally, both sides have decided to completely obliterate the other. I can’t wait to see how this turns out.

            Oh, Sparky, your side doesn’t get to ‘wait’.

            1. Which side is my side?

    2. Let us remember that the ‘solution’ imposed (by violation of the prime directive) was to smash the computer.
      What doe that say about our options for a response to social media?

  3. In a lot of cases it’s the one party system – show me the party that’s for any sort of fiscal restraint.

  4. When even @TheTweetOfGod gets suspended…

    On the 8th day He created Poe’s Law.

  5. I was married with 2 kids when I realized I’m gay
    My life would change forever after a simple Google search in November 2016. I had just seen Kate McKinnon perform the song “Hallelujah” on SNL and discovered that she’s a lesbian. That shocked me because she didn’t fit the awful stereotype often depicted in the media.
    I quickly declared her my “new girl crush.” But it was more than that.
    At that moment, I realized that I wanted a relationship with a woman like her — but I felt terrible for even having this thought, as someone who was faithfully married.

    1. No more 3-Somes for that husband.

    2. My life would change forever after a simple Google search … I Googled to the ends of the earth looking for stories like mine.

      Sheesh, Lady — stop Googling!

      1. I Googled to the ends of the earth

        So she also became a Flat Earther in the process?

    3. I only skimmed the article, so it’s possible I missed something. But she seems to only talk about her decision as it pertains to HER and HER JOURNEY!!1 I guess her husband and kids are just supposed to be happy that she’s breaking up their family because she had a dumb fantasy about some girl on SNL.

      1. Well, sure. The husband has a penis and is therefore an Oppressor, and thus unworthy of consideration. The kids are just clumps of cells.

      2. But she seems to only talk about her decision as it pertains to HER and HER JOURNEY!!1 I guess her husband and kids are just supposed to be happy that she’s breaking up their family because she had a dumb fantasy about some girl on SNL.

        This is it entirely.

  6. Rather, he is taking aim at the binary choices offered by the Republican/Democrat duopoly, the unthinking partisanship it seems to require, and the ways that partisanship has made Congress less willing to exercise its constitutional duties as a co-equal branch of government.

    In the most ineffectual way possible.

  7. The drug war never dies, it just takes new forms.

    It’s a shape shifting reptilian.

    1. It’s like the salt monster in Star Trek TOS; one minute its a seductive Denebian bar wench, and the next minute its sucking the life out of you.

      1. So no change?

      2. Except it does not have to change forms to do that.

        1. Indeed.

          And to push this strained analogy even further, like the terrestrial WoD when you’ve finished she identifies herself as an undercover Federation agent and busts you for violating United Federation of Planets Code 22-5-69, the Interstellar Sex Trafficking Prevention Act.

  8. Scott Daniel Warren Is Free (for Now) After Jury Can’t Reach Verdict on Charges for Aiding Migrants

    This is how a good jury system like ours is supposed to work. He was not convicted but not “acquitted” by a jury either, except that the prosecution should only get one crack at a defendant and anything but a conviction means the defendant is innocent.

    It will make these people think twice since most open border people thought this guy would be quickly acquitted by a jury. Rolling your dice on violating federal law, that is constitutional, has consequences.

    1. When people cannot admit that the media spins news.

      The charges were not for “aiding migrants”.

      Once these “migrants” cross the US Border, they are considered unauthorized aliens.

      1. By the plain meaning of words, he was charged for aiding migrants. He may not have been charged with a crime called “aiding migrants”, but that’s certainly what he was charged for.

        And if that is an appropriate charge for someone feeding unauthorized aliens, would that mean that any charity or soup kitchen or anything that provides food or any other useful thing to an unauthorized alien is committing a crime?

        1. Yeah. I wonder why the media chose THOSE WORDS though? Out of all words to describe the situation.

          Of course, propaganda is perfectly innocent. Its not like these media groups have editors and such to mull over the “right” words and headlines.

          1. You really think the problem with this is the phrasing of what we call these people?

            Maybe it’s the fact that they are people(I’m assuming we can agree on that term?) and you’re advocating punishing someone giving them food and water that makes your side look foolish?

            1. I don’t FEELZ like you do.

              They are invading hordes and need to be kicked out.

              If you break into my house, I will blow your head off.
              If you break into my country, I will deport your ass.

              Hey Leo, I got a group of illegals deported this week. I have a direct line to ICE when my farming neighbors try and use illegals for farming.

              Bye bye illegals.

              1. Wanting to deport these people is a far cry from wanting to prosecute someone for potentially saving their lives.

                Hey Leo, I got a group of illegals deported this week. I have a direct line to ICE when my farming neighbors try and use illegals for farming.

                What a great day for freedom. Libertarian, busy-body snitches… unite!

                1. Well, while the land and the business may belong to his neighbors, the country belongs to him.

                  1. We get it. You two are not Libertarians, so the rule of law is something you both hate.

                    1. Poor con, attempting mental backflips but landing on his head.

              2. MAGA!

              3. If you break into my country, I will deport your ass.

                Could you extrapolate on this assertion? How, exactly, do you justify ownership and control of rights of association in, say, Arizona? Please present your case from your sincerely held libertarian position.

    2. Rolling your dice on violating federal law, that is constitutional, has consequences.

      I must have missed the enumerated power to regulate food and water distribution, or your link fell off.

      Or are you saying that food and water distribution is covered under the Naturalization Clause?

      1. Poor Leo, does not remember the multiple times that I cited Article I, section 9, of the US Constitution and the enumerated power for Congress to regulate migrants as of 1808.

        #MemoryHole

        That and aiding and abetting criminals (illegal immigrants inside the USA) has been a crime for a looooooooooong time.

        1. How does this guy know they are criminals? I just assumed that they hadn’t yet been convicted of anything, nor that he’s qualified to determine their residency status. I’ve got food and water here, but I’m going to need to see some papers first, pal!

          1. I’d hate to.think you were serious with your question.

        2. And the cite that you’re missing is the cite that shows that immigration laws have been declared Constitutional based on a limitation of powers in the Constitution (A1S9) versus an enumerated power in the Constitution (A1S8).

          Because LC thinks so isn’t enough.

        3. OK, suppose you are just hiking in the desert, with no intentions to do anything else, and you come upon a Spanish speaking person who is close to death from dehydration. Are you legally obliged to let them die on the assumption that they most likely crossed the border illegally?
          Maybe that is what the law says. But I’d consider anyone who doesn’t defy the law in that case to have acted rather immorally, constitutional or not.

          1. Great thing about Libertarianism is that I “let people die” every day.

            I spend $0 on old people who might live one more day, if I only spent some money and time.

            I think its funny how many of you people are demanding repeal of all these aiding and abetting laws. Oh wait….

            1. There is a difference between worshipping the enumerated power of the state, and libertarianism. It’s just subtle enough to whoosh over the head of the simple.

              1. Its why YOU will never be a Libertarian.

                1. I’m not a libertarian. But unlike you…I’m aware of this fact.

                  1. I am also aware that YOU are not a Libertarian.

                    1. I am also aware that YOU are not a Libertarian.

                      That’s very perceptive of you, considering he literally just said that in the very post your directly responding to.

                    2. But are you also tuned into the fact that your political doctrine is in fact just state-worshipping Constitutionalism. You have no concern for the nature of rights, nor the NAP. These are the foundations upon which libertarian philosophy is built. You mistake The Constitution, which is a product of the same enlightenment as libertarian thought, as libertarian in itself. And by doing so, you mistake doctrinal Constitutionalism as libertarianism.

                    3. Poor Eric does not understand the difference between
                      Libertarianism and constitutionalism.

                    4. Con, every time you come out of your hole you end up embarrassing yourself. If Correct the Record isn’t paying you, you really need to get in touch, because you’re doing their job for free.

            2. I’m not demanding anything. Just thinking about what should actually constitute aiding an abetting.
              You are certainly under no obligation to do everything you can to prevent every death in the world. But I think the ethical calculation is a bit different when faced with a person facing immanent death and who you have the means to assist without endangering your own well being.

              1. These people are trekking into the desert with food and water to help illegals.

                This is not them driving along and seeing a dying illegal and rendering first aid.

                This is about open borders and illegals helping the Democrat Party win elections. These groups are not fooling anyone.

          2. Are you legally obliged to let them die on the assumption that they most likely crossed the border illegally?

            Actually, I believe in many states there are ‘Good Samaritan Laws’ that would hold you liable for the death if you didn’t help when you had the means.

            1. WRONG. No good samaritan law punishes not helping someone.

              It protects those that try to help.

            2. You know what would really help? Enforcing laws and not rewarding illegal immigrants so they stop risking their life crossing.

        4. Are you people really wanting to rehash this?

          1. I’m more interested in the broader question of whether a prohibition on aiding criminals can or should extend to providing them with the basic necessities of life if you aren’t doing anything positive to help them evade capture or commit further crimes.

            1. Funny that you frame their aiding and abetting crime that way.

              Article III, Section 3.
              Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

              All you need is an enemy and two witnesses.

              1. So you’ve finally reached the conclusion that everyone coming in the wrong way is an invading enemy. Well done.

                1. Not only are they an invading enemy, but it seems LC here thinks that giving them food and water in the desert is treason, based on his citation. Scott Daniel Warren is lucky he wasn’t put to death for his crime!

                  1. I’ll bet the poor doofus is sad that he lives in Georgia where he can’t sit on his back porch shooting invaders as they come out of the dark. I’m actually surprised that he reported the illegals next door instead of killing them. I guess he’s just all talk.

                    1. I laugh and think of how sad you dipshits become every time I contact ICE on the illegal farm hands.

                      I wish I could see your sad little faces and collect those tears.

              2. They aren’t enemies and we aren’t at war with them. To claim so is simply ridiculous.

                1. Which is why you’re ridiculous. You cant read and perform simple reasoning. About what other people say.

              3. All you need is an enemy and two witnesses.

                Did I miss something? When did we go to war with Mexico?

                1. The 1840s?

                  I hear the AUMF is still in effect.

              4. You clowns had all day to come up with non-Libertarian comments and this is what you chose to oost forever?

                Hilarious! Its like you people barely speak American English.

                1. Pretty rich coming from someone who lives in rural Georgia.

      2. “Or are you saying that food and water distribution is covered under the Naturalization Clause?”
        Commerce clause – – – – –

  9. “New 2020 Democratic primary poll via Quinnipiac just out:
    Biden 30%
    Sanders 19%
    Warren 15%”

    As a big believer in diversity, it’s disappointing to see two old straight white cis-males at the top. I like Warren (and Harris, and Gillibrand…) more than Biden or Sanders.

    Of course if Biden ends up with the nomination I’ll enthusiastically vote for him over any Republican.

    1. Your parody is played out.

  10. Kamala Harris: If elected, my DOJ would have ‘no choice’ but to prosecute Trump

    Trump’s mistake is not having his own Department of Justice to do his corrupt bidding.

    Kamala Rouge 2020!

    1. Another reason she’s my first choice for 2020.

      #LibertariansForHarris

    2. You dumb fucking hick, Trump has his personal guard-dog at AG attacking anyone who gets near that Damian-like Con Man.

      1. Poor child porn sock.

      2. Like a wing man?

      3. Wait, I thought that threatening to put a political opponent in prison was a sign of Creeping Fascism. It’s not now? Because it’s Wednesday or something?

        But then again, maybe at one point Barron skipped a day of school. That’ll get Harris on his ass for sure.

      4. Ugh, you’re back. I was beginning to think the Feds finally nailed you for the kiddie porn thing.

    3. Her mistake is not calling him “Crooked” Trump and encouraging his supporters to chant “Lock him up?”

      1. Trump should resign and let Pence pardon him Gerald Ford style. Either that or he is going to prison.

        1. Pedo Buttplugger is really have a tough time when Trump is re-elected and Pence runs and wins the Presidency in 2024.

          Im sure Lefties will have glowing endorsements of Pence leading up to Election 2024.

        2. It’s the same amount of bluster that Trump used on the campaign trail. Hillary isn’t (and was never) going to be indicted by the Trump administration.

      2. To be fair, Hillary did publicly admit she mishandled classified information. They lock military folks up quicker when they don’t admit mishandling classified information.

    1. There is no king in the north.
      Its Queen in the North.
      Because, you know, passive aggressive backstabbing and girl power and all that…

      1. Gay, disabled, veteran, hispanic surnamed, black, queen – – – – – –

      2. “Most Annoying Female” award.

  11. Wonkette pushes the Harris campaign line that people hate her merely because she was a prosecutor…

    Is it me, or is much of the party line on the left dependent on a lack of agency on various groups under its tent? What could Harris do? It was all out of her hands, even the terrible laws she personally pushed.

    1. Partisanship means you get to ignore the transgressions by your team, while blaming the other team for theirs.

      1. And blaming the other team for your own as well

  12. Virginia Democrat who was accused of having sex with teen secretary wins in state primary

    I am sure reason and Lefties that visit reason will have lots to say against this Democrat, like they did with Roy Moore out of Alabama.

    1. HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa

      1. Remember how fast Lefties protected the Virginia Governor, Lt. Governor, and Attorney General from racial and sex misconduct allegations?

        They circled the wagons once the Republican Speaker of the House in Virginia would become Governor, if they resigned.

    2. Remember how the GOP protected their own toe-tapping gloryhole loving Senator Larry Craig and let him serve out his term?

      Of course you do. You’re sucking GOP cock right now.

      1. So you DON’T want Republicans more accepting of homos?

        I know. You need to lie about people so the Democrat Party seems good. It is hard coming back from being pro-slavery like the Democrat Party is.

        1. I don’t give a fuck about you Log Cabin Republicans.

        2. reason really needs some web traffic today to send in the pedos.

      2. What’s wrong with sucking cock? You homophobic, bro?

        1. It’s just that so many goddamned conservative males are closet cocksuckers. then they lead fake lives.

          Like Fat Rush Limbaugh (Praise Be Unto Him) and his life as Jeff Christie. Now he has sham marriages to cover his real life.

          1. So yes. And you’re a known pedophile. Damn man.

        2. Poor guys think the World is full of male cocksuckers, when they really only represent a tiny portion of the gay community.

          Of course, Hillary loves it when Lefties suck her dick.

    3. I opposed Moore becoming a US Senator because he’s a theocratic loon, not because he dated a teenager when he was 30 or whatever. Are you a Roy Moore supporter or something?

      1. No one believes you because we know you better than that.

    4. I am sure reason and Lefties that visit reason will have lots to say against this Democrat, like they did with Roy Moore out of Alabama.

      Paging Tony. Tony to the white courtesy phone please.

    5. He is a Democrat, therefore he is a normal politician.

    6. “”like they did with Roy Moore out of Alabama.”‘

      If she had a job as a secretary, she’s probably older than what Moore prefers.

      1. It opened at $45 four months ago. I sold at $88, meanwhile it ended up hitting $160 a day or two ago.

        So yeah, at $125 it’s not much of a buy. Glad I didn’t short it when it was “overvalued” at $100.

        1. Four weeks ago, not months ago.

        2. It’s overvalued at 45, LOL. But here’s a little tip. NEVER short based on valuation. So what if it’s overvalued? Everyone else sees it and knows it and it doesn’t matter. Look at bullshit stocks like TSLA or stupid shit like SHAK. Shorting may pay off at some point, but when the stock is on an irrational tear the value doesn’t matter, you’ll get your face ripped off.

          1. Oh hey Shreek outed another of his socks, because that’s the kind of stupid money losing advice that lost him his bet.

      2. “Beyond Meat” is what Tulpa, LovesCons1789, and Shitlord call their gay conversion therapy.

        1. Poor child diddler.

          He had a rough day trying to get web traffic up.

        2. It’s kind of sad that you’re that hung up on being a homophobe, what with your pedophilia and all.

  13. Texas governor signs controversial ‘Save Chick-fil-A’ bill into law

    Rogue cities find out they are still subject to the restrictions of the US and state Constitutions.

    1. Like I pointed out when this all erupted, the San Antonio city council members who brought this up should have just said, “you guys are closed on Sundays, that won’t work for us since it’s one of the busiest travel days of the week.” Instead, they made it about MUH LGBT CIVIL RIGHTS culture war bullshit, and this is the response.

    2. The new law stops the government from taking unfavorable action against a business or person for contributing to religious organizations.

      Why just religious organizations? Why should the government be able to take unfavorable action against a business or person who contributes legally to any organization of their choosing?

      Sure, it’s good that this bill passed, but the TX legislature should realize that the problem isn’t this one instance against someone popular. The problem is that government is picking winners and losers for what businesses can be in airports in the first place.

      1. Because religion has specific Constitutional protections.

        Jesus how are you this fucking dumb.

        1. Leo has trouble with complex thought.

  14. 23 Democrats Are Running for President. Do Any of Them Know What They’re Doing?

    What is the unluckiest number in the World? 23 Democrats

    1. I’d proudly vote for any of them except Tulsi Gabbard.

      1. The OBL sock really had to step it up this morning or ENB would never get any web traffic.

      2. Actually the Democratic equivalent to Trump is Marianne Williamson – a self-promoting author who is completely unqualified for anything but conning people out of their money (although she is nowhere nearly as good as conning people).

        1. Poor child porn sock. Trying to get people to take him seriously.

          1. Quit lying you cock-sucking Larry Craig GOP hack. I bet you resemble your hero – Denny Hastert.

            1. Poor Buttplugger cannot get HIllary’s cock out his mouth nor kids off his computer.

            2. You admitted you got banned and now are claiming you weren’t.

              Maybe it’s you that needs to stop lying, you stupid hicklib.

  15. Just how bad is the Drumpf economy? It’s so bad people cannot even afford funerals.

    It is maddening that people have to beg for money on the internet when their loved ones die. How have so many of us just accepted that this is how things should be done.

    This didn’t happen during the Obama years. Because he personally created the strongest 8-year run in US economic history.

  16. Left-libertarian Bill Maher offers an important warning about 2020.

    “If he loses… he won’t go. I’ve been saying that since before he got elected.” “Real Time” host Bill Maher warns @ChrisCuomo that President Trump may not leave the White House is he loses the presidential election in 2020, saying it’s something we have to worry about.

    This is why it’s so important for all libertarians to vote Democrat. Drumpf must lose by a huge margin in 2020 so he cannot realistically claim “voter fraud” made the difference.

    1. They said the same about W and Obama.

      1. So far the only one not willing to accept the results of an election is the not my president folks, and Hillary Clinton. Steele said in court that the purpose of the dossier was so Hillary could contest the election.

      2. Dubya couldn’t wait to get out of the White House and paint shit while suffering under his own form of PTSD induced by Dick Cheney.

        With a record low 22% approval rating and Cheney in a wheelchair Dems predicted the death of the GOP.

        But Donnie the Dumpstain revived the racist roots of the GOP and saved them.

        1. Hillary has a 0% Presidential approval rating. She never won!

          Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

          1. She won by 3 million votes, actually.

            #StillWithHer

            1. Hillary winning the Biggest American Loser show does not count.

            2. No, the Con Man won by 70,000 votes in PA/MI/WI.

              Then he called it a “landslide”.

              That is a great con, you must admit.

              1. But that’s only because Russia hacked the election. If not for Russian hacking (and Drumpf’s collusion, definitively proven by Mueller) Hillary Clinton would have won the Electoral College as well.

                #TrumpRussia

              2. Poor buttplugger.

                Trump’s 304 to Hillary 227 Electoral college votes means that Trump won by 77 votes. More than PA/MI/WI combined.

        2. “Donnie the Dumpstain” LOLOLOLOLOL

          You’re on fire this morning! Keep it up!

          #SoGladButtplugRememberedHisPassword

        3. MAGA!

        4. Where are they now:

          Sarah Palin’s buttplug

          Stolen by a Clinton supporter at a McCain rally in Wilmington, DE in March of 2008, the plug was gifted to Clinton herself during the run up to her campaign in 2016. Having mistaken it for a pacifier, Clinton has been discovered on multiple occasions hiding in closets, curled up in the fetal position and sucking vigorously on the plug.

          When asked to comment on the presidential candidate’s mistakes, the plug has declined to answer the question directly, preferring to rant incoherently about racists taking over the country and absolutely refusing to be run through a dishwasher or otherwise disinfected.

    2. One fascinating aspect of the Trump phenomenon is the left’s incessant predictions and intuitions about his thoughts, beliefs and mental state, which they then firmly believe to be established fact.

  17. Suderman writes about the recent riff between Rep. Justin Amash (R–Mich.) and other members of the House Freedom Caucus

    Tiff? Rift?

    1. Nope, it was a riff, not a rift or tiff.

      This is what happened: the Freedom Caucus was over at Meadow’s pad for a jam session, and Amash insisted on taking the lead on the guitar solo in Freebird. This pissed off Brooks who, being from Alabama, thought he should have the honor.

  18. “Kamala Harris Doesn’t Have To Explain Her Kickass Self To Your Dumb Asses”

    —-Wonkette

    Yeah, that’s a shitty story.

    The thing about Kamala Harris . . . as bad as she is, she’s not the worst option in the Democratic field. Yeah, she’s an authoritarian police-state type–on top of being a progressive–but she may be less about imposing authoritarian socialism on us by way of the Green New Deal than the others in the field.

    Yeah, Kamala Harris and her fans are awful for wanting to impose police state solutions on us over our objections and against our will, but I’m not sure that’s worse than other candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren–who want to make authoritarian socialism the rule of law under the guise of a popularity contest.

    Libertarianism is the polar opposite of authoritarianism.

    Capitalism is the polar opposite of socialism.

    Authoritarian socialism is the worst enemy of libertarian capitalism.

    Authoritarian progressives, like Kamala Harris, aren’t as bad, in that formulation, as authoritarian socialists like Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren.

    I’d love to think Biden will hold onto his lead, but his falling 30% plurality of support means that 70% of registered Democrats (and growing) want some flavor of authoritarian socialism, more or less, as outlined in the Green New Deal. Kamala Harris may be the best of the rotten apples after Biden, from that perspective, and compared to anybody in the Democrat field, Donald Trump looks like a libertarian capitalist.

    1. It’s odd that so often use ‘authoritarian’ in place of ‘totalitarian’
      There’s an important difference there that you either don’t acknowledge, or, inexplicably, don’t think applies

      1. There are a number of important distinctions between authoitarianism and totalitarianism. For instance, where authoritarians are mostly concerned with what you do, that isn’t enough for totalitarianism. Totalitarians want to control what you think. It’s not enough to do what you’re told. Under totalitarianism, you have to like it.

        The Chinese government wanting to impose a harsh extradition law on Hong Kong is an example of authoritarianism. The Chinese government imprisoning a million Muslims at a time in reeducation camps to cure them of their religion is an example of totalitarianism.

        Whatever distinction you’re trying to make between authoritarianism and totalitarianism, as it pertains to Democrat candidates and their support for the Green New Deal, it’s relatively unimportant in comparison to the distinction between capitalism and socialism. When I tell you that I oppose the Green New Deal because it’s authoritarian and socialist rather than because it’s authoritarian and communist, that’s not a criticism of the only comparison that really matters.

        I oppose both socialism and communism because they’re not capitalist. In regards the Green New Deal, what difference does the distinction between socialism and communism make in that formulation ? I also oppose both authoritarianism and totalitarianism because they aren’t libertarian. Why does the difference between authoritarianism and totalitarian matter in regards to the Green New Deal when the real difference is between libertarianism, on one hand, and both authoritarianism and totalitarianism on the other?

      2. Why do you think “totalitarian” is more appropriate?

        1. And why does it matter!

          1. Will get back to you on a live thread

  19. When even @TheTweetOfGod gets suspended…

    What’s amusing here is that this account is a far better Le Enlightened Atheist parody than the Good God Above one that’s more well known and has been using the God representation from South Park as its avatar.

    Apparently the latter–which, like a lot of progressive institutions, degenerated into a parody of itself after Trump’s election–lost its monetization recently, and the account owner went on some crying jag because he actually had hired staff that had to be let go and couldn’t pay his bills.

    1. Wait. He hired support staff for his Twitter account?

      1. Yep.

      2. He also did some kind of podcast. In any event, the whole situation was exceptional beyond words.

  20. I’ve got to remember that Balko quote (about the election as a steak). Pure poetry.

  21. “President Donald Trump said he’s personally holding up a trade deal with China and that he won’t complete the agreement unless Beijing returns to terms negotiated earlier in the year.

    “It’s me right now that’s holding up the deal,” Trump said at the White House before he left on a trip to Iowa. “And we’re going to either do a great deal with China or we’re not going to do a deal at all.”

    Last month, the U.S. accused China of reneging on provisions of a tentative trade deal, bringing talks to a halt. “We had a deal with China and unless they go back to that deal I have no interest,” Trump said.

    Trump’s comments came a day after he threatened to raise tariffs on China if President Xi Jinping doesn’t meet with him at the upcoming Group of 20 summit in Japan. Trump told reporters that he could impose tariffs of 25% or “much higher than 25%” on $300 billion in Chinese goods.

    —-Bloomberg

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-11/trump-says-he-s-holding-up-trade-deal-with-china-ahead-of-g20

    I think Trump did a great job with Mexico, and I’ll give him credit for doing such a great job over my objections the objections of every other free trade guy out there, but I hope his balls haven’t gotten too big for his britches because of that win.

    The jobs report for May came in weak–but annual wage growth here in the U.S. is still clocking in above 3.0% and the productivity report was great, which means that wage inflation isn’t a problem. Meanwhile, Trump’s support among Republicans in Iowa, where Chinese tariffs on soybeans, etc. are hitting farmers, is still up over 85%.

    From a getting reelected strategic standpoint, I’m not sure Trump has much to lose if Emperor Xi doesn’t capitulate. If Emperor Xi does flinch, Trump’s reelection may become unstoppable. Meanwhile, Trump is now threatening another round of tariff increases against China–and I’m against it, again. And I hope I’m wrong like I was about Mexico. For the sake of capitalism, free trade, and long term economic growth for the American people, I hope I’m wrong and Trump is right.

    1. I am fine with Trump trying because most Presidents and government officials just kick these cans down the road.

      Americans feel that there is a problem with immigration rules and enforcement. Politicians have been claiming for decades that they will fix the problems. Americans keep electing the same types of politicians who rarely accomplish their campaign promises.

      Then Trump was elected.

      I think China will ride out their position a bit longer hoping that all their bribes to Congress will pay off. After they don’t, China will compromise and shift us all toward freer trade policy, thanks to Trump.

      1. hoping that all their bribes to Congress will pay off

        What else are they going to do with that balance of payments. It’s not like it’s going to get spent anywhere else.

  22. Justin Amash: NeverTrump’s new shiny object

    The article talks a lot about most NeverTrumpers now fawning over Amash probably wouldn’t like his prescribed solutions on a number of issues. But I think it applies even more to Libertarian NeverTrumpers as they’d be more favourable to his solutions but saying he thinks the president has committed impeachable offenses is what finally made them realize how much they love him.

    1. My opposition to Amash is purely strategic.

      Single Member Districts + Green New Deal + Medicare for All = Need Republican in White House

      Single Member Districts + Justin Amash = Republican in White House less likely.

      I maintain that whatever principle Amash and his supporters are trying to serve, it is vastly inferior to my principled stance against authoritarian socialism as represented by the Green New Deal.

      Incidentally, refusing to vote for Trump, even if it’s the best way to stop the country from taking a sharp turn towards authoritarian socialism is not principled. Being principled is about doing things that are hard to do–not about abandoning your principles just because you don’t like Trump. There isn’t anything principled about what Amash is doing, and the people who are following out of a sense of principle are horribly confused.

      1. P.S. We should ask ourselves this: “Could Amash potentially cost Trump Michigan?”

        Amash wouldn’t even need to carry Michigan–just cost Trump enough support that Trump would lose the swing state and the White House to Liz Warren, Bernie Sanders, or any other Democrat who’s willing to sign the Green New Deal.

      2. You’re naive if you think we’re just facing authoritarian socialism.
        We’re looking at totalitarianism.

    2. I’m not a NeverTrumper by any means. I’d support Amash running for the same reason that I supported Rand Paul in the primaries last go-around. He aligns more closely to my political beliefs than Trump.

      I’ve moved beyond the point of voting for the lesser of two evils, because it hasn’t worked for us thus far.

      1. Trump has worked out fantastically for us. Us Libertarian Americans. Us black Americans. Us AmerIndians. Us white Americans. Us asian Americans. Us military and veterans.

        No so much for Lefties and Anarchists.

  23. “The analysis showed that placing geothermal regulatory and permitting requirements on a level similar to that of oil and gas and other energy industries could allow the geothermal industry to discover and develop additional resources and to reduce costs. The GeoVision analysis demonstrated that optimizing permitting alone could increase installed geothermal electricity-generation capacity to 13 GWe by 2050—more than double the 6 GWe projected in the Business-as-Usual scenario that serves as the baseline for the GeoVision analysis.”

    —-DoE

    https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/06/f63/0-GeoVision-ExecSummary-v2-opt_0.pdf

    They’re just talking about eliminating the regulation of developing geothermal to the level that’s normally required to develop oil and natural gas?

    Short version: One of the significant barriers to the development of carbon free geothermal energy is environmental regulation.

    “Environmentalists” who are so scared about the negative impacts of climate change that they’re willing to subject the economy to authoritarian socialism–but not scared enough to reduce permitting requirements for geothermal plants–are completely full of shit.

    1. One of the reasons I’ve seen environmentalists oppose geothermal is because of “fracking”.

      The upfront costs of geothermal have a lot to do with drilling. You want to find water, which is conducive to heat transfer. If you don’t find enough water, then you’ve wasted an awful lot of money on digging a really deep hole. A lot of times, they can improve the chances of hitting water through fracking. Just like fracking releases natural gas and oil, it can also release water.

      Environmentalists don’t like fracking–not for the reasons they usually say. It’s really about not wanting to provide people with an alternative to sacrifice. If you can keep finding new energy sources, it puts off the day when you have to start sacrificing by learning to live with less energy. That’s what their opposition to retrofitting hydro to produce more carbon free energy, their opposition to geothermal, and even their opposition to nuclear is really about.

      They want you to have no other option than to pay through the nose for expensive electricity, so that you’ll learn to go without it.

      1. Nobody will accept their Lefty way of life unless our society burns down.

        If it won’t do it on its own, Lefties will help it along.

  24. Scott Daniel Warren is Right to feed and water someone in need and is wrong for supporting the anti-sovereign movement of open borders, and immigration into our freebie system. It diminishes our pursuit of happiness. The government is wrong to hang 20 years in prison over someone for acting like a good person. They pursued a wrong wrong.

    1. Notice that nobody is arguing for repealing the aiding and abetting laws.

      This guy is just defying Trump, so its a waste of taxpayer money to prosecute him.

      Spending tens of millions for Mueller to go after Trump for years (when a month long investigation would have come to the same conclusion), is a-okay though.

  25. Why is Bernie Sanders in all the Democrat polls? He’s not a member of the Democratic Party!

    1. Because he’s running for the Democratic nomination?

    2. Because Democrats are stupid and don’t want to piss off the Bernie-Brats.

      1. I’m surprised you’d admit that you’re stupid.

    3. His ‘independent’ tag is his first and biggest political lie.
      He runs as a democrat, caucuses with democrats, takes money from democrats, is a socialist like democrats; he is a duck.

    4. FYTW!

  26. His attorneys argued that he was just providing “basic human kindness” to people

    “The Warren Plea”

  27. Alright, I am headed off to lunch, you fucking Peanuts. Enough poking shit at conservatives for now.

    1. You poke shit? I bet you eat pieces of shit like us for breakfast!

    2. Try going on a diet instead you disgusting, morbidly obese, Ron Jeremy – lookin’ pecophile sack of garbage!

      https://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Screen-Shot-2019-01-28-at-1.07.10-PM.png

    3. And by lunch you mean “post more kiddie porn”

  28. I’m exciting to be selected for a jury just so I can nullify the charge (within reason of course).

  29. Wonkette pushes the Harris campaign line that people hate her merely because she was a prosecutor

    Wonkette is still a thing? Good lord, Grandpa Moses, time to update your Netscape bookmarks.

  30. Amash is tweeting about the “Rule of Law”? Uh oh, he just lost the real libertarians…

  31. […] I am happy that Scott Warren, 36, is a free man (for now), it should have never come to this. The charges against this humanitarian represent a clear-cut […]

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.