Reason Roundup

Trump Team Plotted Post-Hoc Justification for Withholding Ukraine Aid, Emails Suggest

Plus: another half-truth from Elizabeth Warren, Rick Perry calls Trump "the chosen one," and more...


Budget office says "procedures were followed." After the talk of a "quid pro quo" with Ukraine started, President Donald Trump's team may have sought to reverse-engineer some legitimate reasons for withholding military aid. A review by the White House Counsel's Office found emails in which Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney asked budget officials if there was any legal justification for Trump's order to withhold the aidweeks after the president had given said order.

According to the administration, Mulvaney was simply asking to review the budget office's legal justification, which is a standard document produced whenever promised funds are withheld.

The question of whether the president withheld the millions in aid to ensure President Volodymyr Zelenskiy's cooperation in investigating the Biden family is at the center of the Trump impeachment inquiry. The president admits to both ordering the aid hold and asking for an investigation into Biden business dealings but maintains that this was no quid pro quo.

The Washington Post mentions "three people familiar with the [White House Counsel's Office investigation] who spoke on the condition of anonymity":

One person briefed on the records examination said White House lawyers are expressing concern that the review has turned up some unflattering exchanges and facts that could at a minimum embarrass the president. It's unclear whether the Mulvaney discussions or other records pose any legal problems for Trump in the impeachment inquiry, but some fear they could pose political problems if revealed publicly.

According to the Post's reporting, the evidence uncovered in this examination goes way beyond an email or two from Mulvaney. The review "has turned up hundreds of documents that reveal extensive efforts to generate an after-the-fact justification for the decision and a debate over whether the delay was legal," write Josh Dawsey, Carol D. Leonning, and Tom Hamburger.

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) spokesperson Rachel Semmel denies that there was anything unusual about communications. Semmel told The New York Times:

To be clear, there was a legal consensus at every step of the way that the money could be withheld in order to conduct the policy review. O.M.B. works closely with agencies on executing the budget. Routine practices and procedures were followed.


Sen. Elizabeth Warren omits son's private schooling when arguing against school choice. Last Thursday, the Massachusetts Democrat and 2020 presidential candidate was confronted by several school-choice activists in Atlanta. "We are going to have the same choice that you had for your kids because I read that your children went to private school," said Sarah Carpenter of the Powerful Parent Network in a video uploaded to Facebook. Warren responded:

My children went to public schools.

But after The Washington Free Beacon unearthed a yearbook photo of her son attending the private Kirby Hall School, Warren communications director Kristen Orthman offered this:

Elizabeth's daughter went to public school. Her son went to public school until 5th grade. Elizabeth wants every kid to get a great education regardless of where they live, which is why her plan makes a historic investment in our public schools. Every public school should be a great school. Her plan does not affect funding for existing non-profit charter schools, but she believes we should not put public dollars behind a further expansion of charters until they are subject to the same accountability requirements as public schools.


California sex workers are concerned about the $1.5 million the state has allocated for a study on human trafficking victims. "Though we really want to support that, we're concerned that the groups that were allocated the monies had conflicts of interest, in that the groups that were to do the investigation, the research into sex trafficking want to call all of us sex trafficking victims, when we're not," said Maxine Doogan of the Erotic Service Providers Legal Education and Research Project (ESPLERP). "Also, the main group is involved in law enforcement, and they are able to arrest people for prostitution and then call them sex trafficking victims and then count them as sex trafficking victims and inflate the numbers of sex trafficking."

Inflated "victim" numbers are then used to justify an increase in policing conducting undercover prostitution stings. This is "because the only way [police] identify sex trafficking victims is through prostitution sting operations where people are arrested for prostitution," said Doogan. "We don't think [victims] should be arrested."


Bloomberg officially in. "The idea that Mike Bloomberg is going to skip the first four states and then bludgeon his way into the mix through sheer financial muscle has to be one of the most fanciful presidential-campaign strategies ever," writes Rich Lowry at National Review.

Over the weekend, the former New York City mayor officially joined the Democratic 2020 presidential race.

Bloomberg—the news outlet, not the candidate—announced that to avoid any conflict of interest it would not do any investigative reporting on its namesake and publisher and, to be fair, would not to any investigative reporting on other Democratic candidates either.

In other election-related ephemera: Maya Rudolph is so good as Kamala Harris.


  • Capitalism remains the preferred economic system of 60 percent of respondents in a new Gallup poll, while 39 percent prefer socialism. But "eighty-seven percent of the population has a positive view of free enterprise," notes J.D. Tuccille, "including 92 percent of Republicans, 88 percent of Independents, and 83 percent of Democrats." And 90 percent "have a positive view of entrepreneurs."
  • Some good news out of the Hong Kong elections.
  • The Adult Performers Actors Guild is protesting discriminatory Instagram censorship. President Alana Evans "has collected a list of more than 1,300 performers who claim that their accounts have been deleted by Instagram's content moderators for violations of the site's community standards, despite not showing any nudity or sex":

  • Rick Perry calls Donald Trump "the chosen one":

NEXT: More Americans Want Bigger Government—If It’s Free

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. …President Donald Trump’s team may have sought to reverse-engineer some legitimate reasons for withholding military aid.

    Plausible plausibility.

    1. Hello.

      SNL really has fallen.

      That’s considered funny?


      1. Their full embrace of prog politics has damaged their sense of humor.

        Do you know any progs with a sharp sense of humor? Most are humorless automatons, like Soviet apparatchiks.

        1. Last genuinely funny thing I saw on SNL was that remake of “I’m a Bill”; “I’m an Executive Order”.

          1. Poor liberal-libertarian mainstreamers, doomed to a humorless existence in a world in which all of the best comedians, actors, musicians, authors, and directors are conservatives, and all of the best movies, songs, television shows, stand-up routines, and other entertainments skew hard to the right.

          2. HOT TUB!

            Get in the hot tub…good God…its hot…

            1. Will it make me wet?
              Will it make me sweat?

  2. The president admits to both ordering the aid hold and asking for an investigation into Biden business dealings but maintains that this was no quid pro quo.

    I’ll need this sentence auto-tuned to a classic Aerosmith song.

  3. My children went to public schools.

    For a day as a scared straight exercise arranged by their Snooty Haven Private Academy.

    1. “Just remember: We can send you back there any time we want!

  4. Ok boomer. Ugh.

  5. “Sen. Elizabeth Warren omits son’s private schooling when arguing against school choice.”



  6. Though we really want to support that, we’re concerned that the groups that were allocated the monies had conflicts of interest, in that the groups that were to do the investigation, the research into sex trafficking want to call all of us sex trafficking victims, when we’re not…

    I didn’t realize, in addition to being simultaneously jezebels and trafficking victims, that sex workers are also anti-science.

    1. The shear scope of the rescue is pretty amazing.

      1. Don’t worry. There are a bunch of financial relationsheeps at play here.

    2. Those animals were on the lamb.

        1. Only if they make it shore.

    3. That’s a lot of progressives

      1. Finally. The Silence of the Lambs!

      1. Surely ewe jest.

      2. Conspiracy theorists say it was, despite the deniers trying to pull the wool over your eyes on the matter.

      3. No. The ship’s captain was a sheep.

        1. That’s only what you herd.

          1. Should’ve scrolled down. I’m shorn of whatever glory would’ve been mine.

            1. T’will.

    4. Think of the shear scope of the disaster.

    5. A deal on preshrunk sweaters.

      1. No deal. Someone will get fleeced.

    6. What do you call a lamb with no arms or legs?
      A cloud.

    7. So this ship was carrying sheep and not Lamborghinis?

    8. A lamb, a drum, and a snake fall off a ship.

      1. Oh my.

        1. Not sure if anyone herd me.

          1. They are flocking to heart more.

      2. Ok that’s so bad its good.

    9. 13998,13999,14000,1400………….zzzzzzzzz.

    10. These sheep need a gyro!

      1. With Zzzzzzzz sauce?

    11. It’s a pity no one shepherded them around the obstruction.

  7. “Rick Perry calls Donald Trump ‘the chosen one'”

    Ugh. That’s another thing I miss about the Obama years — sure people liked him, but there was never this religious aura surrounding him or anything.

    Plus he never, you know, put kids in cages.


    1. Yep. And anyone still supporting Trump is a hopeless case. Nothing will change their opinion of their dear leader. Lemmings all.

      1. lol. you’re nodding along with a troll account

      2. Sounds like you’re going down with the Queen Hind.

    2. It’s only a cult of personality when Republicans do it.

      1. Damn you, it was HER turn!!

  8. Why some black voters want more from the 2020 Democratic field

    Notice the MSM spin here. You can be very sure that this actually means that tens of thousands of Black Americans voters are leaving the Democrat Party forever.

    1. Or at a minimum are going to sit out the 2020 election.

      1. Maybe. A few of my neighbors who are Black Americans have Trump signs on their property.

    2. LOL

      Drumpf is the most racist President ever and Democrats are embracing reparations for slavery. African American turnout in 2020 will be enormous.

      1. Yes, everyone knows all black people do the same things the same way.

        1. “African American turnout in 2020 will be enormous.”

          Where in that sentence did you see the word “all”?

      2. I think Woodrow Wilson and Andrew Jackson tied for that title = the most racist President ever

  9. Bloomberg—the news outlet, not the candidate—announced that to avoid any conflict of interest it would not do any investigative reporting on its namesake and publisher and, to be fair, would not to any investigative reporting on other Democratic candidates either.

    CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC all scramble to get someone high in their respective ownerships to run as a Democrat.

    1. Dept of Redundancy Department.

  10. WaPo recently made the case Barry is ‘conservative’.


    1. Everything’s relative.

      1. Pretty much. At this point the Dims have moved so far left even Obama is saying “Dafaq”?

  11. ‘The rule of law is what sets us apart’: Read Richard Spencer’s scathing final letter as Navy secretary

    This guy should have been fired after two US Navy ships collided with other ships. He is responsible as well as the Captains.

    1. You have to love Schumer giving him a tongue bath, despite him being fired for trying to strike a deal in secret with the WH.

      1. I try to look at motives and the fact that Schumer is sucking Richard Spencer’s dick tips my position that this was absolutely the correct decision.

        These bureaucrats will get the message that Trump is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. Trump wanted this US Navy SEAL fully returned to duty with no punitive actions by superiors and the Navy Brass felt undermined, so they kept on.

        Get the nerve of these senior officers saying that Eddie Gallagher should be demoted for not following orders and then senior officers are not following Trump’s orders. Trump has the Constitutional and legal power to reverse Gallagher’s punishment and he did. End of story.

        1. #notmychainofcommand

  12. More bad economic news.

    Bumble Bee files for bankruptcy

    The #DrumpfRecession is so severe, people cannot even afford to eat canned tuna — despite working 2 or 3 jobs to survive.


    1. An alternative explanation for Bumble Bee going bankrupt.

      Then one day, I see a lot of commotion in the cafeteria. There was an inmate who had been in jail for 26 years or so. And he had his life savings of hundreds – maybe even thousands – of money macks in his locker. This was his savings. When he got released, he would have been able to sell it to someone and then that person’s family would have wired him payment. This was real money. But he got sent to the hole or something – no one was sure what happened.

      And for some reason, the administration emptied out his locker. They took his expired mackerel, put it in a big mail bin, and set it out in the hallway for anyone who wanted them.

      All of a sudden, people’s life savings were wiped out overnight… The government debased the mackerel.

  13. Nunes likely to face ethics probe over Vienna allegation, Armed Services chairman says

    If Democrats cannot convince the remaining Republican voters in Commifornia to get rid of Nunes, then they will. The fact that this Portuguese-American is supported by farmers in California drives the Lefties crazy.

  14. Hong Kong Voters Turn Out For Biggest Election In City’s History

    Did they vote for some person name “Pooh”?

    1. The Art of Mind Control

      Some Commie China mind control techniques.

  15. Hunter Biden-linked company received $130M in special federal loans while Joe Biden was vice president

    Uh-oh Lefties. The plot thickens and your deflection with impeachment is not working.


    2. Joe Biden has never been my first choice for 2020. So I can take a totally unbiased position here and say these Hunter Biden smears are completely baseless.


      1. It’s your impartiality on these matters that I always admire and respect, OBL.

  16. In Virginia, and elsewhere, gun supporters prepare to defy new laws

    Poor Lefties. They spend all that time dressing in Black face and sexually harassing co-workers and get elected to Virginia’s Executive positions, just to have the state citizens defy their unconstitutional gun control laws?

  17. Harvard-Yale game ends in near-darkness after climate change protest

    All that extra energy needed to light the field during the second half.

    This is a measurement of success for Climate Change Accepters!

  18. Bloomberg vows to refuse donations, presidential salary

    Other Democrat candidates will not be following suit.

    Besides, Bloomberg has already been bought and paid for.

    I wonder if the MSM will cover Trump’s giving away his paycheck, donating his salary to the National Park Service, the Department of Education, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Small Business Administration, the Surgeon General’s office and the Department of Agriculture?

    1. Bloomberg entry into presidential race raises ethics issues

      We already are aware that Bloomberg is a MSM Propaganda outlet.

    2. Ok Bloomer.

      1. +100

  19. Greenland Is Not For Sale. But It Has The Rare Earth Minerals America Wants

    Imagine if Greenland residents didn’t get welfare from Denmark. They might actually get to become billionaires from selling rare earth elements to the USA.

    When war with China comes someday and Denmark surrenders to the Socialists again, at least we know where to get the rare earth metals that we cant get from China.

  20. All patriotic Americans must vote Democrat so this country can effectively confront Russia.

    As Fiona Hill said, Russia is “gearing up” to interfere in the 2020 elections. We must pass my election security bills NOW.

    As Robert Mueller proved, the 2016 election was fundamentally illegitimate because of Russian hacking.

    We. Cannot. Let. That. Happen. Again.


    1. The only possible solution is a full nuclear exchange.

      1. I hope it doesn’t come to that. But no military option should be “off the table.”

        1. We need Hillary in office to make the first strike.

  21. Reason Managing Editor Stephanie Slade on “what libertarians can learn from Catholic social doctrine.”

    Libertarians need a beatitude adjustment.

  22. What Bad News? Investors Keep Stocks Rising


    You’re such a hack writer.

    1. Irrelevant.

      Here’s what matters — Charles Koch is only worth $61.4 billion. Because the richest people on the planet cannot prosper in a high-tariff / low-immigration economy.


      1. Just think how fast his fortunes will grow with a punitive wealth tax!

        1. The Democratic Party is moving toward the Koch / Reason open borders position. Increased levels of immigration will more than offset any so-called “wealth destroying” policies the next President will implement.


          1. And increase income inequality! Win-win!!!

  23. she believes we should not put public dollars behind a further expansion of charters until they are subject to the same accountability requirements as public schools

    I have no idea what the hell she’s talking about. Trump University had more stringent accountability requirements than public schools.

    1. Their teachers must be union members who cannot be fired, the schools cannot close regardless of results, and taxpayers will bail out any that exceed their budgets.

      That’s public school accountability!

    2. How about the accountability requirement where if the parent thinks the school eats ass, they don’t have to send their kid there?

  24. “To my friend Kellyanne Conway, I would say, ‘OK, boomer.”

    Not sure why what Kellyanne Conway thinks about marijuana matters. After all, if Trump’s opinion on the issue or marijuana overrode Jeff Sessions’ opinion when he was the Attorney General, why would Kelly Anne Conway’s opinion be of any significance?

    Why not talk about Trump’s record? Where Barack Obama raided state legal medical marijuana dispensaries in California hundreds of times over the course of his presidency, President Trump promised to respect state laws on recreational marijuana during his campaign–and has done exactly that. The fact is that there has never been a president with a more libertarian record on the issue of marijuana than Donald Trump–no matter what Kellyanne Conway says about anything.

    1. Extra Credit:

      On Friday, Trump made a statement on vaping that could hardly be more libertarian if Jacob Sullum had said it.

      “President Trump suggested he is softening his stance on a proposal to pull sweet and fruity e-cigarettes off the market, saying that prohibition can have dangerous consequences.

      “If you don’t give it to them, it is going to come here illegally,” he said in a White House meeting Friday with vaping industry leaders, public-health advocates and others on a policy to address a surge in underage vaping. Mr. Trump said that Instead of legitimate companies “making something that’s safe, they are going to be selling stuff on a street corner that could be horrible. That’s the one problem I can’t seem to forget.”

      “Now instead of having a flavor that’s at least safe, they are going to be having a flavor that’s poison,” he said.”

      —-WSJ, November 22, 2019

      That’s about as libertarian as it gets on nanny state issues with sitting presidents–no matter what Kellyanne Conway says about anything.

      1. The MSM tried to mitigate Trump’s actions on this issue.

        First they said Trump caved to public pressure.

        Now, the MSM might be reporting the truth that federal agencies were pushing a ban and Trump had not really involved himself in this issue. When he did, he doesn’t want to increase crime by creating a back market for vaping products.

        Who really knows because the MSM will never accurately report the full story on stuff like this because NARRATIVE and Orange Man bad.

        1. I saw an article last week about how Trump may have caved to pressure from vaping activists with their “We vape and we vote” pledge–as if caving to public pressure were a bad quality in a president.

          If not caving to public pressure is a good quality in a president, then Maduro in Venezuela has some wonderful qualities!

          1. Since when does literally Hitler cave to public pressure?

            1. Hitler caves when the bombs reign down on public places so he has nowhere else to go to hide from overpressure.

          2. instead of caving he listened and thought about it and maybe changed his mind which is rare in a president.

            1. He considered the issue….
              ….and then he got high!!

            2. In the progressive mind, it’s a terrible thing when the president listens to the people, and I’m not being facetious.

              Being a progressive is about using the coercive power of the government to force the unwilling to make sacrifices for the common good (as seen by progressives).

              Whether we’re talking about climate change, ObamaCare, immigration, or white privilege, it’s all about using the coercive power of government to force people to make sacrifices against their will for the benefit of others, the environment, or for their won benefit.

              When Trump goes around listening to people and doing what they want, he’s being awful.

  25. This tweet just licked *through* the boots

    Hopefully that tweet was before one of his cops shot that guy.

    1. Mayor Pete has no problem with state sponsored violence, it’s when people shoot back that he gets uneasy.

  26. But “eighty-seven percent of the population has a positive view of free enterprise,” notes J.D. Tuccille…

    Socialism isn’t what has the branding problem.

    1. They have a positive view of anything labeled “free”.

  27. Pete Hegseth: “God has used imperfect people forever”

    Is Pete implying that Our Lord and Savior Donald J Trump is imperfect or is he suggesting that Trump’s imperfections prove Trump is God’s Chosen One? Because you know who was even more imperfect than Trump?

    1. Yes, flaws are a sign of perfection.

    2. Attila the Hun?

    3. Virgin Mary?

    4. Richard Nixon?

    5. The Kwisatz Haderach?

  28. West Virginia prisons are charging inmates by the minute to read e-books.

    By the second if the e-book is a speed reading course.

    1. Inmates are checking out e-books and taking forever to return them so others can read them.

  29. “Pope Francis in Nagasaki demanded world leaders renounce atomic weapons”

    He wants a pony, too.

    1. I am sure the Pope got all aggressive nations to forever swear off attacking the USA.

    2. How many nukes does the Pope have?!!

      1. Golf clap.

      2. Does the Holy Hand Grenade count?

  30. London has banned Uber.

    I give you the seat of the British Empire.

  31. “The Adult Performers Actors Guild is protesting discriminatory Instagram censorship. President Alana Evans “has collected a list of more than 1,300 performers who claim that their accounts have been deleted by Instagram’s content moderators for violations of the site’s community standards, despite not showing any nudity or sex”

    Private company. Glad you now care about privately motivated censorship and it’s negative effects to people’s livelihoods.

    1. ENB didn’t give any opinion on this issue so why would you assume she’s not consistent in her beliefs?


  32. Hundreds of porn stars and sex workers had their Instagram accounts deleted this year.

    Instagram isn’t in the business of giving even tangential boners.

  33. The Adult Performers Actors Guild is protesting discriminatory Instagram censorship. President Alana Evans…

    Can suck the chrome off a trailer hitch? This seems like something Instagram should be all for.

  34. Fox & Friends preview an interview with Rick Perry, where he says that Trump is “the chosen one” and “sent by God to do great things”

    Yeah, not so fun when the other side does the cult thing, is it?

  35. Just in: Extraordinary statement from Bloomberg News Editor-In-Chief John Micklethwait about Bloomberg’s coverage plans of Mike Bloomberg’s candidacy: Bloomberg Editorial board suspended, no “investigation” of Mike, his family or foundation:

    Why waste time sorting through all of Bloomberg’s old tweets when you know the Des Moines Register will do that for you?

  36. “To my friend Kellyanne Conway, I would say, ‘OK, boomer.”

    On another tack, isn’t “boomer” being used here as a euphemism for nanny-state shitheads? That would be refreshing. Unfortunately, the way I’ve been hearing it used by younger generations is on older people who are out of touch–because they’re insufficiently woke.

    Some people have thought of boomers as nanny state authoritarians since before Dead Kennedys put out California Über Alles, but that was always an in-joke. Stage left boomers could never really grok that criticism. That charge was never mainstream.

    I don’t think the use of the word “boomer” as a nanny stater is standard, at all, either, but I wish it were.

    I don’t think it’s standard to think of “boomers” as being against marijuana consumption, necessarily, and I don’t think marijuana consumption is high on the list of things that woke people consider woke.

    1. I am pretty sure “ok Boomer” is being used by the nanny state shitheads towards anyone who questions their ignorance.

      1. A liberal person pointed out to me that saying “ok Boomer” is engaging in ageism and is a from of discrimination.

        1. I would agree with that except the retards who are using it generally don’t even know what the word means and are using it as an all purpose insult to anyone who disagrees with them.

          1. While I agree that Millennials and GenZers are generally stupid and probably don’t even know what “Boomer” means, it is funny that young people are fighting back with Boomers. Boomers who refuse to lower their federal debt spending for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Much of the $23 trillion national debt is coming from these program expenditures.

            1. Of course Millennials and GenZers are stupid. Guarantee that they don’t know that Boomers refer to sentient androids that are made by the Genom corporation in Japan.

            2. It’s tough, when you’ve paid into a Ponzi scheme for 30 years, to say “no, I don’t want back as much as I put in”.

              That said, broad generalizations of generations are inherently wrong. I know several boomers who are in favor of sacrificing benefits to fix the deficit.

              1. There are stereotypes and while there are no absolutes in stereotypes there can be some truths.

                I even have family that are Boomers and vote Democrat while saying that they would be fine with cutting back their Social Security and Medicare.

              2. But at that point your ignorance starts to show, and should be criticized, because you didnt pay in to anything. Sure, they said you were paying into the ponzi schemes, but anyone with half a brain knew the money went straight into the general fund to be later flushed on some other wasteful program.

              3. I was forced to pay SS and Medicare for 50 years against my will. I would have gladly opted out, since I knew then it was a ponzi, and one could do better investing on your own.

                Now I’ll milk every god damned nickel out of them that I can. SS will be the difference between taking two nice vacations and taking five nice vacations every year.

        2. “OK boomer” is dismissive, but it’s interesting why it’s being dismissive.

          It’s obviously age discrimination, but it’s meant to be age discrimination.

          It’s meant to enrage just like the suggestion that hippies are actually fascists a la California Über Alles.

          Yes, we know hippies are supposed to be against fascism. And we know claiming that you want exterminate people for being “uncool” is extreme and unfair. But enraging ex-hippies is the point.

          “ok boomer” is age discrimination by the woke, and that’s supposed to be enraging. It’s supposed to make you complain about the not being woke.

          If you don’t want to be the butt of the joke, don’t fall for complaining about the discrimination.

      2. “OK Bloomer” is a compliment by nanny state shitheads towards anyone who is a nanny state shithead.

    2. As a boomer, I have no idea what kids these days mean by the term “boomer”, nor do I give a shit except insofar as they should get the hell off my lawn.

      1. The problem is that it is a stupid insult. In contrast, them calling Gen Xers “Karens” is actually kind of funny. I am fine with jokes and insults as long as they are clever and “ok Bommer” is not.

        1. As a Gen Xer, I have never heard of this insult “Karens”.
          “They’re usually racist, homophobic, and transphobic, don’t believe in vaccines or climate change, and are mostly also the parents of Gen Z children.”

          I also laughed because this insult evidently only addresses the women in GenX.

          The funny thing about “Ok, boomer” is that Boomers get so mad about it. You have to admit that the Baby Boomer Generation will leave behind a good legacy.

          But hey, PEACE MAN!

          1. *[not] leave behind a good legacy.

          2. There is a whole series of memes that involve a picture of a cat in some crazy circumstance with the heading “Okay Karen…” For example a funny one is this picture of a mountain lion outside someone’s sliding glass door with a cat photshopped in and the heading “Okay Karen, where is your little squirt bottle now”. Karen was sort of the stand in for the stereotypical cat owning woman.

            When you understand where it came from, the insult “Karen” is at least reasonably funny. “Okay Boomer” has no such background and is just something stupid an fifth grade kid would say.

            1. I’m just saying that Boomers are not dismissing “ok, boomer” as something stupid.

              Boomers are getting mad. Getting mad at something is a pretty clear sign that the BURN works.

              I’m not saying this is an EPIC BURN or anything but it is gaining traction and pissing off Baby Boomers.

            2. ‘Karen’ Meme

              This one John? It’s kind of funny. More that cat ladies are wacko than some Generation thing where only GenX cat ladies are ‘more’ wacko.

              1. That one. And it is funny as hell I think. Granted the insult is a stretch but at least it is based on something funny. “Okay Boomer” doesn’t even have that.

                1. John, really, you don’t get the “Okay, Grandpa” BURN from that?

                  Even in the polite deep South, people still patronize elders that say ridiculous things.

                  I was not really like that and called stuff as it was. Problem with old people is that calling out the reality gets them upset. To keep the family peace, sometimes, I say things like “Okay… Dad”.

                  1. “John, really, you don’t get the “Okay, Grandpa” BURN from that?””

                    I read that as BERN.

                    I wonder how many people would say OK Boomer, and vote for Sanders.

              2. Due to one link limit, I added this Meme which is funnier and more relevant to GenXers. It is true that GenXers started the work-from-home reality and demands for better customer service.

                Karen vs. The Mountain Lion (True Story)

                I have found dum-dums in all Generations who have trouble with common sense and think travel or or outdoor experiences should be something that they are not. Americans who travel internationally without trying to speak the foreign language, for example.

            3. As a millennial, I find “ok boomer” lame and unclever

              1. Same. It’s especially dumb when it targets things typical of GenX and many peopled on the upper end of “Millennial.”

          3. Funny thing about Generations is that they tend to be mixed bags.

            Greatest Gen fought WWII and much of the Cold War while helping to leave behind trillions in under-funded pensions and national debt.

            Baby Boomers had some highlights with the Internet, home computers, cell phones, and Hep C. Negatives include: Trillions in national debt, ObamaCare, Clintons, Obama, W. Bush, working until death, the modern American police and nanny state, and spoiled Millennials.

            Gen Xers negatives include raising spoiled Millennials and Gen Zs, allowing Socialism to continue in the USA… Positives include pushing Libertarianism to new heights in national politics, allowing Boomers to work until they die….

            1. The members of the baby boom who served in Vietnam are totally different than the ones who didn’t. The ones who did not fit the stereotype. The ones who did, do not.

              Also, people associate the baby boom with the 60s but that wasn’t their decade. The baby boomers were all kids in the 1960s. The people who mattered in the 1960s, including everyone who was important in the youth culture, were all from the so called “silent generation” born too close to World War II to have served in it but before its end. The 70s and 80s where the decade when the Baby Boomers ran things and mattered.

              1. I would agree that Generation Baby Boomer is a very wide-ranging Generation of stereotypes. Probably more than any American Generation in over 100 years. I would also agree that fringe Generational ages can be more like the closer Generation.

                Vietnam defined the Boomers whether they went or not.

                I would argue that Boomers wanted to push their political views on the rest of us and that carried into the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. So we got JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Bill Clinton, W. Bush, and Obama. All super shitty Presidents.

                Boomers wanted to be so different than their parents but they were similar in the bossiness. Boomers just tended to let their kids do whatever and wanted to boss people around with politics. By the time I came of age as GenXer, the damage was done. Our government was huge and out of control.

                1. JFK and LBJ were elected before any boomer could vote. Remember, 18 year olds could not vote in 64 or 68. So, the first election any boomer voted in was 1968 and that was only those born in the first two years of the generation.

                  1. Uh, John, LBJ was “elected” in 1964.

                    Boomers were born starting in 1942. WWII skewed why that Generation’s birth periods. In 1941-2, military folks were off to war and got their women pregnant before they left. By 1943, Americans were seeing the war as winnable and started popping out kids. IIRC most Generational periods go from half way between a decade (1965-1985, 1985-2005, 2005-2025).

                    That would make 21 year olds as of 1963. Even the ones that couldn’t vote started to heavily get into protests and politics. Then of course, Amendment XXVI changed that voting age to 18 in 1971.

                    1. No, the Baby boom is the post war generation. The baby boom started nine months after the end of World War II or May of 1946. Anyone born before May 1946 is not a baby boomer. They are a member of the silent generation. So, no Baby Boomer voted in the 1964 election.

                      You have the definition of the generation wrong.

                    2. Kids born during and after WWII are not like the people before born before WWII. That war changed so much including the new Generation born.

                      Furthermore, if the incorrect definition of Silent Generation were also 15 years (1931-1946) then they would have been too young to fight in WWII.

                      IIRC, we discussed this topic some time back and I remember finding there being no set periods that defined a generation. Some were 14 years, some 15 years, and some 20 years.

                    3. Kids born during and after WWII are not like the people before born before WWII. That war changed so much including the new Generation born.

                      They are not part of the post war baby boom. Therefore, they are not baby boomers. If they don’t fit in with those born before them, that is the result of generations being inexact. It doesn’t make them baby boomers. They are not.

                      Furthermore, if the incorrect definition of Silent Generation were also 15 years (1931-1946) then they would have been too young to fight in WWII.

                      Yes, they were too young to fight in WWII. That is the definition of the Silent generation. If they had fought in WWII, they would be part of the earlier greatest generation or WWII generation. You are just making my point here.

                      IIRC, we discussed this topic some time back and I remember finding there being no set periods that defined a generation. Some were 14 years, some 15 years, and some 20 years.

                      Yes it is inexact. But one of the few hard lines is the baby boom. We know when it started. It started after the war ended and those serving in it returned home. So the beginning of the baby boom is one of the few times that there is an exact an meaningful line between generations.

                    4. Then why have 1946 as the Baby Boom start? If that Generation is labeled this because of a boom in babies, that took place because of soldiers having more babies and standards of living going up because of WWII. That boom in standard of living started in 1943. American cities started turning lights back on that year. There was jump in babies born between 1940 and 1942 of almost 450,000 babies per year. That is almost as big as the jump of babies between 1945 and 1946.

                      US Births:
                      1940 2.36 million
                      1941 2.5 million
                      1942 2.8 million
                      1943 2.9 million
                      1944 2.8 million
                      1945 2.8 million
                      1946 3.47 million
                      1947 3.9 million
                      1948 3.5 million
                      1949 3.56 million
                      1950 3.6 million
                      1951 3.75 million
                      1952 3.85 million
                      1953 3.9 million
                      1954 4 million
                      1955 4.1 million
                      1956 4.16 million
                      1957 4.3 million
                      1958 4.2 million
                      1959 4.25 million
                      1960 4.26 million
                      1961 4.3 million
                      1962 4.17 million
                      1963 4.1 million
                      1964 4 million

                      You will also find a drop in births as of 1947, 1957, and 1963. You will also note that infant mortality also started to drop starting in 1936.

                    5. It started after the war ended and those serving in it returned home.

                      Correct. But what you miss is that although ww2 ended in August 1945, it took quite some time for the troops to be shipped home. That’s why the birth rate between 1945 and 1947 is where you see the jump. Only the 2nd half of 1946 can be considered part of the baby boom.

                      1946 Trump born June, W in July, and Clinton August.

                      Say: Thanks, Boomer.

        2. Just looked up what a “Karen” is: “Karens are generally “privileged from the system the boomers set up for them and [are] now acting entitled and working against Gen Z,” explained Julia, a 23-year-old in Norway. “They’re usually racist, homophobic, and transphobic, don’t believe in vaccines or climate change, and are mostly also the parents of Gen Z children.”

          Good luck with that.

          1. The way to persuade people and win them over to your side is to insult them. This seems to be what millennials actually believe.

            1. To be fair, Millennials were called all sorts of names by older people.

              That Generation is pretty dumb overall as education in the USA has really gone down hill since the 1980s. Kids need junior college or the first two years of undergrad just to get the knowledge base we used to have in high school.

          2. Its funny how “privileged from the system the Boomers set up for them” means the GenXers will not accept the Socialist Utopia that Boomers had established for them.

            Gen Xers electing Trump and wanting to put America first is “entitled, racist, homophobic, and transphobic”.

            This might explain why evidently GenZers are more conservative right out of the gate than Millennials at 18. Boomers were too old to raise GenZs.

  37. Reason goes one way with coverage, meanwhile

    Non progressives have a different take

    1. These are interesting accusations.

      One thing not explained in the article is why/how the State Department had possession of notes from an interview conducted by private attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and colleagues. I found one article from around 9/25 where Guiliani said he gave the documents to Pompeo, and another from 10/3 where Guiliani claims the State Department asked him to conduct the interviews.


    “This latest creation borne out of the Cultural Marxist laboratory, which just happens to be a commercial for Sprite, a beverage produced by the Coca-Cola Company, features several adolescents preparing for their attendance at some rainbow-festooned event on the streets of a soulless urban jungle. If the ad feels more like a documentary than a promotional for carbonated sugar water that’s because no actor is ever seen quenching their thirst with the drink. Instead, the product has become a vehicle – a veritable Trojan horse – for driving home a hugely controversial issue into the living rooms of millions of Americans.”

  39. On the one hand, Democrat primary candidates have been trying to outdo each other on lefty issues with so much enthusiasm, you’d think it would open the door for someone to their right like Bloomberg.

    On the other hand, candidates to the right of the Democrat herd on certain issues, like Gabbard and Harris, have been getting steamrolled by the candidates on the left. Why does that change once Bloomberg enters the race?

    I don’t see what Bloomberg brings to the table at all. To the left, he’s an embarrassing racist because of his stop and frisk polices when he was the Mayor of New York City.

    “The proportion of stops generally reflects our crime numbers does not mean, as the judge wrongly concluded, that the police are engaged in racial profiling; it means they are stopping people in those communities who fit descriptions of suspects or are engaged in suspicious activity.”

    Mayor Michael Bloomberg

    “Stop and Frisk Keeps New York Safe”

    Washington Post, August 18, 2013

    Okay, boomer?

    Middle America might buy that, but what about his bullshit stance on sugary soft drinks and such?

    If Bloomberg were a stock, I’d short him.

    1. Why would anyone who voted for Trump vote for Bloomburg? What does he offer? I guess maybe he would offer some sheen of respectability and politeness to suburban white women or the “Karens” as they are being called. But a lot of them already vote Democrat.

      Meanwhile, things like this will give the woke left all kinds of reasons to stay home or vote third party. I can’t see how Bloomberg will ever be as popular with the Dem base as Trump is with the Republican base even if he won the nomination. And I don’t see how any candidate wins if he is less popular with his own party than his opponent is with his party.

      1. It would be one thing if New York weren’t already squarely in the Democrat fold on election day–and Bloomberg could offer himself as a Vice Presidential candidate to deliver it.

        Bloomberg and Trump are rivals. I bet Bloomberg is so jealous of Trump, it makes him sick at night. Bloomberg may be the only person in America who took Hillary’s loss harder than Hillary.

        Bloomberg doesn’t want to live in a world where Trump can be president–but he can’t. That’s the explanation that makes the most sense to me.

        1. I think that is a pretty good explanation. That makes me wonder if Bloomberg isn’t a danger to go third party. His doing that would be a disaster for the Democrats, especially if they run someone from the far left like Warren. A third party Bloomberg run combined with a hard left Democratic nominee would divide the Democratic party so much it might put even states like California and New York into play for Trump. But Bloomberg is so arrogant and so out of touch and as you say has taken Trump being President so personally, he might just be crazy enough to try it if he doesn’t get the nomination. Bloomberg would have the money to get on every ballot in the country and run a credible campaign right through election day. I wish Democrats good luck in dealing with him.

        2. I dont think any Democrat really thinks they can beat trump in 2020.

          If the goal is then to be the Democrat Primary winner, then Bloomberg has a shot.

          I think 2024 is the real goal and whomever is the Democrat primary winner for 2020 will have a better position come 2024.

          1. Not the Donkey winner, but several of those who make a good impression and show party loyalty by actively campaigning for the lead Donkey. Buttigieg, Booker, Harris, Gabbard are all in that mix.

      2. It should be noted, too, that middle America came to identify with Trump because the media was hurling the same charges against him–racist, xenophobe, misogynist, islamophobe, etc–that they leveled against middle America for eight years during the Obama presidency. After you’ve called the white, blue collar middle class stupid, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, etc., and then you call Trump the same thing–day in, day out for a year or so–they came to believe that New York casino magnate with a trophy wife and private jet was one of them!

        Unless Bloomberg starts being denounced as the King of the Deplorables by every news organization in the country–including an attention seeking chick at Breitbart–he’s not gonna get that kind of affection from middle America at all. For middle America to really love you, the mainstream media has to hate you, and there’s no way Bloomberg can inspire or profit from that kind of hatred.

        1. You have to remember that the Democrats, the media, and the Never Trump Right tell themselves the lie that Trump won because he got all of this free media coverage during the primaries and because he was a celebrity and a billionaire. Telling themselves this lie allows them to avoid taking responsibility for the failures of their policies and the complete political idiocy of trying to stop his campaign by insulting his supporters.

          So, it is not surprising that they could get behind Bloomberg. A Bloomberg campaign would be the building of the bamboo control tower by the anti Trump cargo cult. Trump won because he got free media and is a New York Celebrity billionaire. So, we will give Bloomberg free media coverage and as a celebrity billionaire he will win too. This is literally how stupid these people are.

          1. The weird thing about Trump that makes it possible for normal people to identify with him: he actually likes normally people. He doesn’t appear to think of them as nothing more than livestock who he has to hold his nose to deal with.
            Nobody else in the ruling caste can hide their contempt for Americans. Bernie comes closest, but still far short

            1. Trump’s reaction against elitism appears to be real.

              If you think of elitism in terms of rich vs. poor, like the progressives are wont to do, then you’re mystified that average people don’t see Trump as an elitist.

              If you see elitism as contempt for average people and their desires, then Trump is clearly not an elitist, and average people who like him because of that are perfectly rational to do so.

            2. Yes. Trump’s biggest sin and the biggest reason they hate him so much is that he isn’t embarrassed by being associated with average Americans. Trump’s critics in the media hate the American public with the fire of a thousand suns. How dare that man give those people a voice in how things are done.

            3. Bloomberg wants to stop average people from buying large sized sugary soft drinks because he has contempt for average people and their desires.

            4. Lefties hate that places of Progressivism, like New York City, do not rule the USA.

              People from these Socialist shitholes will go on and on about how great their city is as they have moved to a more affordable state.

          2. the Never Trump Right tell themselves the lie that Trump won because he got all of this free media coverage during the primaries and because he was a celebrity and a billionaire.

            This is not wrong. But to think that Bloomie will get this coverage is wrong. Trump is the ringmaster in a 9-ring circus and a comedian to boot. Bloomie is an old scold with zero personal charisma.

  40. Between the article about the White House Counsel and the one last week about the IG report, the Post really is putting on a clinic in how to disseminate disinformation. The IG report story was based on the anonymous leaks of people who were supposed to have seen the report. The Post itself never saw the report. Now again, the Post prints someone’s opinions of e-mails without actually seeing the emails.

    In both cases the Post, since they have not seen the source materials, have no way to fact check the opinions of the anonymous sources. Further, since the Post is reporting hearsay, it is not technically lying if these opinions turn out to be lies. In neither case did the Post actually say the documents said what was claimed. They only said “anonymous sources” claimed the materials said that.

    An actual news organization would never print such a leak without actually seeing the source materials. Hey if you want to leak the contents of these documents show us the documents themselves so we know what you are saying is true. If the source can’t produce the document you are leaking about, we are not printing the story.

    The fact that the Post doesn’t do that and instead happily prints the word of people without any verification shows how far removed from an actual news organization they are.

    1. And Reason parrots the Post here

      1. They all do. The idea is to create a false narrative about what these reports say so that when the actual materials are released the media can ignore them as “old news” without bothering to undo the false narrative they have created.

        Thanks to the internet and alternative sources, that doesn’t work very well anymore. But it is all they have and they are going to try and do it anyway.

        1. So well put, John.

          Socialism is a failure and they keep pushing that.

          Propaganda is working less and less but they keep pushing it anyway.

        2. Thanks to the internet and alternative sources, that doesn’t work very well anymore.

          It still works with most people because they are only paying attention to headlines. But that’s also the weakness of that strategy, there are mixed headlines if the person even glances at a variety of sources.

    2. According to the Post’s reporting, the evidence uncovered in this examination goes way beyond an email or two from Mulvaney.

      Well, as long as they’re reporting it, I’ll trust their capacity to be unbiased. I’m sure they just want to help inform the public.

      1. The are reporting second hand accounts of documents they have not seen. No wonder these morons think hearsay is credible evidence.

      2. And when the actual report comes out the authors here will rush in to say something along the lines that, due to the discrepancies the ‘truth is unclear.’

        1. Gotta love the “both sides are at fault here”.

          Famous tactic of Lefties to drop the opposition’s moral high ground while holding theirs steadily in the gutter.

  41. “”We had historically said: distributional outcomes, monetary policy has no role to play,” Kashkari told Bloomberg in an October interview. “That was kind of the standard view at the Fed, and I came in assuming that. I now think that’s wrong.””


    The same people who destroyed and humiliated Bristol Palin for the sin of getting pregnant as a teenager are now all about “leave the kids alone” when a 40 year old Hunter Biden gets a woman pregnant while cheating on his brother’s widow, with whom he was cheating on his wife with, and then makes her take him to court and take a paternity test to prove he was the father.

    Remember, journalists are horrible people. More than anything else, they are just garbage human beings.

    1. Hunter Biden deserves as much opprobrium as Bristol Palin did, which was plenty.

      He also seems to have arranged a strong income from being the unimpressive child of an elected official, much like Bristol Palin (and Chelsea Clinton, and Jenna Bush, and Neil Bush, and a few Kennedys, and others).

      1. Was Bristol Palin married at the time to someone else? Did she have an affair with her sister’s husband?

        Look, what Biden did may seem normal to toothless hicklib trailer trash like you but it doesn’t to anyone else.

        You are just garbage Rev. There is no other word to describe you.

      2. Hey Rev, did you forget this one: “ Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife”?


    Rasmussen poll shows Trump approval rate among blacks at 34%. Yes, it could be an outlier. Yes, it could be a bad poll. But how much of an “outlier” could it be? A poll that is 15 points high counts as a huge outlier. Even if it is off by 14 points and the approval rating is 20%, that is potentially catastrophic for the Democrats’ chances against Trump. If the Democrats don’t get 90% or more of the black vote and don’t get a better turnout than in 2016, they are doomed. How do they achieve that against a President whose approval rating is even 20% among blacks and especially if they are running someone like Warren or Buttigieg who has shown virtually no appeal or ability to motivate black voters?

    1. Even more vote fraud?

      1. The Republicans have made that a lot harder. And vote fraud even at the epic levels the Democrats engage in only goes so far. It is hard to imagine them achieving much more fraud than they did in 16 let alone increasing it enough to make up for the defection of a million black voters.

  44. “What happened to the Democrats? The façade of anti-war and pro-civil liberties and being a friend of the middle-class has vanished. They will not even pretend to be against militarism and the Patriot Act, and their disdain for flyover folk remains ubiquitous. The only identifying traits of the Democrats are their hatred of the president and their love of free stuff. That could be the slogan in 2020: Hate Trump, Love the [Deep] State.”

    1. Their new found love of anyone in a uniform willing to disobey the President is scary. The thing with the Navy Seal is a big deal. I don’t care what the merits of his case are. I don’t care if he is the biggest shitbag in the Navy. The President is Commander in Chief and has the authority to overturn his conviction and restore his position in the Seals. If the Seals don’t like that, too fucking bad. They don’t get a vote. Their job is to follow orders of their elected superiors.

      I can’t overstate the danger of allowing the military to ignore the direct order of a President. If they can do this, then they can ignore any order. What happens if the President orders the military to leave Iraq or some other country and the military just ignores him? What is the President going to do about it? What would the Congress do about it? Sure, they could pass a law ordering it but how would they enforce it?

      Whether it be the Navy ignoring Trump’s order on the Seal case or LTC Frank Burns Vindeman going before Congress crying that the President ignored his talking points, these events strike at the heart of civilian control of the military. It is scary to think that Democrats have become so craven and stupid that they are willing to play with that fire.

      1. Exactly. Many people dont realize how scared of a standing army the Founders were. Having civilians in complete control of the US Army and Navy still wasnt enough to convince the Founders to create a huge standing army to fight off the British. The Continental Army had large numbers of militia in their ranks or would integrate militia units into a single battle depending on geographical area. Additionally, many of the Army soldiers were under terms of service or guarantees of citizenship.

        In fact, slaves were offered freedom in exchange for fighting.

      2. The Democrats are more than willing to play with that fire. Totalitarian ambitions require totalitarian means. A military that responds to party loyalty rather than the chain of command is precisely what they want.

        1. Are you kidding? The Donkeys brayed so loud when we started conflicts in Yemen, Libya, and Syria!

          Oh, wait….

  45. “The Adult Performers Actors Guild is protesting discriminatory Instagram censorship.”

    I knew the Supreme Court was considering a case to determine whether LGBT were protected from being fired under the auspices of “sex” in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but I had no idea there were or should be any such protections for adult performers in non-employment situations.

    Should Car and Driver be forced to print everything that’s submitted to them by adult performers, or should they be free to publish some things but not others? Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a adult performer published in Car and Driver.

    Can the dirty movie industry survive without the government forcing companies to let adult performers promote themselves on their platforms?

    1. I thought Instagram was a private company? When it colludes with the rest of social media to deplatform conservatives, reason dutifully informs me that it is their property and there is no constitutional issue. Yet, Instagram telling hookers and strippers they can’t show their boobs on their accounts is a constitutional issue?

      1. It’s the same principle, that’s for sure!

        My stance hasn’t changed.

        If social media violated the terms of their contractual obligations to those people, then those people should sue.

        If the social media company is engaging in what amounts to fraud by enticing thousands of content creators to build up the social media company’s brand–only to deplatform them when it’s convenient–then maybe law enforcement should get involved.

        But the First Amendment is a protection against democracy.

        “Congress shall make no law . . . “.

        There’s no good reason why the press should be forced to publish things against their will. The only question is whether they willingly accepted the obligation to publish in the terms of a contract between themselves and the adult entertainers–unilaterally or otherwise.

        1. I agree with you. That said, social media does have a right to change the terms of service of its platforms as well. Just because it agrees at first to allow women to show the goods doesn’t mean it can’t make a business decision to no longer allow that. If they are doing this in a uniform way and not allowing some accounts to do things others are not, then I have no problem with this.

          I think it is reasonable for a platform like Instagram to start with an anything goes ethos and then over time decide that having hookers and nude models using their platform is not worth the trouble. So, it is all in the details. I don’t think they necessarily have violated any contractual terms here, though they may have.

          1. “Just because it agrees at first to allow women to show the goods doesn’t mean it can’t make a business decision to no longer allow that.”

            Far as I’m concerned, it’s a unilateral contract.

            You put up a sign saying that if I found your cat, you’d reward me with $100. I went out. I found your cat. I brought it to you. You don’t get to point to a clause at the bottom of the sign that says you can change the terms whenever you want, and you’ve changed the terms so that you are no longer obligated to reward me with $100. That’s fraud.

            If the social media platform said that the adult entertainers (or right wing conspiracy theorists) could use their platform to promote themselves and their brands, and the adult entertainers invested their time, effort, and money into building a brand on those platforms–and those platforms benefited from the increased use of their platform by people who viewed those adult entertainers’ content in the form of advertising sales, then I would argue this: Just because the social media platform can cut you off of their service doesn’t mean they don’t owe you compensation for your time, effort, and investment in their platform.

            Even if the social media platform didn’t have an explicit contract with the content creators, if the social media platform allowed those content creators to invest in creating content for the social media platform for years–with the understanding that the content creators would profit from their investment–then the social media still owes the content creators something for their time, effort, and investment.

            I bought a camera, built a home studio, and a special computer with expensive software to edit video–because you tricked me into thinking that we had a deal by accepting my content onto your platform for year after year for seven years. And I haven’t even started talking about what you owe me for my time.

            1. If they didn’t want to be obligated to reward me with $100 for finding their cat, they shouldn’t have put up a sign promising to reward me for my time and effort.

            2. It is a unilateral contract but that doesn’t mean that the contract can never be ended or changed. I offer to rent my car for $200 a month. That is a unilateral contract. I put it out there and if someone likes it they can take me up on the offer. The fact that I made the offer doesn’t mean that I am obligated to rent it at that price or at all forever. I can also unilaterally revoke my offer and take my car back. At most I would have an obligation to let you finish out the month that you have paid for.

              It is the same way with Instagram. It offers to let you use their platform in return for it using your information to market to you under a set of terms. Instagram has every right to change its TOS whenever it wants to. It gave the unilateral offer and it can change that offer if it chooses to.

              1. They have the right to change their terms, but that doesn’t mean they don’t owe the people they’re kicking off the platform some compensation for the time and effort they’ve put into the platform in the past.

                Not only that, they also owe the content creators for what their channel is worth looking forward. A business is typically valued as a multiple of its earnings. Say my channel generated $10,000 a year in ad revenue. If I sold that channel and all of its back catalog of content, I might get six times those earnings. If a social media company destroys my channel, they should owe me $60,000–what the channel is worth.

                1. They have the right to change their terms, but that doesn’t mean they don’t owe the people they’re kicking off the platform some compensation for the time and effort they’ve put into the platform in the past.

                  You are talking about reliance damages Ken. No they don’t owe those damages Ken unless Instagram made some kind of promise not to change its TOS that the people reasonably relied upon. I do not see how they could have. They told the people who used the platform up front that the TOS could change without warning. Therefore, the uses have no claim that they reasonably relied upon the TOS not being changed.

                  Understand, this is a different situation than violating the TOS. Then they would have a claim. But here they chanted the TOS. And the users have no claim for damages unless Instagram made some kind of promise not to change the TOS, which they almost certainly did not.

                  1. I am not a lawyer. However, . . .

                    “Expectation damages are damages recoverable from a breach of contract by the non-breaching party. An award of expectation damages protects the injured party’s interest in realizing the value of the expectancy that was created by the promise of the other party.”


                    My content was perfectly acceptable for five years, but by deplatforming me, not only are you saying that my new content isn’t acceptable–you’re cutting off all my earlier content, too, despite the fact that it was perfectly acceptable by the terms of the contract for five years?

                    You’re basically breaching the contract, and you owe me for what I did under the terms of the original contract.

                    P.S. Because the social media platforms can change the terms of the contract doesn’t mean they can change the terms of the contract without consequences.

                    1. The expectation has to be reasonable Ken. If the TOS says “these can be changed at any time without warning, any reliance you put on them and expectations you have of them remaining the same are not reasonable and your damages that result are not recoverable.

                      If you tell you that you can have the car for a year at $200 a month and then change the terms after 6 months, you can get damages for your reasonable expectation of having the car for a year at that rate. But if I tell you upfront that I can change the rate at any time, you can’t collect any damages for my doing so just like I can’t collect any damages for you saying you no longer want the car under my new terms.

                    2. Those statements about the terms of the contract can be changed at any time are usually ignored by the courts because if one party can change the terms of the contract at any time, then the terms of the contract are unenforceable.

                      That being said, there is a question as to the legitimacy of the expectations content creators can claim based on the terms of a contract with a clause like that. However, the ambiguous nature of those terms should probably cut both ways. The social media platform allowed content creators to invest in their platform–and built their business on the backs of such content–based on content guidelines they never intended to abide–then that may speak to the motivation for the breach but not in a good way.

                      “Buyer beware” isn’t a legitimate defense against fraud, and if the social media company in question never intended to abide by the guidelines for content, for year after year after year of the content creators uploading content, then that suggests premeditated fraud on the part of the social media platform–in which case the content creators have a legitimate complaint.

                    3. No they are not Ken. Not in unilateral contracts like this one where both parties are free to leave the agreement at any time.

                      You are deeply confused about contract law here. And I seem to be unable to teach you.

              2. John, some people have already accepted the terms of the ToS and provided content at their time and cost.

                Then the website changes the terms simply because the company says it has the right to change the terms of the contract at any time? Bullshit. That is not how contracts work.

                Ultimately this comes down to America and the World deciding how we want these website ToS to be enforced and what the law will be.

                1. No it is not bullshit. Read the damn contract. They don’t owe you keeping their TOS the same forever. If they reserve the right to change it, they can. If you don’t like that, don’t use the service. But you can’t rely on a promise that was never made.

                  1. Great. I withdraw from the contract and want all my content erased from the company’s servers. I am changing the terms of the contract. By holding my content, the company is agreeing to the terms.

                    These companies are playing fast and lose with contract law and it worked for over 10 years because people dont read contracts.

                    I love fucking with these companies because they send you ToS change announcements and I opt out or never approve the changes.


    Man stripped of guns after opponent in a civil lawsuit files red flag complaint. Red flag laws are being abused exactly as their supporters intended them and their critics said they would be abused.

    1. These “red flag” laws are unconstitutional and should be struck down immediately.

    2. Looks like there are no consequences to falsely raising the red flag. Also, how does one determine whether the red flag is legitimate or not? Who is it that does the determining?

      1. A judge I am pretty sure. And judges never do anything wrong. Right?

  47. I saw on Twitter this weekend that Sasha Baron Cohen gave a speech where he decried the unregulated speech that’s occurring on social media, and I noted that his speech got a lot of approval from Leftists.

    I’m wondering who they propose to “police” social media. No doubt the federal government. I wonder if they realize that if such a regime were in place today, the content of social media would be under the control of…Donald Trump.

    1. I believe it was Iowahawk who gave the best response I have seen to these people; you can ban “hate speech” so long as I get to define what that is. The unstated assumption of all of these people is that they and not you will be policing social media.

    2. Wellll, you just have to have the right people in charge.

    3. Some thought SBC was trolling the crowd. I’m not sure, but that would fit.

  48. so every morning you’re going to make up hopeful shit about T?

  49. In regards to the mass shooting in Saugus high school, up in Santa Clarita the other week, the shooter used what they’re calling a “Ghost Gun”.

    “Ghost Gun” makes them sound dark and scary, doesn’t it?

    Anyway, the guy’s dad, who recently passed away, was a gun enthusiast, and the 1911 the shooter used was apparently an 80% self milled gun that the guy’s father probably made at home.

    The question people are asking themselves is how to stop “Ghost Guns” now.

    Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed led the way in showing us that distributing the plans for building your own gun is essentially a First Amendment issue.

    Currently, the government has held that the freedom to build your own gun is protected by the Second Amendment, which is why 80% companies are allowed to sell partially milled kits.

    So the question of how to stop “Ghost Guns” is essentially the question of how to violate the First Amendment without violating the First Amendment while at the same time violating the Second Amendment without violating the Second Amendment.

    Ultimate, the correct answer is that there are some things that can’t be done, legally, because of the First and Second Amendments, and people building their own 1911s at home is one of them.

    1. It doesn’t even have to be built. My guess is that most of the guns in this country were bought long before the federal or state governments required any registration and are effectively off the grid to the government.

      The people who are panicking over home made guns are morons who know nothing about guns or the gun culture in this country. Guns, if they are maintained last forever and are passed down through families and swapped among friends. There are tens of millions of firearms out there that the government has no trace of existing. The addition of a few 3D printed or home milled guns has zero marginal effect on that situation.

    2. ban metalworks?

    3. Ghost gun is the new ‘shoulder thing that goes up.’

  50. Headline seen today: “Two more boys found dead in school shooting.”

    Story: An 11-year old and 14-year old boy were shot while sitting in a van in an elementary school parking lot at 1:26 am.

    Gotta pad those “School shooting deaths” statistics.

  51. “we should not put public dollars behind a further expansion of charters until they are subject to the same accountability requirements as public schools”

    Is it even possible to make charter schools that unaccountable?

    1. Unless you pass a law making it a crime for students not to attend them, no it isn’t. The very nature of charter schools make them accountable to their students since any parent is free to send their kid to a regular public school if they don’t like the charter.

      These people are not concerned about charter schools not being accountable. They are concerned that the charter schools are accountable to the parents and students and not the bureaucrats.

      1. I think they may be concerned the charter schools aren’t accountable to teacher’s unions. Charter schools can actually fire teachers.

        1. You mean education money might actually go to the students, instead of being funneled back to the politicians?

          Can’t have that.

          1. Although, it’s not unheard of that a charter school needs to bribe the local school board to get a charter, but that’s amateur hour compared to teacher’s unions.

        2. They are concerned about that as well. God forbid any teacher ever be held accountable for anything.

  52. You realize Obama withheld aid?

  53. I remember when discussing libertarianism with my son awhile back I stated some alleged “libertarians” are really just for legalizing drugs

    They really not so keen on live and let live and taking care of yourself

    I was right. Reason and ENB who is a nut job proves my point.

    Oh yes and open borders

    1. Reason used to be a libertarian publication, but KMW (who professes to be an anarchist) has ramped up the statism due to the hiring of writers with a bad case of TDS.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.