Reason Roundup

Judge Says Teen Who Didn't Finish Online Schoolwork Must Stay Locked Up Until September

Plus: Portland protest updates, Kanye's candidacy, the ACLU's suit to protect Michael Cohen, and more...

|

Protesters ask courts to #FreeGrace. As the COVID-19 pandemic ravages jails and prisons, many people are fighting to keep low-level and nonviolent offenders out. Meanwhile, in Michigan, a 15-year-old girl has been jailed since May for not doing her homework—and a judge says that the Oakland County teenager will stay that way until at least sometime in September.

The family court judge, Mary Ellen Brennan, ruled on Monday that "Grace" must remain in a juvenile detention facility and denied the girl's motion for early release.

"Grace, a pseudonym for the juvenile, was on probation on assault and theft charges related to a November assault on her mother," notes The Detroit News. The assault Grace was found guilty of involved biting her mom's finger and pulling her hair; the theft, swiping another student's phone from the school locker room.

One condition of Grace's probation was that she must complete her coursework from her high school's online classes. When a judge found in May that Grace was behind on this remote coursework, the girl was ruled in violation of her probation and locked up.

Grace was "guilty on failure to submit to any schoolwork and getting up for school," Brennan wrote.

"It just doesn't make any sense," Grace's mom told ProPublica. "Every day I go to bed thinking, and wake up thinking, 'How is this a better situation for her?'"

On Monday, Grace told Brennan: "I miss my mom. I can control myself. I can be obedient."

Grace's mom also wants her home.

But Brennan seems to think she knows more about what is best for this family than they do. "The right thing is for your and your mom to be separated for right now," she told Grace in court. "Give yourself a chance to follow through and finish something."

Brennan also said yesterday that Grace "was not detained because she didn't turn her homework in. She was detained because she was a threat to her mother." But Grace's mom doesn't seem to feel like her daughter is a threat to her at present, and the incidents that led to Grace's arrest are not what provoked the judge to detain her; that came later, when the judge found Grace not following the court's homework order.

"This situation is an emotional challenge," said Grace's mom in a statement, "but is also a window into the brokenness that demands and deserves attention and repair as to prevent other children and families from being negatively impacted by a system that is supposed to offer protection and support."

"Because of the confidentiality of juvenile court cases, it's impossible to determine how unusual Grace's situation is," points out ProPublica, which first reported on Grace's story last week:

But attorneys and advocates in Michigan and elsewhere say they are unaware of any other case involving the detention of a child for failing to meet academic requirements after schools closed to help stop the spread of COVID-19.

The decision, they say, flies in the face of recommendations from the legal and education communities that have urged leniency and a prioritization of children's health and safety amid the crisis. The case may also reflect, some experts and Grace's mother believe, systemic racial bias. Grace is Black in a predominantly white community and in a county where a disproportionate percentage of Black youth are involved with the juvenile justice system.

Activists flanked the courthouse yesterday in protest of Grace's treatment.

"She is 15 years old," Cherisie Evans, a leader with the Michigan Liberation Action Fund, told The Detroit News. "Where is the counseling? Where are the resources?"

Brennan insisted in court that Children's Village, the juvenile detention facility that Grace is in, is a "treatment program."

Last week, the Michigan Supreme Court's communications director said "the State Court Administrative Office is working with the Oakland Circuit Court to examine the processes in this case."


FOLLOWUP

Portland protest updates. Demonstrations in downtown Portland continued last night, despite the aggressive response from outside agitators in the form of federal agents.

In response to recent events, Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D.C.'s non-voting congressional delegate, a Democrat) are introducing legislation to make federal law enforcement agents identify themselves.

"The bill would require on-duty federal agents to display not just the name of their agency but also the individual agent's last name and identification number," notes The Nation. "It would also mandate a new form of oversight for the Justice Department, requiring its inspector general to conduct routine audits to ensure compliance with the legislation. The results of these audits would then be reported to Congress."

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump seems mighty pleased with the work his secret police force is doing:

For more Reason takes on the situation, check out yesterday's Reason Roundtable podcast, read Billy Binion on Hawaii Democratic Sen. Brian's Schatz's hypocritical concerns that libertarians aren't outraged, and check out C.J. Ciaramella on the Trump administration's plans to take their Portland performance to Chicago.


QUICK HITS

• Kanye West is going through… something.

(More on the potential West candidacy here.)

• Whistleblower Reality Winner has contracted COVID-19 in prison.

• The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is suing on behalf of former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen:

The Forward profiles a group of black "public intellectuals [who] scramble the racial lines of today's debate" and push back on "the racial essentialism they view as ascendant in our current moment—the idea that one must prioritize race over everything else to combat racism."

• "It is now clear that it is not the case that President Trump doesn't want to change his behavior. It's that he is congenitally incapable to moderate it even for a single day," suggests former Republican National Committee spokesperson Tim Miller at The Bulwark.

• Breonna Taylor, the woman fatally shot by Louisville cops in a no-knock raid on her home, "was not killed immediately," lawyers for her family write in a revised lawsuit. "Rather, she lived for another five to six minutes before ultimately succumbing to her injuries on the floor of her home."

• Ugh:

• "During its long period of decline, the Ottoman Empire was called 'the sick man of Europe.' The United States is now the sick man of the world," suggests Jonathan Chait. And while "the distrust and open dismissal of expertise and authority may seem uniquely contemporary—a phenomenon of the Trump era, or the rise of online misinformation," they're really the "products of a decades-long war against the functioning of good government, a collapse of trust in experts and empiricism, and the spread of a kind of magical thinking that flourishes in a hothouse atmosphere that can seal out reality."

• New game: Russian bot or British boomer?

• Protecting and serving:

NEXT: How should the U.S. respond to the Schrems II decision?

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. Kanye West is going through… something.

    Spotlight withdrawal.

    1. Hello.

      We shall overcome? Tears?

      The retard level is THROUGH THE ROOF in 2020.

      I can’t but smh.

      If I’m Trump? Just focus on Chicago. Those other places want to stay that way. He can’t win that fight. It’s like trying to reason with an autistic person. The only it changes is if the people change it.

      1. Has the Chiraqi strongwoman been cooperative? Also, wouldn’t “Lightfoot” be more a more appropriate regnal name for a gay man, not a lesbian? I find the whole thing suspicious.

        1. I earned $5000 ultimate month by using operating online only for 5 to 8 hours on my computer and this was so smooth that i personally couldn’t accept as true with before working on this website.REd if you too need to earn this sort of huge cash then come and be part of us. do this internet-website online═════► Home Profit System

      2. Chicago has the easiest solution, tell the Latin kings they won’t be arrested or charged if they are defending the businesses. They already are keeping the peace in their neighborhoods

      3. How is it like trying to reason with an autistic person? I’d love to know.

    2. Honestly, a debate with Trump, Kanye, and Twitter Biden would be the highest watched debate ever.

      1. Throw Jo in there too. Our luck, she’d ask Kanye for an autograph in the middle of it.

        1. Jo is simply a leftist stooge

          1. I understand she is pretty woke about race but what else about her is leftist?

            From her issues page:
            – We can reduce the cost of health care 75% by allowing real price competition, and by substantially reducing government and insurance company paperwork

            – As President, I will use my Constitutional authority to block any new borrowing. I will veto any spending bill that would lead to a deficit, and veto any debt ceiling increase.

            – No US involvement in foreign wars. Bring home our 200,000+ American military personnel stationed in foreign countries.

            – No US military aid to foreign governments

            – As President, I will use my Constitutional authority to end federal civil asset forfeiture prior to conviction, and pardon persons convicted of non-violent victimless crimes.

            and it’s not showcased on her issues page but she is staunchly pro 2nd Amendment.

            I wouldn’t call that a leftist.

            1. She already bent the knee to the mob once, which means she’ll do it again.

              1. Yep.

                She promoted critical race theory, and taking action based on it.
                Completely disqualifying

                1. If she wanted to say something to get attention so she can promote libertarianism, she could’ve criticized the entire narrative of “systemic racism” and pointed out that “anti-racism” is just racism with a new marxist label.
                  She could’ve promoted personal responsibility and self-determination as the cure for one’s ills.
                  Instead, she wholeheartedly embraced collectivism as both cause and solution.

            2. “and it’s not showcased on her issues page but she is staunchly pro 2nd Amendment.”

              This is the only reason I’m even remotely considering continuing to vote libertarian at this point in time. Why do you think it’s not on her issues page? Is it not a very pertinent issue at this time?

              1. How does the Libertarian candidate for President think that a winning play is omitting the Second Amendment as an issue to be discussed in her campaign platform? I mean, the 200 mile low Earth orbit view of Libertarians is that they like guns and weed. It’s like not having an opinion on the Drug War for Chrissake.

          2. [Grabs some popcorn…]

            1. Don’t forget to toss some bullshit hypothetical out there first.

              1. “ Jo is simply a leftist stooge” should do nicely.

                1. That’s an opinion not a hypothetical. This is difficult for you isn’t it?

                  1. I seem to be “living rent free in your head”.

                    1. Lucky for my head a quick stroll through the threads can confirm you’re still not embarrassed you don’t know the difference between the words opinion and hypothetical without me worrying about rent.

      2. What? No Libertarian (TM)?

    3. Spotlight withdrawal.

      Yeah, seems like a lot of celebutards are going through that. I’m sure being famous and having people follow your every move is a huge dopamine rush and without that they’re going through withdrawal.

    4. These are 2 pay checks $78367 and $87367. that i received in last 2 months.I am very happy that i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life.Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period.Just visit this website now.

      FOR MORE DETAILS….⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢2Usd Life.

  2. Whistleblower Reality Winner has contracted COVID-19 in prison.

    Explain that sentence to someone waking up from a 20-year coma.

    1. Did her dad name her after a racehorse?

      1. Also free Reality and pardon Snowden. Only Manning deserves his/its fate.

  3. What are they protesting in Portland? The idiots run the state and local government. What exactly do they want? They have been “protesting” for nearly 50 straight days now.

    They are not protesters. They are terrorists.

    1. The demand for police brutality exceeds the supply

      1. And Trump is ready to goose the supply!

      2. Just like the demand for racism exceeds the supply.

    2. They have been protesting for over 50 days, not nearly 50 days.

      1. People are too hung up on the subjective validity of the stated reasons for the protests. None of this would be happening if not for the lock downs. Many predicted that social unrest would be the end result of the lock downs and so it has been. The problem is that they were expecting something that would have an apparent direct connection to the lock downs – like the protests to end the lock downs. The situation we have now is that many, particularly low skill people, are not working and are in fact being paid not work. What working person can turn out in the streets for 50+ straight days? Why are protests global for a black guy in the US? Hmmmm – the lock downs were global. I wonder if there’s any connection?

        “What are you rebelling against?”
        “What a ‘ya got?”

    3. They’re protesting the establishment, meaning all the racist bitter clingers in flyover country. All the people in power at their own local and state levels and at huge multinational corporations aren’t part of the establishment because they’re down with the cause.

      1. So they’re on the west coast protesting people not on the west coast?

        Sounds pretty stupid Revisionist.

        1. Sort of. They are protesting the very existence of ideas, and people who just might hold those ideas, that they consider unacceptable.

          1. We should go scorched earth on them…time to round them up to California and set it on fire for the season.

    4. Yeah, it’s unclear what the end result of all of this is supposed to be.

      I don’t think it’s fair to call the people not participating in rioting and destruction “terrorists”, but I don’t know what they think they are accomplishing.

    5. Yep. Still trying to understand how the mayor isn’t arrested yet for assisting the rioters.

      1. Same reason the Seattle city councilwoman wasn’t arrested for (allegedly) using her creds to unlock doors for the rioters there.

    6. Didn’t we all read “Lord of the Flies” in school?

      1. I would say there is evidence nothing is read in schools – – – – – – – –

    7. despite the aggressive response from outside agitators in the form of federal agents.

      ENB is literally arguing here that the feds have no jurisdiction over Portland.

      If Portland is no longer a part of the United States, as she’s implying here, can we drop a few MOABs on the place?

      1. Shorter brown shirts: “We never said we supported states’ rights! Must have been some other tea party.”

        1. Is Portland part of the United States, or no? Are federal courthouses under federal jurisdiction, or not?

          Just because you and ENB don’t like it when your lefty boos are getting party vanned for acting like insurrectionist shits, doesn’t mean that just goes away.

        2. And to be quite blunt, if the choice at this point is between fascism and Portland/Seattle’s version of “antifascism,” I’ll take the former every day of the week.

      2. Specifically, she is arguing that the feds have no jurisdiction over federal buildings in Portland.

        1. That’s what happens when most of your education comes from twitter.

    8. Yeah, that’s the real issue here. Not that federal agents are forcing people into vans without charges or warrants, but that people are expressing an opinion that John doesn’t much care for.

      John, good to see you’re still a good fascist.

      1. You’re literally insane.
        You won’t admit this, because your identity is too wrapped up in your “virtue”, and the incompatibility between your expectations and reality has your psychosis doubling down to avoid admitting that your moral code is erroneous. That is, you have to so twist the information you receive to fit your worldview that you now operate as if your fantasy is reality.
        Thus the surprise when your interpretations are proven wrong over and over again.
        Must just be the Russians manipulating you

        1. Keep in mind that DOL, as recently as a month ago, was willing to let John view his PII in order to prove his time in spec ops.

          I guess that’s off the table now.

      2. Not that federal agents are forcing people into vans without charges or warrants

        Which is what has always happened when you’re caught in the act of committing a crime, you dishonest fuck.
        You don’t need a warrant to arrest arsonists and looters who are actively looting and lighting shit on fire.

      3. If cops witness someone, probably wearing a mask, engaged in a crime like destruction of federal property they don’t need a warrant to detain that individual. If charges are to be filed presumably that would happen at the federal courthouse in that jurisdiction. Is the courthouse even functioning? the place is surrounded by rioters smashing windows and violently blocking access.

      1. Yeah, seriously. They have the backing of every major corporation and most politicians in the country. They have been allowed to make a mess and disrupt the city for 2 months without having the dogs set on them or being firehosed or shot (mostly).

        I guess that’s the marvelous thing about the specter of white supremacy. Even if no one supports it or even knows what it is, it’s always there and always to blame for everything. And as we all know, screaming louder and calling everyone racist is the best way to make the world a better place.

        1. If you deny that white supremacy exists, your denial is made to be evidence of it’s existence.

        2. Yeah, this idea about “white supremacy” is simply a wash.

          If we were a White supremacist society, Obama would not have been possible. Oprah wouldn’t be possible. High profile blacks of any kind would not be possible. They simply would not be tolerated in a White supremacist society.

          They look at the modern USA, but what they see is apartheid South Africa, which is fucking nonsense. The rhetoric is so over the top because they don’t really have a legit argument. They have to make it worse than it really is because the reality isn’t anything like what they imagine in their heads.

    9. Ostensibly, at least, they are protesting for police reform.

      They are all protestors, some of them violent, some not.

      1. But they’re all vermin.

        1. Yeah, to hell with that whole First Amendment right to protest!

          You have the right to free speech. As long as your not actually dumb enough to try it.

          1. “It’s freedom of speech, not freedom from responsibility.”

            Seems that was a favorite trope of these goons not too long ago when they were gleefully getting people fired and scholarships to college revoked.

            Although in the case of the latter, they probably did the kids a favor by keeping them out of the Marxist indoctrination centers and showing them what life there would have been like, anyway. Now they not only lost the chance to convert another stool pigeon into self-hatred, they ended up making another “fascist” in the process. Oh well.

            1. I share your concern about cancel culture.

              1. Stop lying.

          2. These particular protesters are indeed vermin

  4. It is now clear that it is not the case that President Trump doesn’t want to change his behavior. It’s that he is congenitally incapable to moderate it even for a single day…

    Says the cuck who couldn’t close a deal to save his life!

    1. Why would he change his behavior? It’s what put him in office.

      1. And made him a billionaire, and let him have sex with and marry models.

        1. R Mac really telegraphs his moral and mental feebleness sometimes.

          1. One defining trait of progressives is that they completely lack a sense of humor.
            No room for it when there’s so much “virtue” to achieve

            1. Lying Jeffy doesn’t think anyone would want to be a billionaire and have sex with models. Or he’s being dishonest so he can insult my morals and intelligence.

          2. DOL: “HOW DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT!??!”
            Trump: “On top of pile of money, with many beautiful ladies.”

  5. Dr. Fauci is throwing out the first pitch for the opening day Nats vs Yankees game. This is a man who is advocating noone goes to bars, games or does anything remotely normal during this. A man who by his own admission lied about the efficacy of masks which surely lead to deaths of some unimportant people by his own logic. He’s a moral monster. I wonder if he’s going to be allowed to stay and watch the game in person or if he’s going to be escorted out immediately and have to watch the game on the tube like the rest of us proles. The fact the man has people who treat him with a cult like devotion is evidence we live in a giant fucking insane asylum.

    https://twitter.com/Nationals/status/1285308233083686913

    1. I would give anything to see the Nats kick his sorry ass out of the park as soon as he is done. That would be fabulous. But you know he won’t be.

      1. If there is any justice in the world his name will become a slur.

        1. Way to Fauci up the comment section, asshole.

              1. That was a pretty Faucian insult.

        2. Better get ahold of Dan Savage. He’s had some success with Santorum:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism

    2. This is just celebration of Fauci’s help on narrative building for the pandemic. I mean, NY is the beacon of action according to him.

      1. While having the second most deaths per capita in the country 167 per 100K residents. New Jersey is in first at 177.

        1. Interesting data. All the haters are raging against Sweden, but they’re deaths per 100k is around 55. Compared to NY and NJ which all went full retard.

          https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

          1. Just wait until they cross the herd immunity finish line and the rest of the world just keeps right on going.

      2. But Brennan seems to think she knows more about what is best for this family than they do. “The right thing is for your and your mom to be separated for right now,” she told Grace in court. “Give yourself a chance to follow through and finish something.”

        Even with the completely negative framing of the judges actions, the judge sounds pretty sympathetic to the family and may have some insight, having reviewed the entire case, unlike the pundits.

        The part about following through and finishing something is absolutely correct and exactly what is most wrong with a lot of people these days. They give up and throw a tantrum the moment they become frustrated.

        1. Well that was not where this comment was supposed to land.

          1. I’ll accept it and rethink my Fauci position based on your response.

      3. Yeah, Faucci playing the long con of serving his country and fellow americans for 5 decades, including suiting up and fighting Ebola in person. All to join and one day lead…dun dun duunnnnnnnnnn… THE DEEP STATE!

        1. “Serving his country” means becoming very wealthy while not working too hard, and not getting good results in the little work he does do, in this case

          1. Seriously: how are you this much of a bootlicker, espresso?

    3. It amazes me that there are people out there who actually care about baseball.

      1. I thought this was a libertarian website? How does this level of explicit communist propaganda filtrate through here?

        1. The ‘liberaltarian’ term didn’t come out of thin air…

          In all seriousness, it looks awful for Fauci to be throwing out a first pitch, while yammering on about how the rest of us need to sacrifice. Typical for our ruling class, but awful.

          I’ll stand with Juice though, in saying that since the epidemic hysteria, I really don’t care about professional sports anymore, and it surprises me when I think about how little I care. I don’t know that I’ll ever care about them again.

          1. Four legs good. Two legs better.

    4. The fact the man has people who treat him with a cult like devotion is evidence we live in a giant fucking insane asylum.

      You know how in a lot of open world RPG games you can keep playing even after you’ve won the game? I think this entire year is proof that the Matrix like simulation we’re living in has ended and whoever was running the simulation just left it running in the background while they do something more useful and productive. Either that or the semi-intelligent teenager who was playing the game just handed the controller off to his autistic little brother.

    5. What’s next? Fauci posing for a fashion mag? Oh, wait…

      1. And his wife’s a bioethicist. No wonder people are dying from his recommendations.

      2. no way Fauci can throw a ball 60’6″

    6. We should start a pool on how far he can throw a baseball.

      1. He will probably do even worse than Obama.

  6. https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2020/07/20/what-would-a-joe-biden-presidency-retirement-system-look-like-farewell-401k-for-starters/#22a648c31009

    Joe Biden plans to steal your 401K. Mass property confiscation is just a “local story”. Reason has important things to cover like the injustice of people being prohibited from committing arson and looting in Portland by the evil Orange man.

    1. My shock is non-existent. People who can support themselves in old age don’t need to vote for the government to take other people’s money. The only way to ensure government run retirement plans is to force everyone to be a part of one.

    2. Joe Biden plans to steal your 401K

      Then use the stock the government now owns to control the market. Fascism.

    3. This would be one of the few things that would make me consider taking my money out of my 401k with the tax hits.

      1. Unless you are over 55 or something, you will owe ordinary income taxes on the withdrawal, plus 10% penalty.
        Gotcha coming and going.

        Welcome to the revolution.

    4. On the plus side a Biden victory still leaves 2 month between election day and inauguration day to pull every penny of my money out of my retirement accounts and offshore it to somewhere they can’t their grubby hands on it. Where I’m sure it will do a lot of good as opposed to being invested.

      1. “On the plus side a Biden victory still leaves 2 month between election day and inauguration day to pull every penny of my money out of my retirement accounts and offshore it to somewhere they can’t their grubby hands on it.”

        Holy Market Meltdown, Batman! Biden’s handlers have to be aware enough to know that rational people will do exactly like CA said above, and that the resulting selloff would absolutely crater the exchanges, right?

        What’s that you smell, boy? Capital controls and a new exit tax? Good boy!

        It’ll look like the Cyprus bank runs.

        1. That will be a “failure of capitalism”.

          1. George Soros least hardest hit.

      2. pull every penny of my money out of my retirement accounts and offshore it to somewhere they can’t their grubby hands on it.

        This place no longer exists thanks to the drug war and the war on terrorists.

    5. Even if the Right somehow miraculously finds the fortitude to abandon this sinking ship after the Left takes permanent control, the prospect of self-reliance and -responsibility being among the cardinal societal values of whatever order emerges is fading fast. Statist, collectivist tendencies on the Right, pointedly including denouncements of “unrestrained capitalism” and defenses of robust government social safety net, have the energy now–in large part because of “beltway” libertarianism’s failure to promote itself in anything but establishment-centrist language.

      1. This is a real question. What does self-reliance mean in practical terms for someone who lives in a city, in a building with hundreds of other people, using publicly funded transit? Is self-reliance a numbers game, and now there are seven billion people on earth, the “group” of people really has become a unit as important as the individual? Does someone write about this?

        1. I don’t mean it atomistically. There’s plenty to be said for the more “autarkic” self-reliance as well, but you’re also exhibiting an important virtue when you take responsibility for yourself but cooperate with others. Government transportation is pretty much the only thing incompatible with this, of the things you mentioned.

        2. What does self-reliance mean in practical terms for someone who lives in a city, in a building with hundreds of other people, using publicly funded transit?

          It means that you are capable of paying your fair share of the tax bill. Annual budget divided by population = each person’s fair share. If you can pay that much in taxes every year, then you are self-sufficient.

    6. Mass property confiscation is just a “local story”.

      If it’s not covered in BuzzFed, the NYT, WaPo, or Vox and it’s not prominent on Twitter, how do you expect ENB to know about it?

    7. I just read this article. Did you read it? It has nothing to do with stealing retirement funds. I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that the referenced “Unity” document mentions confiscating 401(k) funds.

      However, the article itself is fairly technical and talks about the tax and other implications of Biden’s “proposals.”

      1. And even though calculations of a change from tax-deferral to a federal match, such as that calculated by Brookings, determine that it’s a win, because lower-income folk will increase their retirement benefits while higher-income folk are assumed to maintain their savings rate because they are sufficiently motivated to save with or without tax incentives, it strikes me that this not particularly likely. In particular, the tax deferral for retirement savings is not purely a matter of employee contributions, but of employers contributing to retirement plans on a pre-tax basis, through matches or direct contributions. I don’t think we can take it for granted that if this pre-tax savings structure is removed, employers will continue to find it worth their while to provide retirement plans, rather than simply meeting the legal requirements for payroll deduction for the new federal retirement account system.

        Not stealing stealing, just removing the deferred tax preference which forms the basis of the 401k.

        Best to give the people always advocating for more taxation the benefit of the doubt though.

    8. Speaking of the Unity Plan:

      “for example, there is no promise of “Medicare for All,” but there is a plan to include a “public option” in which Medicare sets reimbursement rates, and in which those with income less than 200% of the poverty line have no premiums and every participant is promised a premium cap of 8.5% of income on a plan with no deductible and no copay for primary services.”

      How the fuck does this even pass 2nd grade economics? Is there enough money in the world to fund this and other stupidity?

      1. ‘Money printer go, “BRRRRR!”.

      2. It’s literally worse than medicare for all because only people who don’t contribute will be in the plan. Unreal.

      3. “Moderate” democrat Joe Manchin just said people who aren’t working due to covid (totalitarian panic) should receive their full paychecks, whatever amount it is.

    9. I wonder what Tucker Carlson thinks of a 401k raid? I mean, if I’m not allowed to buy things from other countries for the sake of vote buying and national greatness, then what right do I have to my own retirement savings for some other worthy cause?

      1. I wonder what it is like to be a complete dumb ass who thinks they can’t buy anything made overseas when the country is awash in such goods. What color is the sky in the world for someone as stupid as you appear to be?

  7. Rather, she lived for another five to six minutes before ultimately succumbing to her injuries on the floor of her home.

    Hey there was a hero in blue (well, black) who was shot. They couldn’t spare the time to tend to the perp.

  8. The Massachusetts police reform bill that was just released (House version) directs cannabis tax revenue to the police…

    Defund’s not here, man.

    1. They were going to make money from weed one way or another.

  9. Portland protest updates. Demonstrations in downtown Portland continued last night, despite the aggressive response from outside agitators in the form of federal agents.

    Is this the new narrative? That things were all peaceful before federal agents showed up. Believe it was night 53 of the protests. How dare the feds not completely end it in a weekend through mild arrests stemming from attacks on the federal buildings.

    This is a stupid narrative the media is pushing.

    1. “The bill would require on-duty federal agents to display not just the name of their agency but also the individual agent’s last name and identification number,” notes The Nation.

      Ahh yes. So they can continue the doxing of agents.

      https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xyg8wa/the-dox-of-more-than-2300-government-employees-might-be-worse-than-we-thought

      1. Let’s make it dangerous to be a cop. Let’s make it so being a cop means these assholes know who you are and go after your family. That is what they want. This shit is getting dangerous.

        1. We’re one step away from Watchmen (the TV series, not the graphic novel or the movie)

        2. “Let’s make it so being a cop means these assholes know who you are and go after your family.”

          Already happening, John: https://www.wkbw.com/news/local-news/vehicles-owned-by-monroe-county-sheriffs-office-deputies-set-on-fire

          “CLARKSON, N.Y. (WKBW) — The Monroe County Sheriff’s Office is investigating a fire in Clarkson early Sunday morning.

          The fire began in one vehicle in the driveway of a home around 3:30 a.m. and then spread to a second vehicle in the driveway. The fire also caused damage to the house.

          MCSO says the personal vehicles are owned by two MCSO deputies and they are continuing to investigate. At this time a motive is unknown.”

          1. Don’t worry, the police will become anonymous again right after Biden takes office; we don’t want a backlash when they start enforcing gun confiscation.

        3. Well, cops are always going on about how dangerous their jobs are. So they need to accept the dangers. I think they absolutely should have to identify themselves. You want that job, then your name and official activities are a matter of public record.

          1. That is an exaggeration Zeb. And it is a good thing that it is. Make it true and no one will want to be cops anymore. And we will no longer have police and no longer have anything except rule by the mob, which is what the leftists want because they think they can use the resulting chaos as a means to take over.

            1. I’m almost ready to say “fuck it, start shooting rioters and looters”.

              I’m generally pretty down on police. And I know you can be too. But if police are a thing, then this is the sort of place where more extreme action on their part is probably warranted. With appropriate restraint, I would have some hope that it would go better than it would if armed citizens get fed up and take matters into their own hands.

        4. You want secret police a la Central American Huntas? This is how you get them.

      2. Does this mean that the “unidentified secret police” were now clearly uniformed and marked as police? It’s so hard to keep up.

        1. It is amazing that the unidentified narrative took hold even with the pictures in the very articles showing both a POLICE patch as well as an agency badge.

          1. And an identification number. Literally everything except the last name, which was probably on the front of the uniform not visible in the pictures I saw

          2. Remember the photo of the kid in a cage from 2014? That’s still trumps fault, so you shouldn’t be surprised.

    2. It is insulting and dangerous. Reason hasn’t written a single word about the rights of the people of Portland whose lives have been disrupted and in some cases put in danger and whose property has been destroyed by this. If you are a law abiding person reason has no respect for your rights or concern for them. Reason cares about the rights of the Marxist thugs who are there destroying your city and burning and looting your business. The police better not violate any of their rights. They matter, you don’t. This is what the asshole leftists at reason actually believe.

      1. John, haven’t you learned yet?

        If the government isn’t directly being mean to you, your rights CLEARLY aren’t being violated bu roving mobs.

        1. Americans have the right to free speech, own weapons, assemble etc. There is no right to an undisrupted life.

          1. What a foul piece of garbage you are. I sadly think you’re going to see in the near future, personally, how valuable an “undisrupted life” actually was.

            Into the filter with you.

            1. You mean van, fascist?

              1. Do you believe that your rights can or can’t be violated by other citizens? Is it better to have your rights violated by other citizens than government?

                1. Citizens.

                  I have a far better chance at getting any kind of restitution in court from a citizen than the government.

              2. What’s Oregonian for Sturmabteliung?

              3. Have you used the word “fascist” in every post you’ve made today?
                Think you’ve got some projection going on

          2. So, your rights to assemble are more important than my right to not assemble?

            Good to know.

            1. The fuck does this even mean?

              1. Fuck around and find out

              2. You might want to try a more simple site if you’re having difficulty keeping up.

          3. Yeah, that whole property rights thing is so slavist. I certainly should not expect my house or business to be “undisrupted”, right?

            Ass hole.

      2. Yep. No discussion of the $23 million in damage and lost revenue in Portland. Guess that for reason, loss of property and livelihood is just collateral damage if someone wants to protest something.

        And just what are the folks in Portland protesting, anyway?

        1. They want more omelets

        2. What level of lost revenue does the constitution require before we suspend habeus corpus and the requirement for specific warrants?

          You can’t support nameless, faceless federal agents abducting people without charges and call yourself an advocate of civil or individual liberties.

          Why are you brownshirts hanging around a libertarian magazine? Your fig leaf is gone, the masks long discarded. We see you.

          1. You will have to research the great emancipator to find out about suspending habeus corpus.

            1. Totally relevant. Why don’t you guys just stick to principles? It’s not ok for federal forces to abduct people and jail them without ever even intending to press charges. This is America for fuck’s sake.

              Trumpies have made it clear they want a dictatorship that is sympathetic to them, and have no interest in a republic or rights or liberties.

              1. Since you and your collective comrades are behaving as if your resentful fantasy is reality, maybe we should just make it come true.

              2. Why don’t you guys just stick to principles?

                What, that Trump’s supposedly following in Lincoln’s footsteps and you’re crying about it?

                I mean, seriously, if Portland does get it in their heads to declare secession, what will your response be? “Good, let them go”? I’m honestly fine with that, too, but the US doesn’t have to tolerate what is clearly a hostile entity on its former soil. And if Portland kicking off leads to more progressive havens declaring “independence,” then that means a real, actual shooting war is quite likely.

                You have a wife and kid. You’ve supposedly seen what war does to families in areas where violent conflict is a way of life. You really want to clap your hands for what Portland is doing? All that shit you saw in the Middle East will replicate itself here if they’re allowed to continue acting like emotionally stunted retards. I doubt you really want to risk your family’s well-being by supporting a Pacific Northwest insurrection just to own the Bad Orange Man.

                1. “…but the US doesn’t have to tolerate what is clearly a hostile entity on its former soil…”

                  At the risk of necro-ing the thread, it won’t tolerate that at all. Mainly because the first action a newly declared independent Democratic People’s Republic of Portlandia will do, is sign a treaty of friendship and military basing with the PRC.

                  Absolutely unacceptable.

                  1. If that happened, bombing them back to the stone age would be perfectly justified.

                  2. I thought our slide into totalitarian leftism was going to be slower.
                    Fixing the Progressive Era’s steady march through government, academics, and culture is going to take violent conflict. I’ve seen that for 10 years, but Trump, in conjunction with things like Brexit and defeat of regime change in Syria, 5 years ago presented the (exceedingly thin) opportunity to right course against the growing incompetence of the “elite” global cabal.
                    But coming so close to completion, and doing so because of their increasingly decadent incompetence, they couldn’t handle reality slapping them in the face. They snapped.
                    I was worried the opportunity to actually have it out would never arise. Modern Civilization takes care of so well, and the middle class especially having not enough but having too much to risk it, and we’re (or we were) quite comfortable. Resistance to the Progressive march, controlling almost all avenues of influence, would never reach the critical mass needed to stop it.
                    But it looks like the Left’s psychotic breakdown is bringing things to a head.
                    It’ll be painful and horrific, but that’s the path of recovery and growth.
                    Maybe we will have it out and force some level of resolution.

                    1. *Trump presented the (exceedingly thin) opportunity to right course *in a relatively bloodless manner.

          2. Yes, we see you supporting the actual brownshirts (they’ve gotten slightly darker).

    3. let them burn it down. No relief funds, they can live in the society they created and rule over the ashes and rubble.

    4. Jesse, we already know you are a loyal cultist and diligent fascist. No need to get so effusive.

      1. Wow, a race-baiting, goose-stepping, authoritarian prick like DOL is calling others “fascist”.
        Amazing.

        1. So many times. Like every other post.

          Methinks espresso is having a Freudian episode.
          He senses the fascism… but it’s coming from the opposition to Trump, not the evil Orange Man.
          This is, undoubtedly, causing him a bit of emotional turmoil and psychological distress. It is contrary to his faith.

  10. Every patriotic American must vote for Joe Biden.

    Today, I am putting the Kremlin and other foreign governments on notice: If elected president, I will direct my administration to impose substantial and lasting costs on those who interfere with American elections.

    Putin’s attack on our 2016 election must be understood in the context of earlier atrocities like Pearl Harbor and 9 / 11. We deserve a President who will confront Russia — with military force if necessary.

    #LibertariansForGettingToughWithRussia

    1. Like Putin is going to allow Joe to get elected President.

      1. Putin doesn’t care who gets elected as long as we are all at each other’s throats for another 4 years

        1. And if we stop exporting LNG to Europe, and allow Russia to set its own price on the one export from Russia that anybody wants. Well, that and leggy models.

      2. Putin did great under Obama/Joe/Hillary.

    2. Well, except Ukraine as long as they insure his useless son is given tons of money again.

    3. Cold War 2: Nuclear Boogaloo

    4. So Joe Biden is going to impose substantial and lasting costs on the democrat party?
      He should read the 25th amendment again.

    5. No patriot would ever vote for Biden.

  11. During its long period of decline, the Ottoman Empire was called ‘the sick man of Europe.’ The United States is now the sick man of the world…

    A couple doses of hydroxychloroquine will fix that right up.

    1. Well, maybe a couple of weeks of penicillin as well.

  12. Officer charged with shooting three journalists. The 3 “identified themselves as members of the press and had their hands up, asking to cross the street.”

    The officer “fired his weapon at them, striking all three with rubber bullets.

    FAKE NEWS GETS FAKE BULLETS

    1. “…asking to cross the street.”

      Did they say “mother, may I”? Did they look both ways?

      1. Police ‘Simon Says’ can be a bitch.

        1. They should’ve used live rounds

    2. My heart bleeds. Pity the commie fucks didn’t get real bullets.


  13. ACLU
    @ACLU
    BREAKING: We’re suing the federal government for imprisoning Michael Cohen in retaliation for his plans to publish a book critical of Trump.

    Umm… he broke his parole terms.

    1. Did the ACLU sue over Obama throwing the Muhamad video guy in prison? Of course not. Some people’s rights matter and others’ do not.

      1. They also sued to overturn DeVos’s vicious plan to give…accused students in college due process rights.

        1. they actually sued over that? jesus christ. Fuck the ACLU.

          1. Be sure to get consent and wear a condom.

      2. No one’s rights matter anymore, the ACLU has become a completely partisan organization. Any defense of constitutional rights is purely coincidental at this point

        1. Not so much coincidental, as advancing the interests of the DNC.
          The ACLU is now just another Democratic Super-PAC masquerading as a rights organization.

      3. “Some people’s rights matter and others’ do not.”

        This is rich coming from you.

        Tell me why the Bundy’s deserved to keep grazing on government land at discounted rates (after they were suspected of arson as well), but people in Portland don’t deserve fundamental civil liberties. Go on. I’m sure it’s very logical and consistent reasoning that doesn’t boil down to “My tribe good. Other tribe bad.”

        1. This question has been answered repeatedly you dishonest piece of shit. Just because you don’t like the answer doesn’t make you look less stupid for continuing to ask it.

        2. but people in Portland don’t deserve fundamental civil liberties.

          I was there when these people said Randy Weaver deserved for his family to be murdered by federal agents for being a racist troglodyte. I was there when these people justified the raid on the Branch Davidians by federal agents because they were religious wackos. I was there when these people cheered in the streets when federal agents ambushed and murdered Lavoy Finnicum as he traveled to meet with a local sheriff. Go piss up a rope, liar. They pleaded for this shit when it wasn’t them. They are the reason it is possible.

          1. “but people in Portland don’t deserve fundamental civil liberties.”

            Plus this question should really be addressed to the actual brownshirt mob that’s rioting, stealing, destroying people’s property, and assaulting anyone who even might not 100% submit to them

        3. people in Portland don’t deserve fundamental civil liberties

          Neat how you keep pretending rape, arson, looting and property destruction are fundamental civil liberties.
          These aren’t people being spirited away by the OGPU for merely protesting, but of course you actually know that, you dishonest fuck.

  14. Tired of resorting to hoaxes, schools on the East Coast are determined to focus children’s views based on skin color and not character content.

    https://pjmedia.com/culture/tyler-o-neil/2020/07/20/virginia-school-district-urges-marxist-splc-race-slavery-lessons-for-kindergarten-n665305

    1. LOL This is in Loudon County, VA of all places, the #1 richest county in the country, which is 70% white, 20% asian, and 8% black.

      1. So why is it surprising to find they’re racist?

    2. There’s that outrage fix. Gotta keep your rage up if you are going to be a good culture warrior.

      1. “Nooooo, don’t look at what we’re doing” – t. DOL

  15. Meanwhile, in Michigan, a 15-year-old girl has been jailed since May for not doing her homework—and a judge says that the Oakland County teenager will stay that way until at least sometime in September.

    That judge has taken to heart the decades long evangelism that preaches the absolute importance of a public school education.

    1. She was jailed for not doing her classwork – which was a condition of her parole. But sure, let’s threaten the girl that she’d better straighten up and fly right but fight like hell any attempt to actually follow through on the threat. That’ll teach her. It’ll teach her the exact wrong thing.

      1. When you have two choices, do your homework or go whining to the press, the obvious choice is Door #2.

        1. “Every day I go to bed thinking and wake up thinking How is this a better situation for her?”

          Allow me to answer

          Because for the first time in her life, she is being taught there are consequences to her actions, something you obviously failed miserably to do. Otherwise, she wouldn’t assault her own mother and steal phones from her classmates.

      2. the law shouldn’t even be involved with this girl. That’s the big issue here everyone is missing.

        1. She should’ve claimed to be a protester when she assaulted someone, then they wouldn’t

        2. “…the law shouldn’t even be involved with this girl.”

          We are talking about the ‘I didn’t do my homework and my probation got yeeted’, girl, right? She got probation for assault, among other actual crimes. If you don’t want the law getting involved there, who do you want to handle those problems?

    2. This article presents the case in a flawed way. Grace is in juvie for a probation violation. The conditions of her probation included doing her schoolwork. It is reductive to say “she is in juvenile hall for not doing her schoolwork.” The conditions of her probation were set up that way for some reason, probably a coalition of social workers and probation.
      It’s good that she isn’t beating people up anymore and it’s a good sign that her mom wants her home. But I think part of the juvenile justice system is very sensitive to young people who see themselves as above the law. Doing the online schoolwork was a condition of probation, she knew that, her family knew it and didn’t follow through. Sounds to me like the court thinks the mom also sees herself as above the law and has been probably unintentionally but certainly effectively raising her child that way the whole time. “Probation stops when I want it to!” is not how it works. But the headline and the whole article jump to the “injustice” side of it and ignore the “procedural” side. I think journalism like this has contributed to the failure of many people to see police brutality as real until there were unedited amateur videos for evidence. It sounds like just more bs when they don’t even address that probation exists for a reason. The juvenile justice system is very far from perfect but I bet they see cases all the time on this basic pattern. “Probation should end when I want it to!” Because making choices that you think are in your personal best interest in the past has worked out so well for everyone else. I think they want to see the juvenile making decisions independent of mom, and mom may feel guilty and has the resources to bring this case. If they win, the teen learns that mom is stronger than the system and can still de facto control the teen too.

      That’s the juvenile justice world, surviving manipulation attempts from all sides. The only defunded version of this that makes any sense to me is mandated outpatient treatment, and jail or hospitalization would be backing up the mandate.

      1. As I wrote the last time Reason tried whining about this case, completing her schoolwork has a greater penological relationship to the goals of probation, than does the ubiquitous ‘no booze for you! And you get to pay for the piss tests too.’ restrictions on adult probationers.

        Of course, the real goal of probation is to keep the probationer on it, and paying.

      2. Only Steven Seagal is “above the law”

      3. Wait, are you saying that Reason misled? Even lied?

        UNPOSSIBLE!

        1. ENB isn’t even pretending to be a journalist anymore.

    3. “She is 15 years old,” Cherisie Evans, a leader with the Michigan Liberation Action Fund, told The Detroit News. “Where is the counseling? Where are the resources?”

      WHERE is the FATHER??

      That’s the root problem with so many things in this country. Fathers AWOL.

      1. “Fathers AWOL”

        No, father AWOL.
        It’s just one guy who really, really gets around.

  16. “During its long period of decline, the Ottoman Empire was called ‘the sick man of Europe.’ The United States is now the sick man of the world,” suggests Jonathan Chait.

    Chait is a fantastic journalist. He was among the first to point out that Drumpf has been a Russian intelligence asset since 1987. Which of course was 100% confirmed by the Mueller Report.

    #TrumpRussia
    #LibertariansForChait

    1. Chait is a progtard masquerading as a journalist. He is badly mistaken about my country. The man should fucking leave and go to the socialist paradise of NK and write glowingly of his hero Un.

      There is no country that does as much, gives as much, sacrifices as much for the general betterment of humanity than the United States of America. No other country comes even remotely close

    2. 100% confirmed to be the a DNC hoax.

  17. The crowd sings “we shall overcome” while everybody has their flashlights out. Not a dry eye in the house, mine included ????.

    Hit with tear gas, eh? Well, everybody’s a critic.

    1. I thought I heard:

      We shall overdose!

    2. Haha! But seriously, what a bunch of pansies. Crying during “we shall overcome”? Overcome what? Living in the richest, most privileged country in human history? Oh, the horror.

      1. This.
        They’re the wealthiest, most privileged generation of children in the history of the world, and they pule and groan about microaggressions, triggers, being othered, safe spaces, and their own personal pronouns.
        As if any of that shit matters, or ever could matter.
        Fuck them, and fuck their enablers. 

  18. Matt Taibbi continues his concentrated attacks on woke culture and how it is breaking down our society. Good read.

    https://taibbi.substack.com/p/year-zero

    1. Taibbi should have quit journalism in shame after he was proved completely wrong about #TrumpRussia. He’s no better than Glenn Greenwald or Michael Tracey.

      1. Why is the sick man always white?

    2. Is anyone in the national Democratic leadership wishing that they brought Taibbi on board as an advisor?

      He may lean left, but he certainly is grounded in reality.

      1. What is this “reality” of which you speak?

  19. When a judge found in May that Grace was behind on this remote coursework, the girl was ruled in violation of her probation and locked up.

    Oh, if only the schools could sic coppers on all their students who hand in tardy assignments.

  20. The bill would require on-duty federal agents to display not just the name of their agency but also the individual agent’s last name and identification number…

    The War on Police comes to Congress.

  21. This is just getting embarrassing.

    Reason.com’s benefactor Charles Koch has lost almost $10 billion this year, while Jeff Bezos earned $13 billion yesterday.

    I don’t know how Bezos is managing to prosper despite this terrible high-tariff / low-immigration Drumpf economy. But we cannot expect Mr. Koch to do the same. His business requires a steady influx of highly skilled labor, particularly across the US / Mexico border.

    #OpenTheBordersToHelpCharlesKoch
    #50BillionIsntEnough

    1. Charles Koch needs to wise up and buy himself a better media outlet than Reason magazine. It’s not like Bezos would sell the Washington Post or Satan would sell the New York Times, but there are plenty of large regional newspapers that could be purchased for a song right now.

      1. I have often proposed that Mr. Koch should buy some newspapers and create an arrangement similar to the one he has with Reason. IOW, they will continue to receive generous funding as long as they promote his open borders agenda on a daily basis.

        #FreeMindsAndFreeMarkets

      2. Why? And hire ENB and the B boys to write for him and end up losing the rest of his fortune? There’s no future in print media.

    2. As far as I can tell, instead of shopping, the higher classes are ordering everything they need off Amazon Prime. That’s how. And much of the marketplace for homemade masks is on Amazon also. And people selling sanitizer at inflated prices, etc. Amazon just has a large corner of internet commerce. Etsy and a few other places are itty bitty competitors, and B&N, but nobody does it all like Amazon.

      I don’t buy anything from them or their marketplace if I can avoid it. At one point I caved and bought a Kindle, which is a convenient thing, but I think I will have to switch to another e-reader. My tiny boycott is meaningless, but it proves it can be done.

      1. Walmart has a pretty good online and delivery racket as well.

  22. “Not a dry eye in the house, mine included”
    I’m looking forward to the encore in November. Well the crying part, anyway

  23. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work n my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home. Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page………click for jobs its a limited offER.

  24. I clicked on Peter ACAB’s twitter and landed here.

    https://twitter.com/RubyWaves_/status/1285333938374873088

    1. At first I misunderstood her point. Shame on me.

    2. Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I am now making over $15k every month just by doing an easy j0b 0nline!OPt I KNOW YOU NOW MAKIG MOR DOLLARS online from $28 k I,TS EASY ONLINE WORKING JOBS…
      go to this SITE for more INFO just copy and past…ReadMore.

      1. This asshole just called you Mike, Rufus! What are you gonna do about it.

  25. Every month start earning more cash from $20,000 to $24,000 by working very simple j0b 0nline from home. I have earned last month $23159 from this by just doing this 0nline w0rk for maximum 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop. This home j0b is just awesome and regular earning from this are much times better than other regular 9 to 5 desk j0b. Now every person on this earth can get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow instructions on the given web page.Click For Full Details.

  26. Nothing about the Epstein case judge’s son being murdered? Are you guys getting your cues directly from the NYT now? They also didn’t see anything much out of the ordinary there. The headline I saw was literally “federal judge’s son is killed” very sad but sometimes freak occurrences happen. What are you going to do?

    1. It apparently it was a guy with a revenge list. He has a history of losing court cases.

      1. And the connection to Epstein is really fucking tenuous. People need to take off the tinfoil hats.

    2. From what I’ve gathered from Dailymail, the suspect was a Trump loving, woman hating rightwing freakazoid.

      1. If he’s typical of what you describe, well then… you better watch the fuck out

  27. The shooting was unprovoked. At no time did the three complainants do anything to cause the defendant to shoot at them.

    Well, other than being alive and in the general vicinity.

    1. Well, it does say that they had their hands up and requested permission to cross the street and were shot when they were in the middle of crossing the street. The report somehow missed reporting on the part where they were either granted or denied permission to cross the street. I would say this cop deserves to have the book thrown at him if he granted them permission to cross the street and then shot them when they did what he had just given them permission to do. But, you know, there is an alternative to them being granted permission to cross the street …. and given that the report is coming from one side here and they neglected to mention whether or not they had been given permission, I have to suspect that I know exactly why they were shot. The press is not above the law, no matter how much they think that a press ID gives them the right to go where they want to go and do what they want to do regardless of the law. When the riot cops tell you that you have to go, you have to go and just saying “But I’m the press and the law doesn’t apply to me” isn’t going to cut it.

      1. ^ This ‘libertarian’ here thinks that cops give permission for people to cross streets or not, and that failure to interpret their whims is reason enough for shootings.

        Individual rights are what to you?

        1. Now do homeowners with a threatening mob.

          1. Just an HOA violation.

        2. Traffic cops literally give people permission to cross the street. It is illegal and dangerous to do so against their direction. In many places, automated lights have replaced the traffic cop, and it is illegal and dangerous to cross against their instruction as well.
          I guess there will be hundreds of thousands of pedestrian deaths in Libertopia

      2. why should they need permission from the cops to cross the street?

        1. To keep safe from the rioters mingled in with the peaceful protesters.

        2. they’ll shoot you just like they shot that chicken

  28. Apparently to Democrats, black lives don’t matter to even try to pass some form of police reform unless they’re in control and can put whatever they want in it.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/house/507915-democrats-set-to-hold-out-for-big-police-reform

    1. Black lives matter….

      …..er, black votes matter….to Donkey elections.

  29. What I love is that, eventually, Trump will be out of the White House. But the media, and Reason, will never be able to reclaim their credibility.

    Ever.

    1. I dunno, i expect a full-on gaslighting campaign and denial that any of their idiocy ever happened. I mean, hell, just look at how we don’t really talk about Russia any more. Or spying. Or Eric Ciaramella.

      1. Or running, screaming, away from Ron Paul when that newsletters story resurfaced in 2008.

      2. Traffic cops literally give people permission to cross the street. It is illegal and dangerous to do so against their direction. In many places, automated lights have replaced the traffic cop, and it is illegal and dangerous to cross against their instruction as well.
        I guess there will be hundreds of thousands of pedestrian deaths in Libertopia

        1. This fvckin message board fvckin sux

      3. They spent 20 years after Reagan was gone gaslighting about how awful the 80s were, the Me decade (is a perfect description for the 60s and 70s, actually), and finally just had to give up, partially because Obama was in anyway, but mostly because nobody who was alive at the time bought any of it.

    2. What makes you think they care? Progressives don’t.

    3. hahahahahaha.

      If you think Trump’s critics are the ones who are going to need repairing their credibility after this, you might be a cult member.

      1. Tell me more about Russian collusion.

        1. Everyone that doesn’t agree with DOL is in a cult in his fantasy land.

        2. Why don’t you just read the report? It’s ok to change your mind when presented with new information.

          1. You mean the one that found no evidence of any American “colluding” with the Russians? Or are we playing the libertarians for process crimes game now? But you’re super serial about civil rights. Yes, you are.

          2. The report that found nothing?

            The FBI notes that show that the FBI was ready to close it in Jan 2016 due to absolutely no evidence?

    1. US accuses supplier for Amazon, Apple, Dell, GM, Microsoft of human rights abuses
      The company, whose tech helps power phones, tablets and wearables, is accused of helping China’s campaign against Uighurs.

      https://www.cnet.com/news/us-accuses-supplier-for-amazon-apple-dell-gm-microsoft-of-human-rights-abuses/

    2. As we’ve seen, the modern Left and Libertarians would have sided with Hitler during the Holocaust if it’d make them a few bucks more.

      1. Clearly China learned from Hitler’s mistake: first make sure everyone is buying your cheap shit and you’re dug into global supply chains like a tick before you start eliminating your “undesirables.”

        1. Not having a Royal Navy to contend with, is another significant difference. Ford Motor Company, to name one, was perfectly happy continuing to trade with Nazi Germany post September 3, 1939.

      2. In ’39 the current left sided with Hitler until 1941 when the Hitler/Stalin pact was broken.

        1. They traded the fascist for the commie!

          Now they ape both.

          1. Fusion is all the rage

  30. So is reason going to just ignore the attempted prosecution of the St. Louis couple who did nothing more than protect their homes?

    Are political prosecutions now a libertarian thing?

    I know you ignored the story of the Portland journalist who was charged with 21 counts crime after drawing against a mob of antifa… but at what point does a libertarian magazine speak out against political prosecutions?

    1. When it shows how bad Trump is.

    2. “So is reason going to just ignore the attempted prosecution of the St. Louis couple who did nothing more than protect their homes?”

      You mean the couple who were pointing firearms and screaming threats at people walking past their home?

      1. People who broke their gate and entered their private property.

        So, you’re now opposed to property rights?

        Good job.

        1. “People who broke their gate and entered their private property.”

          According to what I read the gate was open and the protesters were walking on the street, while the ambulance-chasers were screaming threats and had fingers on triggers.

          1. According to them, it was closed, there are pictures of a broken gate, and the McCloskeys were ON THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY.

            But you keep being you.

            Good to know that some people don’t have property rights because you disapprove of their jobs, though. too bad the rioters have no jobs at all.

            1. Good to know you think it’s kosher for people break the law and point guns at people as long as you disapprove of their politics.

              1. Defense of private property is not breaking the law. The castle doctrine in Missouri is wide and covers this fairly well.

                You may want to stop digging buddy.

                1. I agree with you up to the point of pointing their guns at people.

                  Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

                  1. I comprehend it fine. I have also looked at the laws of Missouri including the Castle Doctrine.

                    You have not based on every comment in this thread. So I understand/comprehend more it seems.

                    1. Then you would know that castle doctrine does not apply to people who aren’t even on their property. They cannot deploy deadly force in service to the HOA, fascist.

                    2. No force was ever applied dummy.

                      Way to jump into this comment thread with a comment dumber than any presented so far.

                    3. They cannot deploy threaten deadly force in service to the HOA, fascist.

                      ftfy

                    4. There’s video of them going through the gate that was just broken down. You seem to be implying, when you keep saying “HOA” that it was like a normal neighborhood that you can just drive through like any other neighborhood. The evidence is easy to find that shows this is incorrect, but you lefties here have made clear you don’t want to learn anything that doesn’t fit your narrative. They broke through a gate in a wall and were threatening to burn down the historic home that was filled with antiques and murder them and their dog.

                      You clearly do not believe in property rights. Just admit it and stop making an ass of yourself.

                    5. “No force was ever applied dummy”

                      Castle doctrine is a defense for the USE of force in self defense. So clearly it doesn’t apply here. Missouri’s unlawful weapon use laws are clearly in the lady’s favor if she wasn’t using a real gun.

                      HOWEVER

                      That works against them. If you reasonably fear for your life you aren’t going out there with a fake gun. It destroys any credibility for self defense.

                      Also a private street doesn’t make it their private property.

                    6. Does the synagogue on the other side of the couple’s fence have property rights? What do you think of the husband’s going over that fence and destroying the synagogue’s honeycombs?

                  2. So yes, you do think self-defense is criminal. Or you are arguing that the are required to pull the trigger. That’s just twisted.

                    1. We all know that that was not self defense. You know it, I know it, we all know it. People who are afraid for their lives do not exit their giant fortress of a house and waive little ppk pistols about.

                      Don’t insult everyone here by continuing that charade. Leave that at huff post, or wherever you guys go to “troll the libs” nowadays.

                    2. Yes DoL, the smart move is to wait for them to breach your walls before doing anything.

                      Of course.

                      You loathe self-defense yet bitch about the police. That’s kinda ironic.

                      We get it, you find guns “scary”. C’est la vie. They didn’t fire at anybody. If the mob wasn’t on private property, they never would have even seen them.

                      …then the mob came back. That’s also a bit germane.

                    3. Hi Delta!

                      We all know it was self-defense. We all know that the mob engaged in destruction. You know it, I know it. You can’t let the truth come out because you must protect the narrative.

                      Leave that at huff post, or wherever you guys go to “troll the libs” nowadays.

                      Thankfully you make it convenient by posting here.

                    4. DOL likes to make false statements, aka lie, then act like everyone else is being dishonest.

                    5. “breach the walls”

                      Hyperventilate harder.

                    6. Hyperventilate harder.

                      You’re the one urinating because the mob was forced to back down.

                2. The state AG is apparently acting the judge to drop the case, over the objections of the local prosecutor, and the judge just might.

                  This crowd of people busted down an iron gate to gain access to this private subdivision. They also apparently severely damaged a gate at the drive entry. These aren’t public roads or sidewalks, they aren’t owned by the city or state. It’s a gated community with signs clearly posted – access for residents only – directly attached to both the gates and the fences.

          2. You’d almost be right. They didn’t break the gate, they forced it open however. It wasn’t open.

            But video from early in the incident shows a man holding open the left side of the gate while the right door is fully intact and upright.

            It doesn’t state if the forced opening broke it however.

            They still entered private property and were yelling expletives and threatening the couple.

            https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was-intact-when-cwe-couple-pointed-guns-at-protesters/63-14a1582a-9372-4494-b8ee-41d5d4d71b61

          3. “According to what I read the gate was open and the protesters were walking on the street, while the ambulance-chasers were screaming threats and had fingers on triggers.”

            And you believe it, like a good little muzzled subject.

            They broke the gate down. There are videos and photos of it.
            Then the mob – ok, some people within the completely atomized and individually distinct mob – threatened to invade their home when he told them to leave.
            You’re pathetic

            1. Your comments are nothing more than the sound of a gnat buzzing around my head.

              1. Another lefty admitting they won’t even listen to anything they don’t like. That’s four of you in the last few days.

                1. Nardz is a hostile jerk who approves of murdering people who disagree with his politics. I see nothing to gain by having a conversation with him.

                  1. You hate me because I’m right about you, sarcasmic.
                    Grow the fuck up and stop thinking of Reason as a place for free group therapy sessions.
                    Stay in your lane, boy.

                    1. I don’t hate you. I’m just not impressed that you think, like cops and two-year-olds, that it’s perfectly reasonable to initiate violence in order to get your way. You’re a bully. And bullies suck.

                    2. sarcasmic didn’t say he hates you.

                      He said that you are hateful. There is much evidence of this.

            2. Show us the video of the protestors breaking the gate down. The gate was up during all the gun pointing.

              It’s almost like you guys have to consistently lie and bend the truth in order to even have a point to argue.

              https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was-intact-when-cwe-couple-pointed-guns-at-protesters/63-14a1582a-9372-4494-b8ee-41d5d4d71b61

              1. So you missed the comment in your article about the gate being forced open? As well as other articles showing the gate as broken from this forcing? Your own article, the one I also posted, literally says the gate was forced open dummy.

                1. The gate being forced open is disputed. Show me some pictures of a broken gate.

                    1. Minadin came through!

            3. Can you link to:
              – video or photo of the broken gate, gate being broken down?
              – story that documents some people threatening to invade their home?

              1. This gate, jackass? Someone else posted this link here literally days ago.

                https://co-a2.freetls.fastly.net/co-uploads/2020/06/Broken-gate-.jpg

          4. Then you read something that lied to you.

      2. I think he means the couple that went to their firearms when a large angry mob broke into their neighborhood and loudly threatened everyone living there with bodily and property harm, while the police told them they were on their own.

        1. According to the shark that the rich lawyers hired to represent them. I choose to believe my lying eyes which show pictures of the couple pointing weapons at a crowd of people on the street. If they hadn’t been waving their guns around then I’d have some sympathy, but they were being extremely unsafe and reckless. I do think the felony charges are a bit much, but you don’t go pointing the barrel at people.

          1. So you’ll believe your lying eyes that the couple was pointing their guns at a crowd, but you won’t believe your lying eyes that there was a large angry crowd trespassing on private property and threatening harm to the residents living there? Even from the “protesters'” videos it’s clear that Ken and Karen were fully justified in bringing their firearms out to tell the crowd to move along.

            1. Bringing firearms out? Yes, totally justified. Pointing them at people with fingers on the trigger? No.

              1. It’s a gated neighborhood, Sarc. Private property, if this rag of a magazine still cares about that concept. Those were their homes, and they were staring at a mob, of the type that for the past few weeks in St. Louis, hadn’t stopped at trespassing with the laws they chose to break.

                I think the couple showed a lot of restraint, if not a lot of training. I’d have been scared shitless, were I in their shoes. You would be too.

                1. Hey now, you’re supposed to ignore the looting/arson/etc attached to the “peaceful protests.”

                  https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/photos-4-police-officers-shot-buildings-looted-fires-set-in-downtown-st-louis-riot/collection_f701b60b-3e13-59ed-b8a1-050fe71946b4.html

                  You are not allowed to protect yourself until violence occurs in Sarc’s world.

                  1. I see no point in having a conversation with you because you respond not to what I actually say, but to come caricature in your head. Whatevs, dude. Talk to the hand.

                    1. I have literally responded to each of your arguments, no matter how sophomoric they have been.

                      Your threshold for allowed defensive is essentially only when violence has already occurred. This is based on your arguments in this thread.

                      The actions that proceded the display of the guns were:

                      a) violent protests over the course of the previous weeks
                      b) mob of protestors yelling expletives and threats
                      c) forced opening of gate (and according to some reports breaking said gate)
                      d) trespassing onto private property

                      Given these 4 facts prior to any brandishing of even an inoperable weapon, you claim there was not justification to brandish a weapon.

                      That is an insane point of view. The only step left prior to being able to use the gun is seemingly some violent action to have occurred. If I am wrong, please elucidate.

                    2. Point c is not a fact. Even if it’s true, the protesters were on the street. So what if it was a private street? It’s still the fucking street. The couple was pointing guns at people on the street. Not on their personal property, their driveway, their yard or their doorstep. The street. You can’t convince me that that’s cool.

                    3. The private street is their shared private property. JFC, even you can’t be drunk this early.

                    4. There’s also a sign at the gate that says residents only allowed past this point. All your doing is justifying trespass.

                    5. There’s also a sign at the gate that says residents only allowed past this point. All your doing is justifying trespass.

                      Jeebus H Christo on a skateboard Batman!

                      Are you fucking illiterate?

                      My simple, yet impossible to comprehend, point is that pointing their guns at people on the street wasn’t justified. Yes they had good reason to be afraid, yes the protesters were trespassing on a private road, yes they were jerks, blah blah blah I have no problem with what the couple did up until the point where they pointed guns at people on the street. You know, like threatening deadly force and stuff?

                      Politics numbs peoples’ brains. Protesters’ politics bad! Anything anyone does to them good! Me make fire with rocks and sticks! Durrr!

                    6. So the mob was trespassing, and threatening to destroy their property and harm them and their dog, but the couple standing on their property pointing guns at said mob are the problem.

                    7. There’s also the little detail in one story on the couple that the husband trespassed on a local synagogue to destroy beehives.

                      Admittedly, it was a cheap shot at the couple by the reporter who dug it up. On the other hand, it’s very relevant to this comments discussion.

                      Where’s the outrage from everyone here that he trespassed on the synagogue and destroyed their property?! Why doesn’t unreason talk about it, huh?!

                    8. Wow, this is pathetic even for you white knight, but it fits your MO.

                      White Knight: Here’s a story nobody’s heard of, that I’m not gonna cite, which I admit is a cheap site. Where’s the outrage?

                    9. Where’s the outrage from everyone here that he trespassed on the synagogue and destroyed their property?! Why doesn’t unreason talk about it, huh?!

                      Point out where anyone is defending it. Point out how that impacts the facts here at all. Oh, just more whataboutism. If they trespassed and destroyed property then they should be held accountable for it. Is that really so hard to understand?

                    10. bs, I’ve been refraining from saying this, but you just personally insulted me:

                      You are not very bright. You’ve shown this over and over in comments you’ve posted.

                      My point, which flew over your head, even though it is clear, is that it is ridiculous when someone gets all bent out of shape and writes “how come Reason doesn’t write about X?!”

                    11. Wow
                      White knight thinks he’s smart enough to talk down to someone???

                      L
                      O
                      L

                    12. And honestly your honeycomb story is the most blatantly desperate attempt at employing “whataboutism” that I’ve ever seen.
                      Truly impressive.
                      Not in a positive way.

              2. Sarc, don’t you get it? Those protestors were not protestors, they were dirty commie rioters, and thus it is not in violation of the NAP to kill them for violating the HOA bylaws.

                This is consistent with Hayek. I mean, none of us Trump cultists have ever read Hayek, but we assume he was into this.

                1. Sadly yeah, it’s all political. Had the politics of the protesters been different, and every other circumstance the same, the conservatives would be jumping through hoops to defend them. And in the minds of these conservatives if you don’t completely excuse what the couple did, you agree with the politics of the protesters. So stupid.

                  1. Had the politics been different you would be jumping through hoops to protect the homeowners, because you lack any foundational principles.

                    Yeah, stupid.

                    1. That’s the joke. Because I’m going on principle, I appear partisan to partisans.

                    2. It’s a remarkably inside joke.

                  2. Had the protesters not been burning down parts of St. Louis for days prior to this, and the cops standing by and watching them, you might begin to have a point, sarcasmic. Their homes were being threatened, by a mob that could have overwhelmed them, burned their shit down, and monkey-stomped those homeowners into the ground. Just like the mob had been doing in downtown St. Louis up until that point.

                    You’re telling me you would’ve watched this group break into your private, locked neighborhood, march in front of your house, and you wouldn’t have been bothered? If you are, then you’re a bigger liar than that DoL sock.

                    These groups are exactly like spoiled, rotten children: they will push and push on the boundaries of decent behavior, decent behavior for peaceful protesters, until something stops them. And if stopping them results in a pile of corpses that were overprivileged, dipshit white folks? So much the better, as far as their backers are concerned.

                    1. I’m saying that as long as the people were on the street my weapon would be pointed in a safe direct.

                    2. *direction*

                    3. “If you are, then you’re a bigger liar than that DoL sock.”

                      Let’s not get carried away. Nobody lies like The Lying Jeffy’s.

                    4. sarcasmic seems unable to comprehend the concept of “private street”.

                  3. Lying lefties making up shit to further their lefty narrative again.

                    “not in violation of the NAP to kill them for violating the HOA bylaws.”

                    Not killing anyone =killing multiple people, and trespassing =violating HOA bylaws. Your not even telling the truth based on your own bullshit story up to this point.

                    You just can’t help being a dishonest piece of shit.

                    1. Truth is, sarcasmic just isn’t very smart, is an incredibly shallow, dogmatic thinker, and has the emotional stability of a schizophrenic 13 year old.
                      But he has read one or two books that tell him what he’s supposed to believe, despite the fact that he’ll never adequately comprehend them.

                    2. When you don’t understand what I’m saying, it isn’t because I’m the one who isn’t very smart.

                    3. Sorry, Nardz. sarc is right. He’s not the one who frequently doesn’t understand what is being said.

                    4. Sorry, White, you’re wrong as usual.

                    5. It’s pretty damn obvious what sarc is saying: he believes it was wrong of the couple to direct their weapons on the crowd when they hadn’t yet stepped onto his lawn.
                      How do you think people aren’t getting this?
                      We are directly telling you the multitude of reasons we disagree.
                      If you’re interpreting it as anything other than “your opinion is wrong, and here’s why” that’s an issue only you can resolve. You’re the one(s) who have to fix that.

          2. First the pistol was a prop gun and wasn’t even fireable. But you keep going on with a strong stance in ignorance.

            Second, the AR was also not loaded and was not fireable. This is from the D.A. report.

            1. Brandishing laws don’t care if the firearm is operable or loaded.

              1. This is the ignorance I am talking about. From Missouri law.

                (4) Exhibits, in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner;

                1. Well I guess I am mistaken. I was going by the laws of states where I have lived and made a bad assumption.

                    1. At least I’m man enough to admit to being wrong.

                2. How does the case law characterize that clause, Jesse? Because I’m pretty sure that a guy waving an Airsoft AR-15 is going to get popped for brandishing too. Aside, it would’ve taken about two seconds to put that AR into battery. He did go to the trouble of putting a spare mag in his pockets.

                  If he did confront the mob with an unloaded gun, he’s an idiot.

                  Weird that her pistol was a prop gun. Though it explains why two wealthy people in a multi-million dollar house were using a Jimenez. 380 to defend themselves with. Maybe it was a drop gun? Or maybe one of them took it as payment from a client.

                  1. She had a real gun and then got an airsoft gun to give to the police.

                    This couple has a long history of dirt baggery. Perfect people for the cult of terrible people to put on a pedestal.

                    https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/portland-place-couple-who-confronted-protesters-have-a-long-history-of-not-backing-down/article_281d9989-373e-53c3-abcb-ecd0225dd287.html

                    1. Hey, another DoL Conspiracy! LOL. You literally can’t stop with the conspiracies.

                    2. Produce the gun. Can’t? OK, you’re full of shit.

                  2. I haven’t delved into case law, I’ve only read what the castle doctrine and actual law says. I’ve been following it only somewhat tangentially reading what I can publicly of the STL D.A. statements and the Missouri AG statements.

                    Even if loaded I, as well as the AG and many Missouri lawyers, would claim they are easily covered under the castle doctrine which is very broad for Missouri. There is no requirement to retreat. Not even a hint of one.

                    1. On the couple’s actual behavior and relevant facts, I agree with you. IANAL, haven’t read MO statutes or case law, but I’d think even if it was brandishing in a vacuum, it’s justified by the circumstances. I was just wondering about whether an act could constitute brandishing a firearm, if the weapon wasn’t technically a loaded firearm.

                    2. I really don’t think it’s as clear as you think it is. I mean it’s not that difficult to poke a hole in their argument that they were reasonably in fear for their lives when the lady turns in a fake gun.

                    3. I really don’t think it’s as clear as you think it is. I mean it’s not that difficult to poke a hole in their argument that they were reasonably in fear for their lives when the lady turns in a fake gun.

                      Yes, people who are afraid would never bluff. Do you bother to read what you write?

                    4. “Yes, people who are afraid would never bluff. Do you bother to read what you write?”

                      I’m sorry do legal standards confuse you?

              2. Okay, so you’re taking a principled approach, where the couple was justified in using their firearms to defend themselves but they did it in just the wrong way to make it illegal, and thus they should be prosecuted.

                I’m curious, would you take the same sort of principled stance against the horde that broke into their property in the first place? Should the DA pursue charges against anyone for that? If not, why not?

                1. Trespassers should be charged with trespassing.

                  1. Yet they weren’t, won’t be in the future, and you don’t care.

                  2. The same trespassers that were let off by the same prosecutor that filed charges against the couple?

                    How is that supposed to work?

              3. Castle doctrine which is especially strong in Missouri doesn’t give a fuck about the “brandishing” law.

            2. Woah, woah! Really?! That’s hilarious.

          3. So, you oppose the 2nd Amendment and getting a legal defense.

            Any other rights you wish to remove from those you don’t care for?

            1. You’ll just have to wait and see what other rights are violated by left wingers for them to tell you. Because they’re principled like that.

      3. No, I mean the couple who were defending their property from a group that broke into private property and were cursing and threatening the couple who were on their porch.

        Did you even watch the video or just go straight to the Vox narrative? You can actually hear the protesters threatening them.

        1. Like I said above, if they hadn’t been recklessly pointing weapons at people I would be singing a different tune.

          1. How were they “recklessly” pointing weapons at a mob on private property? They didn’t shoot anybody so it seems like a simple case of them using their 2nd Amendmend rights to protect themselves against a mob.

            1. Why is this so hard to understand? Yes, they have a right to defend themselves and their property. But until they can reasonably believe their lives are in danger, they can’t start pointing their guns at people. That was their mistake. The actual pointing of the guns.

              1. You’ve failed at understanding what is reasonable and what is not.

                1. Is it possible for people to disagree without personal insults? Try being civilized for a change.

                  1. I am being civil. Your definition of reasonable is not actually reasonable and your argument is based on seemingly ignorance of the actual facts proven in this thread.

                    You are literally claiming a person on their own threshold can’t stop a mob of people who break into their private community even knowing that there has been an uptick in violence among these protests.

                    Your view is the unreasonable one. But you take it because you have a weird defensive mechanism kick in when someone dares to question protesters as violent.

                  2. We are, and you think we should be thrown in jail for “brandishing” firearms at a violent mob that breaks into our property and threatens further destruction.
                    You’ve gone full boot-licking progressive

                  3. You’ve become somebody opposed to Constitutional rights. Not sure why I should be civilized towards people who desire that.

                    We’ve BEEN civilized for years towards people who believe as you do. It was a mistake.

                    1. Who believe as I do? Really? All I said was that they shouldn’t have pointed the guns at people. I have no issue with anything else that they did. But pointing wasn’t necessary. That’s it. And you interpret that to mean I oppose the 2A? Seriously?

                    2. 100%. “I support the 2nd Amendment…just not any use of it for any reason I dislike” is not a defense of it.

                    3. Same could be said to you, damikesc. “1a is good, but not for people I disagree with.”

                      At no point did “the mob” enter that couple’s property. They were on a private road, yes, but that is a misdemeanor at worst, and possible not a crime at all since someone held the door for them and they were never trespassed by a representative of the HOA. The couple was specifically impeached and removed from the HOA for being pieces of shit.

                    4. Do I have to use small words for you to understand? The protesters were on the street. You know, that place not on the real estate that the couple owned where people drive cars. Heard of it? Yes they were yelling, but there’s no evidence that they were armed or had harmed any property. The homeowners were perfectly within their rights to arm themselves in fear. Their mistake was waving the guns around and pointing them at the crowd. And you interpret that to mean I oppose self defense? Dude, you’re a fucking idiot.

                    5. 1a doesn’t give you a right to Trespass. DoL is getting even worse at argumentation, which I didn’t think was possible.

                    6. Let’s go through this. Even if it will be a PITA, given the limits of this comment software.

                      “The protesters were on the street. You know, that place not on the real estate that the couple owned where people drive cars.”

                      The street is private, owned by the neighborhood association of which the couple are members. It is their street, albeit with more restricted ownership rights than their home or curtilage.

                      “Yes they were yelling, but there’s no evidence that they were armed or had harmed any property. The homeowners were perfectly within their rights to arm themselves in fear. ”

                      A mob doesn’t need to be armed to constitute an imminent threat of serious bodily harm. Gross disparity of numbers counts, particularly when the group is manifesting hostility—like yelling—to the subject of the inquiry. (Not that you, I, or the couple could determine whether any of those ‘individuals’ in the mob were actually armed or not.)

                      “Their mistake was waving the guns around and pointing them at the crowd.”

                      Maybe, maybe not. Pointing guns at people who constitute an imminent deadly threat, is an intermediate measure to try and stop the deadly threat. It’s not taught in most basic CHL/LTC courses because it can set the guy pointing the gun up for a brandishing charge. Yet, you’ve probably noted on videos, cops point their guns at people all of the time. If it secures compliance, great. Real world, other people do it too, which is where numbers like Lott’s ‘2 million defensive gun uses’ comes from. Usually, it’s against people aren’t going to call the cops about it.

                      I’m glad it looks like they’re going to be pardoned or NP’d.

                    7. “Pointing guns at people who constitute an imminent deadly threat, is an intermediate measure to try and stop the deadly threat.”

                      The people were on the street. Granted it was a private street, but street nonetheless. Perhaps we disagree on what imminent deadly threat means. I don’t see people in the street as such.

                      “cops point their guns at people all of the time.”

                      That’s because laws don’t apply to police.

                    8. “cops point their guns at people all of the time.”

                      That’s because laws don’t apply to police.

                      Or people you like.

                    9. Or people you like.

                      That is remarkably ironic being that I don’t like anyone in this scenario, while your contempt for the protesters forces you to defend the couple at all costs.

                    10. Your unswerving devotion to rioters is what you’re consistently defending.

                    11. “The street is private, owned by the neighborhood association of which the couple are members. It is their street, albeit with more restricted ownership rights than their home or curtilage.”

                      It is a street owned by a separate legal entity. It is not ‘their’ street. Not by any legal definition.

                      “A mob doesn’t need to be armed to constitute an imminent threat of serious bodily harm.”

                      Let’s be real here, if you’re whipping out a fake gun it seems very unlikely you view whatever it is as an imminent threat to your life.

                      “Maybe, maybe not. Pointing guns at people who constitute an imminent deadly threat, is an intermediate measure to try and stop the deadly threat. It’s not taught in most basic CHL/LTC courses because it can set the guy pointing the gun up for a brandishing charge. Yet, you’ve probably noted on videos, cops point their guns at people all of the time”

                      Because they have an exemption. In Missouri’s Unlawful Weapon Use law it’s this

                      2. Subdivisions (1), (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10) of subsection 1 of this section shall not apply to or affect any of the following:

                      (1) All state, county and municipal peace officers who have completed the training required by the** police officer standards and training commission pursuant to sections 590.030 to 590.050, RSMo, and possessing the duty and power of arrest for violation of the general criminal laws of the state or for violation of ordinances of counties or municipalities of the state, whether such officers are on or off duty, and whether such officers are within or outside of the law enforcement agency’s jurisdiction, or any person summoned by such officers to assist in making arrests or preserving the peace while actually engaged in assisting such officer;

                      Subdivision (4) is brandishing in section 1.

                  4. This is hilarious. You excuse every arsonist and vandal but have no trouble whatsoever it siccing the government on a couple exercising their 2A rights.

                    1. Really? I wasn’t aware that I’ve excused arsonists and vandals. I’ve said that such people don’t represent the majority of protesters, but that doesn’t mean I’m excusing the actions of criminals. You should ask your doctor to give you some medication to quiet the voices in your head.

                    2. You’ve denied that there is any possibility that those arrested could be, oh, guilty of committing a crime. Yes, you’ve excused them. At the same time you didn’t allege that these people committed a crime. You asserted it.

                      Good to know you think it’s kosher for people break the law and point guns at people as long as you disapprove of their politics.

                      So yeah, your words, sport. But even better, you deny them the ability to defend themselves because you reflexive assume that the mob of people who committed the original criminal act of tresspass, destruction of property, and intimidation are in no way responsible.

                      Time for clown nose back on?

                    3. “But even better, you deny them the ability to defend themselves because you reflexive assume that the mob of people who committed the original criminal act of tresspass, destruction of property, and intimidation are in no way responsible.”

                      Really? All of that because I say they crossed the line when they pointed their guns at people on the street?

                      Did you miss the part where I said trespassers should be charged with trespassing?

                      You’ve got some serious mental issues. Go see your doctor. Seriously.

                    4. And you’ve never answered the simple question I posited yesterday.

                      If a protester is intentionally hampering law enforcement from interceding in an act of violence, such as arson, is the protester violating the NAP or not?

                    5. Did you miss the part where I said trespassers should be charged with trespassing?

                      Your assertion here is that there is no chance at the trespassing ever escalating to an act of violence, therefor no reasonable person could assume such and seek to defend themselves.

                    6. Really? All of that because I say they crossed the line when they pointed their guns at people on the street?

                      Did you miss the part where I said trespassers should be charged with trespassing?

                      You’ve got some serious mental issues. Go see your doctor. Seriously.

                      This is the fun game you play. You get to make all of the assumptions about what is reasonable and what really happened. You KNOW that the mob wasn’t threatening. How do you know? Well, you don’t. The video evidence doesn’t vindicate your position, but you just know. All skepticism is reserved for the couple. There’s literally no possibility that the they could fear for their lives because you can’t have that. You need them to be wrong here, and so they are.

                      If anyone needs a DSM V diagnosis here, I’d suggest you look in a mirror.

                    7. “Your assertion here is that there is no chance at the trespassing ever escalating to an act of violence, therefor no reasonable person could assume such and seek to defend themselves.”

                      No, I’m asserting that pointing weapons at people on the street was not justified. You’re equivocating being on a private street with being in someone’s yard or home. I don’t see it that way.

                      We’re not going to change each other’s minds. I’m dropping it.

                  5. Calling people cultists isn’t an insult? You’re so full of shit.

              2. They had a mob that broke down the gate and entered private property.

                Not sure where you label “Reasonable” concerns, but “hundreds of people breaking into private property” works in most cases.

                But, please, tell me more about how bad Portland was with federal troops and how you oppose the government suppressing rights.

              3. You mean like have a mob marching on their house and screaming threats? You mean like breaking down the gate to private property?

                No, their mistake was thinking that laws matter when you’ve got a narrative.

          2. No you wouldn’t. You have failed to even understand the basics of the case. As I mentioned above. The guns weren’t even fireable per the D.A. documents.

            https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/bryan-preston/2020/07/20/prosecutors-file-charges-against-mccloskeys-but-their-case-may-have-already-fallen-apart-n665967

            1. “No you wouldn’t.”

              Why don’t you just make up what I think and argue against that instead of what I actually say? Whatever.

              1. Yeah! He’s just a Trump cultist that would feel different if it was a different group of people. You didn’t just make that up, you knew that as a fact, right? You don’t even realize what a fucking hypocrite you are.

              2. You have made up whatever you wanted. They were not “in the street”, most were on the sidewalk beside their house. And since it was a big crowd, many were in the grass on their lawn because not everyone could fit side by side on the sidewalk.

      4. and then what happened?

        1. They were rightfully charged with a crime for brandishing firearms at people on the street.

          1. But they weren’t on the street. They were behind a wall with a broken gate.

            But, don’t worry…mobs are always peaceful.

            1. You guys are all repeating the same lie that the protestors smashed the gate to get in. They did not. It seems the gate was broken at some point after the events in the video, and the HOA that the couple was supposedly defending (the protestors never stepped foot on the couple’s property) had already removed that couple from any leadership positions. This couple is not popular in their home town, which usually tells you something about their character. I would be hesitant to take anything they say as fact, lest you run the chance of looking like a moron later when they change their story again, a la Trump.

              https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/video-shows-gate-was-intact-when-cwe-couple-pointed-guns-at-protesters/63-14a1582a-9372-4494-b8ee-41d5d4d71b61

              Which brings me to an interesting point. Trumpies are definitely all in on this couple, who are well known pieces of shit in their community, much like Trump is hated in New York and Atlantic City, and called a moron by basically ever person who’s ever known him who isn’t currently receiving a check from him. What is it with Trumpies supporting terrible people who lie? And why do your arguments always hinge on some obvious lie (gate broken or meetings about “adoptions” or hurricane courses directed by sharpie).

                1. They’re personal injury lawyers. Doesn’t get much scummier than that.

                  1. Oh, so they are totally guilty.

                    I thought you never lumped people together. Remember how you sanctimoniously scolded everyone for dare saying peaceful protesters are conjoined with the rioters.

                    Weird your consistency.

                    But yes, the facts and logic aren’t on your side, so join in DoL on attacks of character instead. Totes helping your reasonableness argument.

                    1. I’m simply agreeing that they’re not saints. I don’t really give a fuck about their profession. I’ve got a problem with them waving guns at people on the street. So what if it’s a private street. It’s still the fucking street.

                  2. Wow, look at the guilt by association all of a sudden. Totally principled.

                    Let me guess, joke?

                    1. The clown nose is an amazing tool.

                    2. I’m pointing out that you should not accept for a moment any of their statements. They have shown themselves to be shameless liars. Character is a thing.

                    3. Oddly enough you’re willing to take the words at complete face value from the “peaceful” protesters. Have you vetted their personal history yet? Is there any criminal history there?

                      Funny how the character game only goes one way here. Almost like you need it to be that way…

                    4. Who needs to accept their statements?
                      We have video of an angry mob 50 yards from their front door screaming threats at them.
                      Did they kidnap that mob at gunpoint then march them onto private property so they can go back to their house and tell them to leave?

              1. “This couple is not popular in their home town, which usually tells you something about their character.”

                So you’re projecting when you accuse others of basing their principles on who is involved. It’s fun to watch you spew your bullshit long enough to tell on yourself.

                1. Everyone knows that only popular people have constitutional and legal protections, that is what the BOR is all about

              2. The gate just broke itself

          2. you know that’ll bounce and this is a nothing, yes?

      5. Wait, wait. They were PEACEFULLY on their own property. Suddenly Sarc is OK with abuse of government power. Oh, but you’re principled alright.

        1. Peacefully waving their guns around and pointing them at people on the street. Mmm, hmmm. Nothing to see here. Move along.

          1. Just like peacefully breaking down the barrier in Portland, peacefully attacking the wood barricades, peacefully setting fires.

            Mmm, hmmm. Peaceful protesters.

            SECRETZ POLIZ!!!!

            1. RED HERRING DID IT!

              1. Glad that you agree the secret police nonsense is a red herring. Your first step on the road to recovery.

          2. The guns weren’t pointed at any individuals at all.

    3. Somewhat related–the Salish Sea Black Flag Twitter account tried to pull a #TwitterDoYourThing on a couple of white guys getting spicy with protesters in Placerville, California recently, thinking they were going to get a couple of scalps. One of them, who was wearing a yellow shirt, had a teardrop tattoo, prompting some snickers about “wannabe gangster” and other stupid shit.

      In a hilarious twist, someone found out this guy is a legit hardcase that did time in a maximum security prison for violent felonies, and had hooked up with The Warlords (a white supremacist gang) while in the clink. That person immediately called off the dogs because they were worried that either this guy or the gang themselves would subsequently track down Antifa members for a little “conversation.”

      1. I do hope they find the Twitter and discuss their differences. Peacefully would be preferrable.

        1. Again we see that violence solves nothing…

          What terrible incentives we’re giving for political discourse in this country.

        2. The last thing Antifa wants is an actual gang war with bodies piling up. They’re mostly white college students who haven’t had any real violence done to them in their lives, and get off on using social media to bully people and ruin them. The minute they get real, actual pushback in significant numbers, they start screeching and crying victim. The irony is that they’d need the feds to actually protect them in such an instance, because the John Brown Gun Club or Socialist Rifle Association isn’t going to be able to do shit against a bunch of legitimate killers and gun-runners like The Warlords.

          Over in Vienna, a group of them tried to start shit one night with a gang of hardcore Turkish nationalists called the Grey Wolves, by flying a PKK flag at one of their rallies. The Wolves absolutely kicked the shit out of them and chased them into one of Antifa’s safehouses in Vienna. Antifa started desperately calling for the police because they thought they were going to get allah hu ackbar’d.

          1. “…with a gang of hardcore Turkish nationalists called the Grey Wolves,”

            Blasts from the past over here. I’d heard of them only because Mehmet Ali Agca used to be one, at the same time period he shot the Pope. Weirdly, he converted to Catholicism in prison. I should have known it was the beginning of the end for the USSR when they didn’t manage to have him killed immediately after shooting Pope John Paul II. Lack of attention to detail…

            What naive idiot thinks picking a street fight with a gang of Turks is a great idea?

          2. I saw that.
            Twas hilarious.

            And it doesn’t even need to be legit criminals or white supremacists – some vets and/or good ol boys will make real quick work of them if they decide to make the effort

            1. Notice the crying about the lawyer couple merely being armed and about car “attacks” – they always go immediately to calling for police/State protection/retribution.

              Hell, even their response to the fed “secret police” isn’t to actually go to war, it’s to whine to the press and get their governments to protect them.
              Just a bunch of Karens

    4. When choosing your poster boys for the sanctity is property rights you might not want to focus in on a guy who snuck onto the property of his neighboring synagogue and destroyed their beehives.

      Where is the outrage from you all about that?! Where’s the offense Reason hasn’t written about it?!

      1. Funny thing is I agree with everyone here who says they had a right to defend their property. (So does, sarc, by the way. He said so above.)

        It’s just that several people here in the comments section came a-looking for an argument, and to play another round of “why didn’t Reason write about my favorite hobby horse topic! They are commies!”.

        My point in bringing up the beehive thing is get off yer high horse, and maybe tone it down on the “reason didn’t write about X” thing.

        1. Because the beehive was national news, when someone from the synagogue pointed his gun at the very threatening McClusky and thwarted him from destroying the beehive, only to then be threatened, publicly disarmed, and charged with a felony?

          No, that didn’t happen.

          What is national news, and did happen, is widespread rioting (notably, a violent mob had previously attacked a group of Christians gathered at a statue to protect it from destruction – it is unknown whether anyone was present at both events), a mob breaking into a private neighborhood then confronted by an armed homeowner (no shots fired) and turned them away, that homeowner being vilified by media and receiving threats for his action, the police disarming him publicly as the press covered it, and finally being charged with felony weapons violations (no protesters have been arrested or charged).

          Your “what about the beehive” talking point is completely irrelevant. It is a footnote that has no bearing on whether the homeowner should have his civil rights violated for threatening a hostile crowd in response to the threat they presented.
          The context of the discussion consists of his recent actions, various mobs’ recent actions, and the recent actions Stl prosecutor’s office. The synagogue is completely uninvolved. Him being an asshole at a previous time, and doing to the synagogue’s honeycombs what he feared the mob would do to his home, doesn’t matter. The response to that mob was either justified or not based on its own context.

          1. Though I probably would enjoy seeing you attempt to fit the honeycomb story into the context.
            Should be entertaining

      2. What does that have to do with the other incident? Are you seriously fvckin retarded? They can be the bad guys in one situation, and not in the other. Their alleged apiericide does not make them free game for the mob, you fvckin nitwit.

  31. Your morning peaceful protest news:

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo

  32. Three graphs from Sweden tell the entire story of #COVID19; deaths by day, positive tests by day, deaths by age. Remember: Sweden had NO lockdown. Deaths peaked in weeks and have declined ever since; no relationship of cases and deaths; nearly all deaths over 70, most over 80…
    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1285574565649952770

    1. NYC vs Stockholm. What is this magical thing that caused Stockholm’s epidemic deaths to completely collapse without a lockdown and without masks? Could it possibly be the same mysterious force that caused NYC’s mortality to collapse (only with 3X as many deaths per capita)?
      https://twitter.com/luigi_warren/status/1285575395526406145

      1. Are you saying Fauci was wrong when he made NYC the beacon of response?!?!

  33. https://twitter.com/jessesingal/status/1285300110616932353

    “Even if you’re more concerned with the culture-war stuff than anything else — and I would argue this is quite myopic — electing Biden is much more likely to calm things down than electing Trump. Trump is one of the major causes of the present weirdness.”

    This is going to be the message going forward and while it was the implicit message for the past three months it will quickly become explicit. Appeasement generally doesn’t work as a rule, which is why I’m going to vote for Cheeto man in the fall.

    1. The Democrats, basically, are running a protection racket.

      1. “Vote for Biden, or we’ll be even more obnoxious and crazy!”

        All of their behavior bears the hallmarks of personality disorder, and an abuser

    2. TDS is one of the major causes of the present weirdness

    3. “Elect Biden and you can have peace” carries the implicit threat of “Re-elect Trump and we’ll make things worse”. Gonna be interesting when the Right adopts the Left’s tactics and starts putting down the rebellion.

      1. You mean the people with more than 300 million guns and 2 trillion rounds of ammo deciding the game is rigged and start playing by the new rules might be problematic?

      2. Good luck with that. We’ll win the elections and you fuckers can play terrorist.

        1. I’d be OK with that. You’ve been playing terrorist for four years. Just desserts can be a bitch.

          And, fortunately, a lot of the left live in very packed cities. Wouldn’t take a lot to cause problems.

          Just sayin’.

        2. >>We’ll win the elections

          lol

        3. “You can play terrorist. You’ll never be professionals like us!”

        4. At least you’re admitting you’re a leftist. Your comrades here lie about it.

  34. “Social Studies teacher fired for correctly naming current US President” is the peakest of peak 2020 headlines.
    https://twitter.com/ThePowersThatBe/status/1285565321563254785

    1. Let the lawsuits begin.

    2. I honestly wish I could say I was shocked by that story. That is the scary part.

      1. Glad to see a government entity is not punishing people for wrongthink. It might give Reason a case of the sads…oh wait, Reason doesn’t give two shits about much besides hookers.

        1. Chinese trade too. And where would we be without cheap immigrant labor?

          Basically, if it raises the prices in any way for multinational corporations to source goods and services, Reason has a sad.

          1. Don’t seem to have much heartburn over Uigher abuse these days either.

  35. CBS is using a picture from New York in March to attack Texas
    https://twitter.com/SealeTeam1/status/1285429764526751746

    1. The give-away might be the winter coats and hats.

      1. Yep. 105 degrees in TX this week and nobody in jackets.

    2. CBS might as well be the Commie Broadcasting Network now. They’ve gone into full-on propaganda mode over the last few months.

      1. You mean years right?

  36. https://twitter.com/JamesHasson20/status/1285452014453915649

    You can agree or disagree with Tucker’s politics, but if you publish photos of someone’s house and (allegedly) plan to describe where they live, it’s a given that people in 2020 can find out where you live. And NYT knows that. Given the prior incident, the result of this is clear

    1. Informing the mob where Goldstein lives is just as much a threat of deadly force as me pointing a gun at you. A repeat of Charlie Hebdo is going to happen. And it will be considered a form of media criticism.

    2. The reporters who were digging on that got doxed almost instantaneously after that came out.

      Remember when The Journal News published the addresses of all the gun permit owners a couple years ago? Or CNN threatening to dox the kid who posted that Trump pro wrestling gif if he didn’t apologize? Or Dan Rather pimping fake documents about Bush’s Guard service? Or the reporter who dredged up years-old tweets to slam the “Beer Money” kid that donated all the cash he collected to charity?

      It’s like these reporters think the 1st Amendment is some kind of shield that justifies any sort of behavior as long as they’ve got their “press” badge on. These people REALLY need to start exercising some future-time orientation, and think about a world where they end up being targets for ruining the lives of average people out of malice and sheer lazy gossip-mongering. No one is going to give a squirt of piss about “MUH FREE PRESS” if they think you’re actively trying to destroy their life. That press badge will end up being a bullseye instead of a shield.

      1. They could spend some time reading Borderland Beat, Red. Though I doubt that would clue them in.

        Note, I am not advocating what I see is an inevitably violent backlash to a propaganda service. I’m just predicting it’s going to happen, and it’ll be one more nail in the coffin lid of what used to be a pretty damned good civilization.

        1. The consequences are entirely predictable. Journalism schools at colleges are essentially full-time activist training centers now, pushing a very specific socio-political agenda. The Fifth Estate is also pathologically addicted to Twitter and often simply parrots an established narrative that gets set up by one of their colleagues, without any critical investigation whatsoever. I know people here like to give him shit, but Soave deserves a lot of credit for not taking everything his colleagues say on Twitter at face value, and doing his own investigations. Maybe it’s his brand of luxurious hair products that blocks the mindmeld to just go along with the crowd.

          The problem is that there are a LOT of people who aren’t buying what these folks are selling anymore, and the more shrill the latter act, the more pissed off the former become. They’re not going to give a shit about journalists getting clopped with rubber bullets precisely because the lines have already been drawn between them.

          1. “Journalism schools at colleges are essentially full-time activist training centers now, pushing a very specific socio-political agenda.”

            Storytime. What personally clued me in that things might have changed with journalism, and the business of the news, was the public reaction of news rooms to the first Journolist scandal. We used to have a poster here, ‘CitizenNothing’, IIRC, and I’m probably not, who claimed to once or currently be an editor for a MidWest newspaper. His reaction here to the scandal was dismay and anger, stating that if he’d done such a thing as a cub reporter, or even in his editor role, he might have been allowed to clean out his own desk by noon that day. To get caught orchestrating a narrative for one political party, across multiple newsrooms, was absolutely anathema.

            Yet, what did we see happen? Iglesias and Klein got promoted to prestigious jobs instead. Even the execrable David Weigel made it to the Post. Not only did nothing bad or permanent happen to these people’s careers: they flourished because of it.

            “You get more of what you reward, and less of what you punish.”

            1. Hell, Spencer Ackerman actually wrote that people who didn’t vote the way he wanted them to needed to be shoved through a plate-glass window. He kept his job at Wired and is currently employed by The Daily Beast.

              That’s why the whinging on here by the left-symps about “fascism” rings so hollow. These people already picked their side and their methods. They just don’t want to suffer the consequences of what happens when those who don’t agree with them decide their narrative is bullshit, and become willing to sling their hatred right back with interest.

              1. He also proposed making up charges of racism against whomever republican was around at the time. Sound familiar? Guess who Reason likes to use as a source: Spencer Ackerman.

  37. https://twitter.com/CHSommers/status/1285244090783866882
    The Left is Now the Right. “We laughed at the Republican busybody who couldn’t joke, declared war on dirty paintings, and peered through your bedroom window. Now that person has switched sides, and nobody’s laughing.”
    Matt Taibbi

  38. https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1284895806823243783
    OMG – Kamela Harris was on Al Sharpton’s show, and must’ve gone crazy with plastic surgery. Face with tears of joyFace with tears of joyFace with tears of joy

    It’s so bad.

    1. Good Lord. She should also get big white choppers like Uncle Joe.

      1. Meant *chompers*, but this probably works. 8-(

        1. The big white chompers with the gap between her front teeth like she has now or the big white chompers without the gap between the front teeth like she had before?

          Man, I hate being a conspiracy theorist like the ones who are claiming that wasn’t the real Kamala Harris on Sharpton’s show, but I would like to hear an explanation for that gap between her teeth. Did her caps fall off and she couldn’t get it fixed? Did the injections in her cheekbones cause her jaw to swell enough to separate her teeth? What the fuck is up with that crazy bitch?

          1. I also question why she isn’t being questioned about being on the show of a race baiter who has unleashed racial pogroms.

  39. “One condition of Grace’s probation was that she must complete her coursework from her high school’s online classes. When a judge found in May that Grace was behind on this remote coursework, the girl was ruled in violation of her probation and locked up.”

    So protesters are calling for judges to throw the book at asshole kids instead of letting them out early if they do a few small things? Got it.

    No more early release. Stay in jail til the end.

  40. “The bill would require on-duty federal agents to display not just the name of their agency but also the individual agent’s last name and identification number,” notes The Nation

    Is this standard practice by the FBI?

    1. Is it standard practice for any law enforcement organization? Most tactical or raid guys don’t look like they wear name tapes. Maybe it’s black on black, or something similar?

    2. The more interesting question is should it be standard practice.

      There are very good reasons for making police agency and individual identity of the officer readily available: namely, so civilians can effectively complain about misconduct and follow up on arrests (for example, to see if The police had a warrant, or to find out what happened to the arrestee).

      On there are concerns about doxxing of officers. It’s a real concern, but one has to ask if it is a big enough concern to overrule the citizen’s rights to due process. Also, is it really possible to keep a police officer’s personal information, such as their home address, secret if someone is determined to uncover it?

      Also, there are ways an officer could wear an encoded personal identity during dangerous crowd duty, such as riot control against antifa.

      Also, there is no good reason at all not to wear insignia telling what police agency you are from.

  41. https://amgreatness.com/2020/07/20/woke-neurosurgery/

    As a general surgery intern rotating through the university hospital neurosurgery service, I was immersed in learning all day and frequently all night. There was so much to learn, and my Socratic chief resident often reminded me, “that’s why the program is so long.” Six years after medical school for a neurosurgery residency, actually, and that’s not counting any additional subspecialty fellowship, which tacks on another year or two.

    But now doctors in training are getting crash courses in the insistent mandates of identity politics. At the crucial stage of their long training when bedside and operating room experience is paramount, doctors are now being told what their new priorities should be—to heal society, not just individuals, and to prepare for their part in the progressive racial justice project.

    Does anyone believe that turning medical schools into woke madrassas will not come at the expense of expertise in taking care of the sick and injured?

    1. “Harvard’s Program in Global Surgery and Social Change.”

      WTF. When I took the Model Professional Responsibility Exam during law school (A prereq for sitting for the bar exam) I took it at Harvard. There were two Harvard Law students sitting behind me discussing their course, “Law and Existentialism.” I rolled my eyes so hard I had trouble reading the exam. Harvard is failing to heed sound advice: “You never go full retard.”

  42. Red Bull Company Fires American CEOs For Being… Too #Woke and Too Pro-Black Lives Matter?
    http://ace.mu.nu/archives/389235.php

    Red Bull just reminded their ‘wokest’ employees who calls the shots in a total massacre of “social justice warrior” employees.
    Not only were the top two North American executives fired, but so were entire marketing teams and “culture” teams that were dedicated to pushing the lie of systemic racism.

    1. Red Bull may taste like shit but I might have to start buying some and choking it down anyway.

      1. Do like the meatheads and drink it with plenty of vodka so you can’t taste it!

      2. Yep
        Time for freedom loving citizens to get all hopped up on red bull… then give those Marxists the horns!

        1. Aim might be an issue, so be sure to fix bayonets

  43. “Every day I go to bed thinking, and wake up thinking, ‘How is this a better situation for her?'”

    Well, she gets to do her homework.

  44. I’m glad we continue to get thorough, deep analysis about the situation in Portland from Elizabeth Nolan Brown. Some protesters sing “We Shall Overcome”, we get some choice quotes from AOC and the Nation, and some protestors tried to break into a courthouse and set fires.

    Wait, that last part failed to make it into Brown’s round-up. As did any mentions of the uglier parts of the protests.

    Might libertarians be interested in being presented the whole truth and stories about damage to businesses and tax-paid property by the more ethically-challenged members of the protests? As a libertarian, I hope so. Elizabeth Nolan Brown? Meh. I guess it’s not like the citizens of Portland might be frightened by roving bands of hooligans destroying things and concerned with the creepy behavior of the Feds.

    1. Here is a video of Steve committing a felony last night.
      Steve is innocent; I can prove it.
      How?
      Here is a video of Jim yesterday afternoon NOT committing a felony.
      How does that prove….
      And here is a video of George two days ago NOT committing a felony.
      But….
      Nope, I have proven Steve innocent. You and your video of his guilt begone.

    2. “and some protestors tried to break into a courthouse and set fires.”

      some? tried? yawn!

      1. I know , right? What losers.

    3. That’s why the looters know better than to touch the red light district. This is not a woman you want to provoke.

    4. Where are the interviews of the people who have been picked up? There is an accusation but there does not seem to be any follow up by the media organs.

      1. They have to wait to find out if it’s true to determine if it’ll continue to be a story or memory holed.

  45. The USA is a society in rather obvious decline. The values that have metastasized to take over the entire left two-thirds of the political spectrum–the portion that will be in permanent control henceforth–are clearly unconducive to a flourishing or even healthy or sustainable civilization. I doubt our decline will be as protracted as the Ottomans’.

    I think this has become, despite themselves, so obvious even to the very supporters of what is destroying America that people like Chait can actually leverage that awareness their way by pointing the finger in the opposite direction. He already knows there’s really no limit to what they can be convinced of, after all.

    1. That depends. Keep in mind that Rome went through several civil wars even while they were administering a far-flung empire. It wasn’t until the Goths actually settled within Italy that things went pear-shaped within about 100 years. We’re either doing a speedrun of the latter, or this will just be another low-grade civil war such as the labor wars of the early progressive era or the late 60s-70s, until a new political realignment emerges.

      1. The Romans just couldn’t stomach the Marilyn Manson and black nail polish.

    2. The public is supposed to believe “experts” despite the obvious fact that experts have shown themselves to be manipulative, dishonest and agenda driven? The lack of trust is a problem, but to blame it on the people rather than those who abused the trust placed in them in the past is the wrong approach.

      1. The irony, especially in the sciences, being that skepticism is a fundamental requirement for inquiry. But trust the experts without question.

        1. Representative democracy would work so much more smoothly if the people would just submit to doing as they are told by their betters. At least, that seems to be Chait’s complaint.

        2. But, but,…. Obama said Global Warming was SETTLED SCIENCE!!!

  46. “She is 15 years old,” Cherisie Evans, a leader with the Michigan Liberation Action Fund, told The Detroit News. “Where is the counseling? Where are the resources?”

    Where is the father?

    1. From the web site, Oakland’s Children’s Village has counseling, schoolwork and activities programming. The counseling and “resources” are right there in juvie. Where was the counseling ten years ago when the teen was getting the habits that brought her here, that’s a better question.
      “Dysfunctional” families can make it very difficult for a child to really connect with counseling. I think the mom brought the assault charges in the first place to win the power struggle with the daughter, and when she succeeded she decided she could own the system, and now wants to daughter back to own the daughter too. They lock up the kid but it’s the mom they’re fighting. I dislike enforced adolescence, where a kid who needs to be on their own, for their own development, has such a hard time getting away until it’s probably too late at 18.

      1. Where was the counseling ten years ago when the teen was getting the habits that brought her here, that’s a better question.

        No, that’s not the question.

  47. I have two things on my wish list from the soon to be released Republican “stimulus” bill–well, one thing I definitely want to be in it and another I definitely don’t want to be in it:

    1) Payroll tax cut.

    This is the part where Americans get to keep what they earn. This only seems like an “expense” to parasites who live off the taxpayer.

    Eliminating all payroll taxes on a permanent basis will mark the end of socialism and the beginning of Libertopia–and libertarian capitalists everywhere should support doing this, recession or no recession, virus or no virus, “stimulus” or no stimulus.

    Oh, and in addition to giving working Americans a sneak preview of what it feels like to keep all the money they earn, it would also lower the cost of keeping people on the payroll as well as lower the cost of hiring the unemployed.

    2) No money for the states.

    This is really important. The Democrats are trying to use the recession and the virus as an excuse to bail states like California, Illinois, and New York out of their pension crises. The only long term solution to those states’ obscene pension obligations is for them to slash those benefits and other spending. There is no good reason why the federal taxpayers of Kansas, North Carolina, and Utah should pay to keep outrageously overpaid state employees in California in unnecessary jobs with outrageous pension benefits.

    Neither Albany, nor Sacramento, nor Springfield will ever be so flush with cash from federal taxpayers that they decide to cut spending. Starving them of cash is the only way to make them cut spending.

    Anyway, the bill emerging from the White House and the Republican leadership in the Senate appears to feature both of the items on my wish list. President Trump and the Republicans will probably need to give in on some things in order to get anything through the House. However, when Reason staff predictably start decrying all the payroll tax cuts as “stimulus”, don’t be fooled. Barack Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act didn’t actually make healthcare more affordable, no matter what they called it, and cutting payroll taxes isn’t actually Keynesian stimulus–not even if the Republicans call it a “stimulus bill” to get it through the House.

    1. Eliminating all payroll taxes on a permanent basis will mark the end of socialism and the beginning of Libertopia–and libertarian capitalists everywhere should support doing this, recession or no recession, virus or no virus, “stimulus” or no stimulus.

      No, it absolutely won’t. That is the closest thing we have to a flat tax. Abolish it and you’re going to get some combination of higher progressive income taxes and a wealth tax which just further feeds the neo-feudalist welfare state.

      1. Letting everyone keep whatever they earn is not the closest thing to a flat tax.

        If socialism means, “From each according to their ability (to pay), to each according to their need”, then getting rid of taxes on labor cuts off socialism at its source.

        It would be so hard for them to redistribute our income if we gave them no income to redistribute.

        1. You do understand that there’s this little thing called an income tax, don’t you? The *payroll* tax is the closest thing to a flat tax we have.

          C’mon, Ken.

          1. There may be some misunderstands here about what we’re talking about with the payroll tax.

            “A payroll tax is a tax withheld from an employee’s salary by an employer who remits it to the government on their behalf. The tax is based on wages, salaries, and tips paid to employees. Payroll taxes are deducted directly from the employee’s earnings and paid directly to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by the employer. In the United States, payroll taxes are divided into three main categories: Federal income, Medicare, and Social Security. The government also collects money for federal unemployment programs.”

            https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/payrolltax.asp

            During the first stimulus bill, Trump was pushing to suspend all payroll taxes through the end of December. A fat chunk of Senate Republicans didn’t want that because it offends their concept of people working for a living. They don’t want people benefiting from government programs in various ways and not paying anything into the tax system. I maintain that if we waited for the government to cut off all the spending programs before we cut taxation, we’d never cut taxation. It has to start with cutting taxation.

            Although the Republicans are now on board with Trump’s ideas about (probably because they’d rather cut taxes to “stimulate” the economy rather than a do a round of Keynesian stimulus spending), I wouldn’t expect them to get a complete forgiveness of all income taxes through the end of December–because that would be too awesome. And I’ve learned to expect disappointment.

            That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t support cutting all the payroll taxes we can. Taxing people’s labor is by far the stupidest possible thing to tax.

            1. You don’t honestly believe that the payroll tax cut will eliminate income tax withholding, do you? The previous cut was only for OASDI and maybe medicare. Expect exactly the same here.

              That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t support cutting all the payroll taxes we can. Taxing people’s labor is by far the stupidest possible thing to tax.

              Wealth taxes are the worst. After that income taxes. And taxing that income progressively is by far worse.

            2. To be more clear. If you’re calling for an income tax cut, then say it explicitly. Because OASDI/FICA are flat taxes (or close enough). Income tax is not. The latter is far more destructive.

              1. I’m in favor of cutting all the payroll taxes we can get a majority of the Democrat controlled House to vote for.

                I will not oppose suspending other payroll taxes just because they won’t support suspending the income tax, too.

                That being said, with the kinds of proportions we’re talking about–the government expects to collect less than $4 trillion dollars in 2021. The Democrats are calling for at least $2.5 trillion in new spending. I appreciate that it’s easier to finance spending in smaller payments, but the Republicans are proposing, I understand, less than $1 trillion in tax cuts. They’ll be financing that deficit by floating more debt, too. I’m not sure suspending all payroll taxes through the end of the year is completely out of proportion compared to what the Democrats are proposing.

                1. So you refuse to be clear. If the government has to tax (and it does unless it’s Saudi Arabia), then the least destructive taxes are consumption taxes. The next least destructive is a flat income tax. Then a progressive income tax, and finally a corporate income tax. We’ll leave the Georgian land tax off in the wilderness where it lives.

                  Eliminating the flatest income tax we have is only going to push taxes into the other categories worse than it. It may sound good for employers now but it isn’t. It will only make the tax code more progressive and have fewer people with skin in the game who will have to make the tradeoff between the welfare state and their taxation. Because they won’t be taxed!

                  1. “So you refuse to be clear. If the government has to tax (and it does unless it’s Saudi Arabia), then the least destructive taxes are consumption taxes.”

                    I keep looking for something we disagree about, and I’m not seeing it.

                    I see Trump and the Republicans pushing for something we should do regardless of whether there were a recession, and although I don’t expect them to get everything we want, I’ll settle for whatever we can get–especially if it doesn’t bail California, Illinois, or New York state out of their self-inflicted pensions disasters.

                    I support cutting the income tax to zero and replacing it with consumption taxes. I’m so enthusiastic about the idea, I’d be willing to put the tax on carbon emissions if it meant we weren’t taxing income, profits, or capital gains anymore. To whatever lesser extent we can move towards that goal, I’m in support of doing that. Cut whatever tax we can to whatever extent we can, every chance we get. Do the same thing with social spending–which is why I supported the ACA reform bill that would have slashed $772 billion from Medicaid.

                    Don’t know how much clearer I can be.

                    Cut every tax and every bit of spending we can every chance we get and keep fighting for more.

                    1. “tax on carbon emissions”

                      Oh man, that is a pandora’s box. I’d really have to understand how this would get implemented. While I don’t believe CO is the driver for global warming, as science doesn’t prove this theory, I do believe less pollution is good. A major move to nuclear would be amazing.

                      However, could a carbon emissions tax be added to fuel that we pump into our cars? While not the worst idea, it could be if the tax was extremely punitive. 10-20 cents per gallon, easy. 1-2 dollars per gallon, that could have major economic repercussions.

                      I do agree with your overall sentiment about income tax. However, since income tax was establish via Constitutional Amendment, I’m guessing another Amendment would need to pass to eliminate it. If not, the Feds could remove income taxes today and a few years or decades later, we get it back ALONG with carbon tax.

                    2. “I’d really have to understand how this would get implemented.”

                      If I told it was necessary for every American citizen and corporation to report every penny they made in income every year or face criminal prosecution, you might think that the bureaucracy and policing would require too much of a burden on society and the government to implement.

                      Getting rid of that burden to replace it with a sales tax on carbon intensive activity would be easy by way of comparison. It would mostly be a sales tax on coal, oil, etc. We already tax all the things that would be required, and as bad as the logic behind global warming is, if it gives us an excuse to dismantle socialism by abolishing income, corporate, and capital gains taxes, then we should take advantage of that.

                      It’s important to emphasize that this must be “in place of” those other taxes rather than “in addition to”l.

                    3. Taxing carbon emissions is a terrible idea. It’s policy masquerading as a slightly more efficient tax. What makes general consumption taxes efficient is that they DON’T favor any particular industry or group. All consumption should be taxed uniformly. Sticking the camel’s nose under the tent by targeting a consumption tax. Next it will be a sugar tax. Then a fat tax.

                      But the reality is that we’ll never get just a consumption tax. We will follow the eurotrash model of stacking a VAT on top of income taxes, so in that world the best option that is achievable is a flat income tax, which is what “payroll” taxes are typically referencing.

                    4. Jason A:

                      I do agree with your overall sentiment about income tax. However, since income tax was establish via Constitutional Amendment, I’m guessing another Amendment would need to pass to eliminate it.

                      No, the amendment made a progressive income tax possible. A flat national income tax is expressly allowed in the original constitution.

        2. Abolish it and you’re going to get some combination of higher progressive income taxes and a wealth tax which just further feeds the neo-feudalist welfare state.

          I mean at least try to address the point. Getting rid of just the payroll tax will make the tax system even more progressive, i.e. redistributive. And you think THAT will eliminate socialism?

    2. Not a bad list, Ken. I could get behind that. Wonder what we’ll get instead?

      1. No cap on OASDI (there’s already no cap on medicare), and a VAT is what we’ll get.

        1. I actually don’t hate the first one, conceptually. Though I’d get rid of the disability eligibility and have income caps for benefits. Since it’s Welfare for Grandma, and all, so treat it like we do welfare.

          1. There’s a fiction it’s not welfare. It gets increasingly threadbare every year.

            Not only will the caps be lifted, don’t be surprised when they’re applied to cap gains. Further, expect that everyone will get the same SS bennie which will be plussed up some from the current minimum making it even more progressive.

    3. probably the greatest benefit of eliminating payroll deduction would be the awareness of the population on how much they pay into the system.

      Most view the new tax year as the point when they get a refund of taxes paid through the withholding system. The crow about how they got $1500 back or mope because they had to pay $300 this year, but fail to connect that their tax bill was 16 or 17 thousand dollars that they never an opportunity to decide if they had a better use for during the year.

      Opening some eyes would be a good thing. Having the serfs open their checkbooks and pay ALL AT ONCE their tax bill is a wonderful wish, Ken. After we do that, we should move election day to always be the day after taxes are due.

  48. It’s all TDS all anti cop all quoting democrats all the time here.

    1. There have been two major schisms in Reason’s history online.

      The first one seems to hardly be remembered now.

      The second one came because of the coverage of the issues descended into TDS ahead of the 2016 election and thereafter. There were other straws that broke the camel’s back, but the opinions of the people who left and never came back in regards to the coverage here seemed to mirror the American public’s opinion of the news media nationally. Check out this chart from Gallup–from two weeks before the election in 2016:

      “Americans’ Trust in Mass Media Sinks to New Low”

      https://news.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx

      It was shortly after that, when half the commentariat here became Glib.

      The newer journalists here are basically just like journalists everywhere. They seem to think their calling is to inflict the proper vision of the world on people who don’t share it. Lanny Frielander’s original vision is dead to that part of the staff. His vision had a really good run. Not everyone on staff here is in the same boat, but a lot of them are just like journalists everywhere. I suppose that’s to be expected, but this place used to be special.

      And there are plenty of us here in comments who are keeping Frielander’s dream alive.

      1. “When REASON speaks of poverty, racism, the draft, the war, studentpower, politics, and other vital issues, it shall be reasons, not slogans, it gives for conclusion . . . . Proof, not belligerent assertion. Logic, not legends. Coherance (sic), not contradictions. This is our promise: this is the reason for REASON.”

        —-Lanny Friedlander

        Reason
        Issue 1, Volume1
        May 1968

        https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/07/us/07friedlander.html

        That’s what made Reason special.

      2. Losing Ed was a big deal.

        Even Sullum has degraded significantly.

      3. Was part of Friedlander’s dream resorting to personal attacks and temper tantrums on a regular basis?

        1. There wasn’t on-line comments sections in 1968 retard. His dream was in regard to what was published by the magazine. And that has changed, no matter how much you cry about it.

          1. Thanks for illustrating my point.

            1. I didn’t. I pointed out it was stupid.

        2. No, that’s Ken’s point. It’s pretty sad that that is what Reason has degenerated into.

    2. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use these.Make 5000 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website………………ReadMore.

    3. The link article on TDS was written by a Republican. In fact, a former spokesman for the party.

      1. A “Republican” who is actively campaigning against all republicans, even the moderates that they claim are true conservatives.

  49. Eliminating all payroll taxes on a permanent basis will mark the end of socialism and the beginning of Libertopia

    It certainly would–which is why it’s about as unlikely as anyone ever supposes Libertopia is. Remember when Social Security privatization was on the lips of every self-respecting Republican, and centrist Democrats took it as a point of pride to be a “reformer”?

    Yet another of the countless ways in which Bin Laden won. The Bush wars not only allowed the feckless GOP to focus “conservatism” on other issues, it pretty much destroyed “centrist/New Democracy” when their “outside the box thinking” hitched itself to a “moderate” or outright hawkish view on foreign policy.

    The bright side is that everyone can see all these useless creatures completely discredited and unmasked. The dark side is that it’s too late to save our country from ruin.

    1. …But yeah, a payroll tax cut would be so great I think we should be willing to eat a pretty big concession on unemployment.

    2. We get there incrementally–and this Republican proposal should be supported.

      We take what we can get, and then we keep fighting for more.

      Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day.

      1. Destroying Rome really not a good goal

        1. have the Romans figured out exactly which day it was so we know to look out for it now?

          1. Given their influx of MENA ‘refugees’, probably Thursday.

    3. No, it will not. See Above.

      The irrationality would have happened regardless. Bernie didn’t come into being in 2001.

  50. >>”Give yourself a chance to follow through and finish something.”

    bars in front of a 15 year-old’s face are the best view for follow-through?

  51. “But Brennan seems to think she knows more about what is best for this family than they do.”

    So, the state, represented by Brennan, is wrong in this case, and people can speak and act for themselves. But then many of the same people put on their Statist badges, and declare that the state has to control what other people say and do.

    Its almost like people are opportunistic or something.

    1. job opportunity for everyone! Work from comfort of your home, on your computer And you cAn work with your own working hours. You cAn work this job As A pArt time or As A full time job. You cAn eArn from 65$ An hour to 1000$ A dAy! There is no limitAtions, it All depends from you And how much you wAnt to eArn eAch dAy…..Click For Full Detail.

  52. ACLU: We will defend the First Amendment from government censorship — as we have for a century now.

    Unless the speech is, in our enlightened view, unfair, or sexist, or racist, or mean.

    1. I am making $125 per hour working online on my laptop among my family. I continue doing work in my room talking to them. Its too easy to complete it no experience or skill required. You just need internet connection and PC/Laptop. For more information visit……More Detail Here.

    2. They will bravely stand up for the cause of free speech–at least until their donors decide they don’t like free speech anymore. Then they’ll sell whatever else is coming down the pike. Maybe vaping.

    3. Is not breaking attorney-client privilege a crime on the part of a lawyer? Cohen’s 1st Amendment rights in conflict with Trump’s 4th Amendment rights.

      1. It’s generally unethical, Mickey, albeit there are exceptions to the privilege if, e.g., the attorney is being sued by the client. I don’t know that it’s specifically a crime though, but I haven’t looked. Being unethical, and potentially costing the attorney their license, is usually bad enough.

        1. What I mean, is that lawyers have legal obligations to their clients to keep aspects of their dealings confidential, to protect the client’s rights. Their free speech rights in those matters are not absolute.

          1. Oh absolutely. Completely agree there. Doesn’t even need to be privileged for it to be kept confidential.

    4. A long way from defending Skokie Nazis, isn’t it?

  53. I earned $5000 ultimate month by using operating online only for 5 to 8 hours on my computer and this was so smooth that i personally couldn’t accept as true with before working on this website. if you too need to earn this sort of huge cash then come and be part of us. do this internet-website online.********************ReadMore.

  54. As Obama’s secret police prepare to move on more cities, DHS engages in spying on domestic targets:

    The Department of “But wait, I never expected that leopard to eat my face” has long been one of the busiest in Washington. Great power may be wedded to great responsibility in the comic books, but in real life … it’s a sure thing that extraordinary authority or ability will be, sooner or later, misused. Procedures designed for emergencies will be employed day to day. Laws created for the most severe circumstances will be deployed against the most trivial offenses. Systems built for the military will roll down city streets. 

    And, as we’re seeing right now in the streets of Portland, an agency gifted with extraordinary access to resources and information with the explicit intent of protecting the nation from the threat of international terrorists, will end up battering the faces of mothers and veterans in the cause of defeating … graffiti.

    https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2020/7/21/1962539/-DHS-targets-intelligence-resources-to-spy-on-Americans-engaged-in-protests-against-racism

    Editor’s note: I changed “Trump” to “Obama” for the benefit of our lizard brain apes.

    1. engaged in protests against racism lol

      1. How shocking that you’re speaking hosannas in support of a left-winger.

        1. Have no idea if he is a left-winger or not. Never seen LoS before.

          He didn’t say anything left wing in his comment.

          1. Stop lying.

    2. Lord Dumbshit above thinks this wasn’t already going on before the Bad Orange Man took over.

      1. But it wasn’t being used against peaceful Marxist protestors destroying property.

  55. “…Meanwhile, President Donald Trump seems mighty pleased with the work his secret police force is doing:..”

    “Secret”? How’d you find out?

  56. “It is now clear that it is not the case that President Trump doesn’t want to change his behavior. It’s that he is congenitally incapable to moderate it even for a single day,”

    Well, I read the piece, and had to check if it was written in 2015. The tl;dr version of it is that Trump is a rude, crude, vulgar, narcissistic, fat-headed pig of a human being and therefore he has got to go, no matter what.

    Hey, some of us knew this about Trump in 2015. But this doesn’t address what he’s actually doing as President, it’s entirely a facile critique of appearances. Sure Mitt Romney and Jeb! would have looked more Presidential, but what would they actually have accomplished? Not a goddamn thing, because they didn’t fucking get elected you stupid cunt. Trump did get elected, and if you think nothing can possibly be worse than Trump getting re-elected when you’re staring right down the barrel of Bernie Sanders and Ilhan Omar and AOC and Antifa and #BLM and the Green New Deal, you’re too goddamn evil to be allowed to live, you mendacious cocksucker.

    1. Remember this:

      The great criticism of Mitt Romney, from both sides of the aisle, has always been that he doesn’t stand for anything. He’s a flip-flopper, they say, a lightweight, a cardboard opportunist who’ll say anything to get elected.

      The critics couldn’t be more wrong. Mitt Romney is no tissue-paper man. He’s closer to being a revolutionary, a backward-world version of Che or Trotsky, with tweezed nostrils instead of a beard, a half-Windsor instead of a leather jerkin. His legendary flip-flops aren’t the lies of a bumbling opportunist – they’re the confident prevarications of a man untroubled by misleading the nonbeliever in pursuit of a single, all-consuming goal.

    2. Remember when Romney was “caught on tape” criticizing Obama?

      Romney to Business Crowd: Obama Sees You As an “Evil”
      The GOP candidate—and his wife—are caught on tape at a private fundraiser dismissing [Obama] as not a “grown-up” and an arch foe of commerce.

    3. I like Lord of Strazele’s turn of phrase above:

      “The Department of “‘But wait, I never expected that leopard to eat my face’”

      Speaks to the heart of why you don’t want a sociopath in the role of chief executive of the country, even if you think he is getting you what you want (for now).

      1. Of course you would, because you’re on the same side of the aisle.

        And it’s not the middle, no matter what your pretensions are.

        1. Yes, sir!

      2. Lol, no it doesn’t retard. It speaks to the exact fucking opposite. It speaks to the heart of why you don’t give that much power to the government in the first place, because it is inevitable that it will be misused.

        Man, you really should stop posting for awhile, you make an ass of yourself on the regular.

        1. “ It speaks to the heart of why you don’t give that much power to the government in the first place,…”

          Agree with you. You’ll have to figure out the implications of a retard like me agreeing with you.

  57. This is a fundamentally dishonest headline.
    If you don’t follow the rules of your parole, you go back to prison.

    She wasn’t “behind on her coursework” by a few homework assignments. This was virtual school and she had completed none of it.

    Think about this. If we were in a normal situation, and we had the condition: “She has to go to school. She skipped three weeks straight”. No one could rationally question that she violated parole. How does that change when she’s in remote schooling and skips multiple weeks of lessons?

    Shame on you, Ms. Brown, for writing such a transparently slanted article ignoring plainly obvious facts, and shame on the editor as well for allowing it.

    1. Yeah. She is a criminal who didn’t meet the terms of her probation. Reason makes it sound like she was just some kid the judge grabbed and threw in jail.

    2. Well, to be sure, she casually mentioned in the tenth paragraph that the judge said she was NOT imprisoned for not doing homework, but for parole violation. Which is an open admission that the headline is pure propaganda clickbait.

      Does anyone know of a libertarian website?

    3. Yes. She is in jail because of the assault and theft convictions. She lost her probation privileges because she was not doing her schoolwork as a condition of parole.

      Perhaps you can argue about completing school being a condition of parole, but the situation is not what the headline or the blurb implies, and this sort of mendacity is something ENB pulls constantly.

    4. I agree. The headline is misleading…The sort of thing I would expect on NYT or WaPo.

      This is about a probation violation…Not about a few homework assignments.

  58. “the distrust and open dismissal of expertise and authority.”

    the U.S. constitution is based on the distrust of authority and yes we do distrust those who claim to be experts because they have been wrong and or flat out lying many times.

    1. It is the distrust that leads to determining the facts that require dismissal.
      To quote the great thespian; “trust, but verify”.

  59. Meanwhile in the same county that ENB is so upset about a judge not excusing a probation violation:

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/teacher-says-school-district-fired-him-for-pro-trump-tweet

    I actually heard about this on local radio this morning. He didn’t bring any of this into the school. A woman called in who’s children went to the same school, and the civics teacher one of her children had lead a class wide boycott of Chic-fil-a.

    And the rest of this roundup is pure leftist propaganda bullshit.

    1. One of the odd argumentative techniques I see over and over around here. Someone writes about something, it turns into that person being “upset” about it.

      1. “But Brennan seems to think she knows more about what is best for this family than they do.”

        1. Oh, yeah, lots of emotion in that sentence. Like where she calls Brennan a retard.

          1. White Knight: If you don’t say retard you’re not upset.

            1. Kinda. If you don’t say anything that indicates emotion, then it is in the reader’s mind if they think you are being emotional.

      2. So you’ve been reading the articles then. You should probably let them know.

  60. The officer “fired his weapon at them, striking all three with rubber bullets. The shooting was unprovoked.”

    But hey, somewhere else in the city some jackass was spraypainting a cop station so these people deserve it.

    1. “Unprovoked”

      You’ll excuse me if I don’t take the serial liar’s word for it.

    2. We see the riots happening, but the rioters are so few, so slippery, such a tiny percentage, that the cops haven’t arrested or detained a single one. Not one.

    3. Yeah, No one who is arrested is ever guilty of riots. The riots just happen. Bad luck I guess.

  61. So… we’re re-tweeting people who’s Tweet handle contains “All Cops are Bastards”? What’s next, using video from Doug MAGA?

    1. I remember when ACAB was a skinhead/football hooligan thing.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1TAzlmaM-Y

      When did it become okay for social justice warriors to culturally appropriate skinhead/football hooligan slogans from the the U.K.? Does this have something to do with soccer becoming popular in the Pacific Northwest?

      Why isn’t it “problematic” for social justice warriors to call people “bastards”? Calling someone a cunt isn’t especially awful in the U.K.–like calling someone a bastard isn’t especially awful in the U.S. Why are they calling people bastards? People will humorously call themselves bastards in the U.S. But calling someone in a bastard in the U.K. is a serious insult.

      Shouldn’t it be problematic for social justice warriors to use the word?

      It’s class snobbery at the very least. It’s also problematic from a feminist perspective. Are they saying that the children of women who don’t conform with traditional gender roles and ceremonies are somehow inferior to others for that reason?! Add to that the racist connotations. Are they trying to leverage old racist tropes about how members of some races supposedly don’t have a father in the home?

      I suspect it’s because little of this has anything to do with social justice and more to do with the economy.

      1. It’s weird that Reason is uncritically linking tweets from people with that in the handle. I’m very careful when I link to someone like Andy Ngo. Not because I think he’s a liar, but I’m aware that he’s a polarizing figure. I’m also aware that the ‘polite’ media doesn’t like him because he tends to show that which they won’t.

        I can’t stand the fucking police as an institution. I think there’s corruption baked into their structure, I think the US made a major mistake when it allowed them to unionize, and I think that they should be filmed early and often. But “All Cops Are Bastards” is just unproductive hate-mongering.

        This shit in portland has been going on for two months. TWO FUCKING MONTHS. But the media only became interested when Trump sent authorities to protect the federal facilities.

        By the way, you wanna know full of fucking shit Portland city officials are? This is a video clip that the city of Portland used against a group called Don’t Shoot Portland, which wanted an injunction against Portland police use of tear gas to control rioters.

        So what you have here are Portland officials whinging about Donald Trump’s occupying army against 100% peaceful protesters, while using video evidence to show how dangerous they are in a separate court case.

        Skip to 00:30 for video of a kid aiming what appears to be a firearm over his car.

        Ted Wheeler is a lying mendacious fucking cunt.

        1. Would that qualify as brandishing for sarcasmic? Enquiring minds want to know.

          1. Think about it. Ted Wheeler and Portland city officials entered that video into evidence to show how dangerous things had become in Portland. While at the same time, declaring to the uncritical, sympathetic media that the situation in Portland is completely peaceful, but for the 11th hour introduction of federal authorities.

            1. And ENB repeats it like the left wing propagandist she is.

            2. I don’t need to think about it. It’s all about power for them. 1984 just came a little later and ironically government will be the last place it takes hold.

            3. Don’t worry, Paul, I’m sure White Knight and sarcasmic will be along any second now to parrot the “not all protesters!” line they’ve been squawking for several days now.

              1. Looks like we didn’t need to. D’oh!

                1. Watching your allies get party-vanned has been the best part of the last week.

                  1. Unfortunately, truth is you are more my political ally than any antifa kid in Portland. And I yours.

        2. I’ve seen Portlandia, and I’ve been to Portland.

          I know the stereotypes, but when I was there, the people seemed liberal the way I imagine Norm Abrams from The New Yankee Workship is liberal. They’re almost like Canadians. They think people should be nice to each other. They don’t think people should be greedy. They wear flannel without irony.

          I imagine that just because they disapprove of Trump and voted for Barack Obama, that doesn’t necessarily want their city overrun by mobs of vandals and arsonists.

          All the facts I’m seeing suggest that people who might have been on the casual left in the past are horrified at what they’re seeing people do in the name of social justice. And yet everything I see on TV or social media seems to suggest that everyone around the country is unified in their hatred of the police, national monuments, and Donald Trump. It’s like watching interdimensional cable, where the news is covering America in some parallel universe.

          Here’s the Marin Independent reporting on the explosion in gun sales in California.

          The recent coronavirus lockdown caused a surge in gun sales in California. There were 164,000 background checks for gun purchases in March — a 72% increase over the month earlier and one of the highest months in the past two decades.

          . . . .

          https://www.marinij.com/2020/06/21/gun-sales-are-up-but-a-pandemic-is-not-a-time-to-buy-firearms/

          The rest of the article is all about suicide prevention!

          It’s hard to get what’s being said in that article through to reasonable people, but what they’re basically saying is that people are buying guns–not because they’re afraid of riots, the explosion in violent crime, or the defunding of the police. No, they’re buying guns because they’re feeling socially isolated because of the pandemic and the lock-downs–and we need to be worried about that because these gun buyers are prone to killing themselves.

          No mention of riots. The coronavirus lockdown caused a surge in gun sales. How do we help these people not feel so isolated that they want to buy a gun to kill themselves?

          It’s like the entire news apparatus has gone completely haywire. If Trump wins in November, things will get crazy. If Trump loses in November, the nutjobs who are writing the news and public policy are going to think they have a mandate–and things will get crazy in a different way. The whole news media industry seems to have completely lost its way. We’re seeing a collective psychological meltdown on a massive scale, and I’m not sure reality reasserting itself will save us in the short term.

          1. Anyone who lives in Portland and sees what is going on and still supports Wheeler would have to be a full on Shreek level retard. I know exactly the type of liberal you are talking about. And I too have been to Portland and found it inhabited with such types. Maybe they are so bullied and have so much of their personal sense of self worth tied up in fighting the evil “Republicans” that they are willing to stand by and allow the mobs to destroy their city and their sense of security and peace with it. I have no doubt that some are. But I can’t believe that all are. I have to believe that a good number of them are horrified and walking away from the Democratic Party over this. That it is not all of them is just further evidence of the insane times we live in. But it has to be a significant number.

            1. I don’t think those people will vote for Trump in November.

              I think a lot of them will stay home rather than vote for a Democrat.

              There isn’t anything about out of control vandalism and arson that makes these people want to vote for Democrats, that’s for sure–and yet the narrative is so delusional . . .

              Like thinking that the gun buying surge has nothing to do with the fear of lawlessness we’re seeing being cheerled on TV and everything to do with people’s suicidal feelings of social isolation.

              It’s TDS on steroids.

              They’re so committed to their preexisting biases that that the facts all seem to confirm their weirdest fears–even if the fact is that the American people–even in places like Portland–are recoiling in horror at the sight of the news media and their elected politicians cheering on the rioters.

              1. These sorts of people wake up every day with the certainty that they are part of the good side fighting the forces of intolerance and racism. For them to walk away from the Democratic party would mean to admit that they were not fighting for the good side all of these years and were just partisans who had reasonable disagreements with other Americans. Most of them have way too much of their personal self worth wrapped up in their politics to do that. They would literally get on the trains to the Gulag still thinking they had no choice but to support it. The last thing that would go through their heads before the guard’s bullet would be “but the Republicans were worse”.

                They are all like this to one degree or another. It is going to be very painful and emotional for any of them to not vote Democrat and stay home much less vote Republican. How many are willing to actually do it, I would not care to guess. But I think things are getting bad enough and the far left so obviously crazy that a significant minority at least will.

          2. Ken, I live in Portlandia. And this little minithread w you and Diana is both spot on and scary.

            I’m at a loss.

            1. Texas is still open if you need to get out.

              1. Shit, it’s not going to remain better for too much longer.

                Come on over though, Eric.

        3. By the way, it’s Police Commissioner Wheeler, not just Mayor Wheeler, let’s not forget.

    2. ●US Dollar Rain Earns upto $550 to $750 per day by google fantastic job oppertunity provide for our community pepoles who,s already using facebook to earn money 85000$ every month and more through facebook and google new project to create money at home withen few hours.Everybody can get this job now and start earning online by just open this link and then go through instructions to get started……….COPY HERE====►►CLICK HERE.

  62. “It is now clear that it is not the case that President Trump doesn’t want to change his behavior. It’s that he is congenitally incapable to moderate it even for a single day,” suggests former Republican National Committee spokesperson Tim Miller at The Bulwark.
    Bul as in Bullshit
    War as in Warmonger
    K as in K street

    1. ●US Dollar Rain Earns upto $550 to $750 per day by google fantastic job oppertunity provide for our community pepoles who,s already using facebook to earn money 85000$ every month and more through facebook and google new project to create money at home withen few hours.Everybody can get this job now and start earning online by just open this link and then go through instructions to get started……….COPY HERE====►►CLICK HERE.

  63. I am finding it hard to find a Reason to be outraged at the teenager. If she doesn’t learn that actions have consequences now she never will. Clearly her mother is incapable of imparting good habits if she is not getting up for school or doing her homework during COVID.

  64. I’d bet Judge Mary Ellen Brennan would put this teenager in a work camp if she could. I’d also bet Mary doesn’t understand the Constitution.

  65. A boot in the tail might send a worth while message to this kid. As for imprisonment, what sort of message is that sending?

  66. Grace was not imprisoned because of homework. Her probation was revoked because she committed theft and battery, got house arrest with a promise to online educate. She didn’t. She didn’t have a defense, but wanted leniency for violating easy probation orders based on the fact that she hadn’t attacked her mother, lately. Case closed.
    So, why the misleading title? Click bait.

    1. My last month paycheck was for 11000 … All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour HERE? Read More

  67. My last month paycheck was for 11000 … All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour HERE? learn More

  68. Start earning today from $600 to $754 easily by working online from home. Last month i have generated and received $19663 from this job by giving this only maximum 2 hours a day of my life. Easiest job in the world and earning from this job are just awesome. Everybody can now get this job and start earning cash online right now by just follow instructions click on this link and vist tabs( Home, Media, Tech ) for more details thanks…══════❥❥❥❥Join Here

  69. Really informative article about teen school work like it.
    shayari

  70. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work n my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home. Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page………click for jobs its a limited offER.

Please to post comments