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

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Fourth Amendment

Come Back With a Warrant

Plus: A fight over Section 702 spying reforms, Iran threatens Israel and the U.S., Trump's proposed tariff is even worse than we thought, and more...

Eric Boehm | 4.11.2024 9:35 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
"so what we want to do is scoop up all the communications at once...." | Rod Lamkey - CNP/picture alliance / Consolidated News Photos/Newscom
(Rod Lamkey - CNP/picture alliance / Consolidated News Photos/Newscom)

Spying stymied: The reauthorization of a warrantless electronic surveillance tool hit a snag in the House on Wednesday, as a group of Republicans revolted against Speaker of the House Mike Johnson's (R–La.) plan to bring the bill to the floor without guaranteeing the inclusion of key privacy-protecting reforms.

By a vote of 193–228, the House failed to approve a preliminary measure that would have set the terms of a floor debate over the renewal of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows intelligence services to scoop up vast amounts of electronic communications between Americans and individuals overseas. The 19 Republicans who voted to sink the preliminary vote want to include a requirement that American law enforcement agencies get warrants before being allowed to access the Section 702 database to obtain information about American citizens.

Republican leaders promised to allow a floor vote on including the warrant requirement, but Rep. Chip Roy (R–Texas), one of the holdouts, told Roll Call that he was unwilling to support "a pre-cooked determination that we're not going to pass a warrant protection."

The need for reform should be fairly obvious: The FBI routinely uses the Section 702 database to troll through communications that have been "incidentally" collected from Americans who are not the targets of Section 702 surveillance. Even a White House advisory board has said the program lacks essential privacy protections.

Section 702 is set to expire on April 19 unless Congress votes to extend it. (For more on the fight over Section 702's reauthorization, check out this week's edition of Elizabeth Nolan Brown's newsletter, Sex & Tech.)

Weighing in: Both the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and former President Donald Trump cheered the holdup of Section 702 reauthorization.

"Section 702 has been abused by the U.S. government for too long and the latest fight in the House only shows that Congress and the American people are fed up with the status quo," Kia Hamadanchy, senior policy counsel at the ACLU, said in a statement after Wednesday's House vote.

On Truth Social, Trump urged lawmakers to "KILL FISA" because it had been used to spy on his campaign.

Truth Social
(Truth Social)

Of course, it's worth noting that the last time Section 702 came up for reauthorization was in 2018—and Trump signed the bill to extend the spying authority without including any reforms.

What's next: The House will likely try again to pass the Section 702 reauthorization on Thursday or later this week. Johnson met with some of the holdout Republicans on Wednesday night and may court Democratic votes as well, Politico reports.

Iran draws a red line: If the United States helps Israel defend itself against a possible Iranian attack in the coming days, Iran will view American troops and other targets as fair game, The Intercept reported on Wednesday night, citing notes from a Tuesday meeting of the National Security Council.

That news came on the heels of a warning from American officials that an attack by Iran against Israel is imminent. Iran is seeking to retaliate for a strike by Israeli forces earlier this month that hit the Iranian embassy in Damascus, Syria.

Any additional escalation in the conflict between Israel and Iran would be a worrying step toward an all-out regional war. The possibility that U.S. troops will be targeted by Iran only heightens the risk of a growing conflict.

Despite that, Gen. Erik Kurilla, the top American military commander in the Middle East, is reportedly meeting Thursday with top Israeli military officials.

Terrible tariff: Trump's proposal to slap a 60 percent tariff on all imports from China would be a massive tax hike on Americans but could actually be a net negative for federal revenue too.

According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), Trump's proposed tariff "would dramatically reduce trade with China (as intended) and thus lead to far less revenue than" some estimates have concluded without accounting for the decreased levels of trade.

"Despite the much higher tariff rates on remaining imports, tariff revenue on Chinese goods would fall from roughly $65 billion to $55 billion in FY 2035 under this scenario," the CRFB's analysis concludes. In other words, Trump's tariff would disrupt huge amounts of trade, make many products more expensive, and wouldn't even help reduce the budget deficit. That's a serious lose-lose-lose.


Scenes from Virginia: While hiking in Shenandoah National Park last weekend, I came across one of the small, old cemeteries that dot the landscape—remnants of the homesteads and small communities that once existed there.

This one included a reminder about the human cost of central planning. (You may need to click on the image to make it large enough to read clearly.)

Click to enlarge
Eric Boehm

The widespread use of eminent domain against private landowners is a little-known, dark chapter in the history of many of America's national parks. To create Shenandoah, the state of Virginia condemned hundreds of properties with the stroke of a pen: State lawmakers approved the Public Park Condemnation Act and then appointed a committee of three men to decide how much each landowner would be paid. Eminent domain was used to evict over 2,000 people who refused to leave voluntarily.


QUICK HITS

  • Chicago cops fired 96 shots in 41 seconds and killed Dexter Reed, a black man, after pulling him over for failing to wear a seatbelt.
  • Waymo began offering driverless taxi rides in Los Angeles on Wednesday.
  • Today marks five years since Julian Assange was incarcerated in Great Britain.
  • Georgia cops are still hassling vape stores over legal products like delta-8 and delta-10.
  • Former President Donald Trump's latest attempt at postponing his Manhattan trial has failed.
  • Americans are still not worried enough about the threat of global war.
  • A government-enabled monopoly is responsible for the loss of 17,000 kidney transplants in the U.S. every year.

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

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

NEXT: Quiz: What Do You Know About the SAT?

Eric Boehm is a reporter at Reason.

Fourth AmendmentSurveillanceCongressDonald TrumpFISACivil LibertiesDomestic spyingFBINational SecurityPoliticsReason Roundup
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (533)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    The reauthorization of a warrantless electronic surveillance tool hit a snag in the House on Wednesday...

    If that snag doesn't turn out to be very temporary my whole world will be rocked.

    1. Moonrocks   1 year ago

      Baby steps. This is the first time it's ever hit any kind of snag.

      1. Commenter_XY   1 year ago

        Hope it hits even more snags.

        1. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

          Chuck Schumer says don't mess with the intel agencies, they will screw you 6 ways to Sunday.

          That was Schumer's message to Trump after Trump was elected. Look how well it worked out for Trump.

          1. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

            As I've said here before, a modern surveillance state cannot be overthrown.

            1. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

              The question is, is it in charge and we have a shell government.

              The fact that no one in Congress did anything to James Clapper after Clapper told them to their face that he lied to them speaks volumes.

    2. Ersatz   1 year ago

      hang on, is this a both sidez thing or is one party responsible for this 'snag'?

      Oh wait - I see ... it was those revolting Republicans 😉
      You cant take them anywhere!

      I guess it wasnt those freedom-fighting Republicans.

  2. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    Both the American Civil Liberties Union (ALCU) and former President Donald Trump cheered the holdup of Section 702 reauthorization.

    Ouch for the ACLU.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

      Next thing you know the ACLU will question official election results.

    2. Unable2Reason   1 year ago

      Trump's persecution by FISA proves that he's being treated just like everybody else. I mean, if you just ignore all those pesky politically motivated prosecutions, just like everybody else.

      1. Ersatz   1 year ago

        if you just ignore all those pesky politically motivated prosecutions
        …and the proportion of other major name brand politicians that got the same FISA treatment.

  3. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    If the United States helps Israel defend itself against a possible Iranian attack in the coming days, Iran will view American troops and other targets as fair game...

    Iran is going to step from behind its proxies? It's a bold strategy, Cotton.

    1. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

      If Israel and Iran annihilate each other--what's the down side for the USA?

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

        Fewer delis and food trucks?

      2. TheReEncogitationer   1 year ago

        A lot of IT and medical technology made in Israel. No SodaStream for you either.

        And, of course, it would be sheer fantasy to assume that the Mullahs of Iran would stop with Israel.

        1. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

          They would if Israel nuked them into the stone age.

      3. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

        Other than turning complete control of an important geopolitical and strategically valuable area to purely Islamic States? Remember our first foreign war was against Mediterranean Islamic states.

    2. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

      Pretty sure if Iran starts chucking missiles all Willy- nilly around the place that all infidels will be “fair game” to them.

      Like we needed a formal declaration. Duh.

  4. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    Trump's proposal to slap a 60 percent tariff on all imports from China would be a massive tax hike on Americans but could actually be a net negative for federal revenue too.

    4D chess from our most libertarian president.

  5. Moonrocks   1 year ago

    Today marks five years since Julian Assange was incarcerated in Great Britain

    It’s been close to 12 years.

  6. HorseConch   1 year ago

    Chicago cops fired 96 shots in 41 seconds and killed Dexter Reed, a black man, after pulling him over for failing to wear a seatbelt.

    Is this the one that LOTT shared video of opening fire on the cops before they did?

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

      Yes. He fired shots at the CPD first, before they sent a hail of bullets his way. Boehm is disingenuous by not sharing the whole story.

      1. Social Justice is neither   1 year ago

        At this point he's either malicious or simply incompetent and should not be employed at anything in journalism. Fortunately he's at Reason so Leftist propaganda is the narrative of the day every day.

        1. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

          Bohem is a shit sub human. I didn't see this comment, and still called it in a comment below.

          1. VULGAR MADMAN   1 year ago

            He just wants the summer of love 2: Electric boogaloo.

            And he doesn’t care how many people it kills.

        2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

          It’s Jeffy level disingenuousness at this point.

        3. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

          But 21st century journalism is all about cherry-picking info to further standard partisan narratives, which either placate or anger the targeted echo chamber audience.

          1. Social Justice is neither   1 year ago

            Sure but his chosen schtick fits in more at Salon than the purported principles of Reason.

      2. JesseAz   1 year ago

        He fired 11 times before cops fired one time.

        1. Quicktown Brix   1 year ago

          Not quite true. He did fire multiple shots before cops returned fire though and probably a total of 11 including those fired after the cops returned fire.

          A lot missing from this story, like why a tactical team had guns drawn over a seat belt violation and reports that the same group of cops detained the same perp for the same violation a month earlier.

          One thing is clear. Dexter won a Darwin award.

          1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

            When the Chicago Tribune immediately asks people to chill, you can probably figure it was a good shoot.

            https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/04/10/editorial-dexter-reed-police-shooting-copa-brandon-johnson/

            1. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

              Not a bad editorial. The shooting was justified, the stop may or may not have been. There is a fine but very distinct line between the two.

              1. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

                However, considering he had already been arrested recently for having an illegal weapon, the cops approaching with other officers covering them with drawn arms seems prudent, especially if last year police were shot or shot at an increasing amount of time.

      3. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   1 year ago

        "Disingenuous" my foot. It's a flat out lie by omission.

        Mrs Lincoln enjoyed the play up until Mr Lincoln was murdered.

      4. R Mac   1 year ago

        And unfortunately he’s too stupid to realize he’s actually doing real criminal justice reform a disservice. His dishonesty is so transparent that someone with an open mind sees it and gets turned off the whole issue.

        1. Quicktown Brix   1 year ago

          he’s actually doing real criminal justice reform a disservice. His dishonesty is so transparent that someone with an open mind sees it and gets turned off the whole issue.

          This is a good point. This is why I nitpick many people I agree in these comments with when their rhetoric is exaggerated or missing context.

      5. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

        But he did share the whole story.

        The formula is simple: If they don’t mention that he was unarmed, you can assume he was. If they don’t mention race, you can assume not black.

        Duh.

    2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Is he upset the cops wasted too much ammo?

      1. Randy Sax   1 year ago

        .45 ACP isn't that expensive. (pretend the word "that" is in italics, I don't know how to do italics on here)

        1. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

          I just put everything in "scare" quotes.

        2. Ajsloss   1 year ago

          Fuck it. I know how to do it, but can't show you without it happening in the post. Thanks to Diane for showing me how (haven't seen her on in a long while).

          1. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

            Switched his/her handle to Rick James. Came by briefly a few days ago.

            1. Red Rocks White Privilege   1 year ago

              Yeah, his real handle is "Paul"--the Diane Reynolds thing was just a long-time goof after the Hillary emails were exposed and it came out that Chelsea Clinton was using that as a sockpuppet email name.

              1. Ajsloss   1 year ago

                I feel like such an asshole for assuming gender. Point me to the nearest reeducation camp?

              2. Medulla Oblongata   1 year ago

                THANK YOU! I missed that whole thing and have long wondered. I guess I never heard the Chelsea Clinton part so there wasn't a 2 and 2 to put together.

              3. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

                I heard the name Diane Reynolds in a local newscast (Seattle) while driving and wondered who she was. Can’t recall what the story was about.

                I miss Paul. I mean Rick. Hope he comes back.

          2. Dillinger   1 year ago

            >>Diane for showing me how (haven’t seen her on in a long while).

            Rick James now.

            1. Medulla Oblongata   1 year ago

              It's "Rick James now, bitch!"

              1. Dillinger   1 year ago

                cocaine is a helluva drug.

        3. Ajsloss   1 year ago

          You need to start with the "<" symbol.

          1. Ajsloss   1 year ago

            Then put a "i". Then put ">".

            1. Ajsloss   1 year ago

              Then type your italicized words. Then close it with another "<".

              1. Ajsloss   1 year ago

                Then put "/i". Then put another ">".

                1. Ajsloss   1 year ago

                  Use "b" for bold and "s" for strikethrough.

                  1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                    Then there’s “blockquote” done the same way.

                    1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      Did you have to go to glibertarians to get this like sarc?

                    2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                      No, I got it from Paul and from looking at the page source code.

                    3. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                      I have not been able to close blockquotes for weeks and have had to resort to using them only at the end of a post.

                    4. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                      To close blockquotes properly, you need to have text, your blockquote, then more text. If you don’t have text prior to your blockquote, the quote will not close properly.

                    5. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                      blockquote

                      blockquote

                      Blockquote

                  2. Randy Sax   1 year ago

                    Thank you
                    Thank you
                    Thank you

                    1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      thank you

                    2. Ajsloss   1 year ago

                      Curious as to why you saved the last "thank you" as the one to be struck through. Are you not really thankful?

                    3. Randy Sax   1 year ago

                      Tested in order of instruction. i then b then s.

                2. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

                  I don't do algebra.

                  1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

                    SJWs thank you.

        4. Sometimes a Great Notion   1 year ago

          Google: html tag italics

    3. Minadin   1 year ago

      https://twitter.com/CWBChicago/status/1777716822394978553

  7. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

    Americans are still not worried enough about the threat of global war.

    Why worry with the steady hand of SleepyJoe at the helm?

    1. Social Justice is neither   1 year ago

      Why worry when you can doordash nuclear hellfire?

    2. damikesc   1 year ago

      Remember....he is in the 20th Century.

      The rest of ain't, but he is.

  8. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

    The reauthorization of a warrantless electronic surveillance tool hit a snag in the House on Wednesday

    Aren't you the peice of shit sub human that pushed to vote for the party that wants warentless survalence?

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

      Yes, Boehm did, strategically and reluctantly.

    2. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

      Yes. Yes he did.

    3. JesseAz   1 year ago

      Sarc was assuring us yesterday that Trump being against it is purely accidental. So just as bad as the dems and neocons that don't want to require warrants.

    4. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

      Would that be either party.
      The P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act placed us on this this path.

      1. Zeb   1 year ago

        Yeah, sometimes both sides really are the same.

        1. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

          We have been told to beware politics and power. It wasn't beware the republicans, beware the democrats, beware the whigs or whatever. It's was the understanding of human nature, power, and how politics manipulates society to control. That is why government must be limited.

  9. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

    USPS proposes raising the prices of 1st class stamps

    Inflation is a myth, spittin' tabaccy, rig count, gold prices and chocolate diseases prove it's not real.

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      USPS is just greedy.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

        Lizzie Warren should say something.

        1. Old Engineer   1 year ago

          Lizzie Warren took an axe and gave the Constitution 40 whacks. When Sanders saw what she had done he gave another 41.

      2. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

        I've noticed lately there's less mail in the envelopes. More shrinkflation.

    2. Unable2Reason   1 year ago

      I had an order from AliExpress that came from one of their US based warehouses be delivered by Amazon. Even the Chinese are avoiding USPS.

    3. Medulla Oblongata   1 year ago

      Bought a few rolls of forever stamps about 5 years ago, figured it was a lifetime supply at the time, given how few things I send via USPS anymore. Five years later, send fewer things than ever. Will probably die with a few rolls in stock. Can pass them down...

    4. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

      Only the Federal Government can come up with: we’re losing money because we have lost costumers to our competition who provides better service, cheaper. I have an idea to correct this, let’s raise the price of our services more .
      Then again, this is the same government that thinks we can have more daylight by changing the clocks twice a year.

      1. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

        Had to try the italics thing out. Screwed it up the first time. Now the question is, will I utilize it enough to remember next time or not? Eh.

        1. Unable2Reason   1 year ago

          Yeah, I keep a text file on my desktop with examples of italics, bold, and hyperlinks. I wouldn't have a prayer of remembering.

    5. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

      Pfffft. Who uses snail mail anymore? Just eat your cheesy poofs and quit yer bitchin’.

  10. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

    could actually be a net negative for federal revenue too.

    And this is bad why?

    1. I, Woodchipper   1 year ago

      This almost makes the rest of the shitty tariff plan sound ok.

  11. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    While hiking in Shenandoah National Park last weekend...

    I was hoping this was going to be in the form of a Thomas Friedman column template.

    1. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

      If the article isn't bohem whent hiking and never came back the world would be better

    2. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

      Dear Penthouse,

      I never thought this could happen to me. While hiking in the Shenandoah National Park Last Weekend ..

  12. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

    Married ISIS couple who 'raped two Yazidi slave girls aged 12 and FIVE and would punish them with a broomstick or scalding hot water' are arrested in Germany

    But I bet their food truck was the best.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

      Immigration is terrible because some immigrants do bad things. Got it.

      1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

        Now you are catching on.

        1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

          Notice how Jeffy dances around the fact that they entered the country illegally, but were allowed to stay.

      2. damikesc   1 year ago

        They're just torturing and enslaving minors that Americans are just not willing to do, amirite?

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

          We should generalize about all immigrants based on the example above of an immigrant couple doing awful things. Better safe than sorry. Keep them all out because we have no idea which one is going to start a food truck and which one is going to rape a 5 year old. Is that it?

          1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

            You are a simple minded fool.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

              You're right. None of them are going to start food trucks, they all rape 5-year-olds.

              1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

                The story is about these two monsters. You conflated it into something else.

                1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                  He usually does. You were far too kind in calling him a “simple minded fool”. He’s a disingenuous jackass.

                  1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

                    And a propagandizing fascist politruk. Jeff is far worse than just a simple minded fool.

          2. JesseAz   1 year ago

            You and sarc are the ones who generalize that they are hard working and a net benefit. Always discounting anyone who points out your false narratives as false.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

              No no no, migration is always a negative. I know this because FAIR told me so, and all of the studies and data which contradict FAIR are false because they come from left-wingers.

              1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                Fucking hilarious. The first ad hominem!

                Thank you for proving my assertions below jeff.

                What is false about their data? Which studies have I discounted?

                Lol.

              2. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

                The Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism or the Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting?

                They’re both proggy as fuck so I’m not sure what you are whinging about.

                Also interesting that your using the same tactic on this “FAIR”, that you’re simultaneously complaining about being used against your agitprop. If hypocrisy was a medal event you’d always take gold.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  example #298734 of your dishonesty: you know damn well what FAIR means, it is the same anti-immigration organization that Jesse cites all the time. you posted your comment only so you could later claim "omg chemjeff cited some left-wing organization" which you KNOW to be a lie, only to smear me.

                  1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    So double down with an ad hominem attack, don't dispute their data that is derived from government data. Claim others are being dishonest.

                    1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

                      Like I pointed out, he was doing exactly what he was accusing others of doing... in his fucking accusation.
                      He's an incredible piece of work.

                  2. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                    The other purpose of that comment is to reinforce what those who have you on mute believe. They'll see that post and assume that that's what you were writing about. A lot of the lies in the replies are performance for haters.

                  3. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

                    “you know damn well what FAIR means”

                    No. I don’t know “FAIR” is, you fucking goosestepping Nazi. Did you actually think we’re like you, with a big list of all the latest talking-points and sources?

                    “A lot of the lies in the replies are performance for haters”

                    Go fuck yourself you pathetic drunken suckhole. You just want to make a pal, and don’t have the faintest clue what the fat Nazi is talking about either.

              3. DesigNate   1 year ago

                Said no one.

          3. damikesc   1 year ago

            We know they tend to bankrupt cities when they go there.

            Pretty consistently to boot.

            The increase in crime is just ONE of many reasons to end the nonsense.

            1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   1 year ago

              Wait, I thought this was about illegal immigrants, not Democrats.

              1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                Well, as this conversation is demonstrating, apparently it's the immigrants who are bankrupting cities, not Democrats.

                1. R Mac   1 year ago

                  It’s actually democrats giving tax payer money to illegal immigrants, as well as other stupid and corrupt shit they’re doing.

          4. R Mac   1 year ago

            That’s what you did, Lying Jeffy.

          5. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

            Actually, using the modern logic of risk aversion common among US liberals, then yes. Preventing harm is the most important thing, so ban immigrants.

            1. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

              "If it saves just one life."

            2. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

              It is a stupid standard but it wouldn't surprise me if this was just one more thing that the modern right has adopted from the left.

              1. DesigNate   1 year ago

                You’re so close to getting it.

                1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

                  Not likely.

      3. sarcasmic   1 year ago

        Some immigrants are bad which means all immigrants are bad. Why aren't you committing the fallacy of composition? Don't you know that fallacies are the most effective arguments in these comments?

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

          Don't worry, I am sure the ad hominem fallacy will be along shortly.

          1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

            Oh, you poor things.

            1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

              They're not "poor", one's a troll and the other is a fascist propagandist.

          2. sarcasmic   1 year ago

            Claim someone is a hypocrite and you prove that they are wrong as a person, thus it follows that everything they say is wrong. Fallacies are TRUTH.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

              The funny part is that they rail against post-modernism, while implicitly accepting one of the primary tenets of post-modernism: that there is no such thing as objective truth, instead truth is socially constructed. No amount of facts or logic or reason can pierce their social bubble in which "their truth" has been socially constructed.

              1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                Lol. This is the bullshit sarc has joined.

                The people denying objective facts constantly are you two.

                Just like yesterday when you continued to deny lab leak evidence and WPATH false information.

                1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                  He sneaks back in at night and tries to backtrack his fallacies. It is hilarious.

                2. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  The people denying objective facts constantly are you two.

                  "In 2020, Biden campaigned on supporting the Green New Deal."

                  True or False, Jesse?

                  "The 2020 election was stolen and Trump was the rightful winner."

                  True or False, Jesse?

                  "The migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard were illegal immigrants."

                  True or False, Jesse?

                  1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                    "Jeff the Chemist wouldn't know an honest argument if it bit him in the ass?"

                    True or False, Jesse?

                    1. R Mac   1 year ago

                      Oh definitely true.

                    2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      True.

          3. JesseAz   1 year ago

            Ahh the projection i mentioned.

            Like you and sarc do whenever I bring up the statistics on welfare usage as seen here?

            https://reason.com/2024/03/09/the-future-of-immigration-is-privatization/?comments=true#comment-10479818

            This dishonesty of these two morons is legion.

            You’ve made no factual arguments you dishonest fuck.

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

              If I presented data and statistics, would you actually read it, with an open mind? I don't think so. Whenever you are presented data that contradicts your narrative, you either nitpick it to death, or you dismiss it because it comes from supposedly left-wingers, or make some generalized claim about "well they are all corrupt scientists" or somesuch. That is exactly what you did during the pandemic whenever I or others would present papers that contradicted your narrative about the virus, masks, vaccines, any of it. The papers that supported your narrative were held up as the gold standards of truth, but the papers that contradicted your narrative were trashed and dismissed.

              So it's a waste of time, I believe. But, if you are going to actually read and consider data and statistics with an open mind that contradict your narrative, then I will post something for you to consider.

              1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                We’ve presented you with plenty of data and statistics for many things here, yet you dismiss them out of hand. Now you want to present your, most likely majorly skewed, data and statistics and then ask us to have “an open mind” after how you constantly dismiss our data?

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  So I'll take that as a "no". As I thought. Remain in your little bubble then.

                  1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    I’m still not seeing you present any data. What are you scared about?

                    If I remember correctly the last time you presented data it was the study showing immigrants (combining illegal and legal which is dishonest) being net positive to tax paying over a decade after entering the country. So your own data showed they were a net drain for a decade, at the costs of 10s of billions a year, for a small net benefit in maybe a decade. Of course if you took the integration of the data they aren’t a net positive for multiple decades.

                    Again this was your data. Which is why I love when you post data to show how dumb it is.

                    You demand taxpayers pay how for a possible future benefit. While claiming there is never a cost. Socially or economically. Because you can’t.

                    Watching dem run cities finally admit to this must have hurt you pretty badly.

                    1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                      You will have to provide a citation to the anecdote that you are describing to refresh my memory on specifically what the claims were.

                      While claiming there is never a cost.

                      THIS is a lie. I have never claimed this, nor has anyone else here ever claimed this. This is why it's a waste of time talking about these things with you. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter, you just lie about what I say anyway.

                    2. R Mac   1 year ago

                      Lying Jeffy wants you to agree to accept his data before he posts it, lol.

                    3. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                      Lying Jeffy wants you to agree to accept his data before he posts it, lol.

                      ^This right here.

                    4. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      Why don't you provide your actual data jeff. Sorry to remove the one you were likely to provide. Scramble for another. Marxist sites have a ton of manipulated data "studies" to choose from.

                  2. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                    THIS is a lie. I have never claimed this, nor has anyone else here ever claimed this. This is why it’s a waste of time talking about these things with you. At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter, you just lie about what I say anyway.

                    Yup. He knows it’s a lie, and he’ll be making the same claim tomorrow knowing it’s a lie. He’s got a slew of boilerplate lies that he throws out there every single day. Some like ML and ICP know they’re lies but play along because they’re shitty people. Others like Big Mac and Dlam are just plain dumb and believe the stuff to be true.

                    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

                      You should “mute” him I suppose.

                    2. R Mac   1 year ago

                      WE WANT THE LIST!

                    3. DesigNate   1 year ago

                      Maybe Open Borders advocates shouldn’t only focus on the perceived positives while calling everyone that even tries to say “can we slow it down” or “there are negatives and they do cost taxpayer money” a xenophobic racist?

                      Just a thought.

                  3. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                    Or maybe they’re shitty people too. Im not curious enough to unmute their sorry asses.

                    How does it feel to be ignored? I DON’T CARE! HA HA HA!

                    1. R Mac   1 year ago

                      Awe, poor sarc.

                    2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                      Pour Sarc.

              2. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                You know he won't read or consider anything you offer because it's from someone he hates. He judges people, not ideas or facts. Because he hates you, everything you say is to be opposed. Veracity is of no concern to him because he doesn't argue with people about ideas, nor does he care about right, wrong, fact or fiction.

                He argues against people to score points with other people.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  Well yeah, I know. ITL is the same way. They aren't going to read or consider anything with an open mind that is outside of their bubble.

                  1. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                    It's called arguing in bad faith.

                    1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      Which is what you two knuckleheads live for. Examples for you sarc. Showing youre projecting here.

                      sarcasmic 3 months ago
                      Flag Comment
                      Mute User
                      I’m saying that some people are so despicable that I’d rather disagree with them then have something in common with them.

                      sarcasmic 2 months ago
                      Flag Comment
                      Mute User
                      Yes, you are a despicable person who makes it very difficult to agree with anything you say because that would mean being like you.

                      Funny how you two always project your own behaviors. Lol.

                    2. R Mac   1 year ago

                      Just yesterday he admitted even if Trump does the right thing he’ll be against it.

                  2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    It is amazing watching you two collaborate on lies when it is you two who share these behaviors you attempt to project.

                    Why do you do that jeff? Want evidence?

                  3. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                    Your idea of us having “an open mind” is to swallow your baloney hook, line, and sinker with no questions asked and full agreement with you. If you think that’s going to happen, you’re commenting in the wrong place. Try Reddit instead.

                    1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                      No, it means not dismissing it for one of your typical bullshit reason of "it's from left-wingers" or "it's from globalists/Soros/Davos" or crap like that.

                    2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                      And when we rip it apart, you whine just the same, Jeff, and claim we’re doing it for the reasons you list. Even if we post and link contradictory evidence.

                    3. DesigNate   1 year ago

                      Jeff, you literally blast anything Jesse or ITL or Chuck post as “right-wing” and dismiss it out of hand. So maybe don’t throw that stone in your glass house.

                  4. DesigNate   1 year ago

                    They actually do read your links, that’s how they’re able to quote them….

                2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                  Do you two just lie and commit fallacies for fun?

                  One of my favorite things to do is read your evidence to expose it.

                  From Jeff's dark Brandon article yo shrike always being disproven by his own links.

                  Meanwhile I have posts from you literally saying you won't click links being provided to you lol.

                  sarcasmic 2 months ago
                  Flag Comment
                  Mute User
                  I don’t consider links from you guys to be information. I’ve clicked a couple and never found them useful. It has to be from, or confirmed by, someone other than a raving right-wing lunatic for me to give it consideration.
                  *shrug*

                  So pure projection.

                  But to people like you and Jeff who so dishonest you always accuse others of what you yourselves are doing.

              3. JesseAz   1 year ago

                I love reading yours and shrikes data as it is generally easy to refute with your own data let alone data i provide.

                But thank you for admitting you dont bother actually presenting data, just narratives.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  LOL you contradict yourself in the same comment:

                  I love reading yours and shrikes data

                  thank you for admitting you dont bother actually presenting data

                  1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                    Your reading comprehension is abysmal.

                  2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    I haven’t seen you post data in ages jeff. Because of actions taken when you actually do.

                    What is confusing?

              4. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                It seems as though you don't have much confidence in your data and facts. Otherwise you would post it and let it stand to criticism. You're responding to Jesse, but everyone can read the exchange. So even if you don't think Jesse is "open-minded" enough, he would not be the only one reading your data if you presented it.

                Saying that you won't post it because Jesse will unfairly shoot it down is a cop out. Besides, everyone is biased. The best we can do is recognize that and try to control for it. If your data is that good, what does it matter if another commenter blasts it for bad reasons? Other readers/commenters will be able to see how great a point you have, supported by sufficient evidence, and perhaps you will convince them.

                Or maybe you don't think your evidence is very convincing, so you preemptively come out with an objection to doing so to avoid posting it and having it fail on the merits.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  It takes time and effort to gather up all this stuff, and believe it or not I have other things to do with my day than post here all day. I'm not going to spend an hour on a mission that is futile.

                  1. R Mac   1 year ago

                    Lol, you’ve spent more time crying about why you won’t present it than it would take to actually present it.

                    You’re so transparent Lying Jeffy.

                  2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

                    and believe it or not I have other things to do with my day than post here all day.

                    He says after posting all day.

                  3. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    You've spent hours this morning. If you're so firm in your convictions you would know where to get your data. You are not. You would spend time scrambling to find data for your bald assertions.

                    Meanwhile half your time is spent here dismissing data that is provided. Often with an ad hominem attack or other hand waive of the data.

                  4. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

                    Jeff cop out. ^

                  5. Diarrheality   1 year ago

                    It takes time and effort to gather up all this stuff, and believe it or not I have other things to do with my day than post here all day.

                    Maybe with a little less time and effort, you could manage never to post here again.

                2. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  If your data is that good, what does it matter if another commenter blasts it for bad reasons?

                  Are you new here?

                3. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  So in the past, I have provided statistics and data to make a point.

                  The inevitable response was generally something like:

                  "I ignored all of your work except that I did note that you did not cite any of the statistics that *I* think are important, therefore it is all garbage."

                  So basically they demand a thesis-level type of argument and then they are going to dismiss it anyway. Who wants to write a thesis only to see it thrown in the dustbin?

                  1. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                    You post on here all the time. There's nothing wrong with that, but claiming it takes too much time to demonstrate your claims is another cop out.

                    As I said, bolstering your argument with evidence is not primarily about convincing commenters you believe will unjustly dismiss it. It's to convince others who are open to the evidence who are reading the conversation, perhaps not even commenting. And, if you are properly "open-minded" you should be open to having your mind changed. I see you repeatedly doing what you accuse others of doing, specifically dismissing evidence that counters your point because you don't like or don't trust the source. Some sources aren't as credible as others, but it's better to put it out there and let it stand criticism than just dismiss the idea of backing up your positions with evidence.

                  2. R Mac   1 year ago

                    More time spent not posting evidence…

                    1. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                      To be fair, he did post two sources below. I've read the first and replied, but haven't had a chance to read the second. I wasn't terribly impressed with the first one, but I made a good-faith response to it.

                  3. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                    The inevitable response was generally something like:

                    If that is true then post some evidence, fuckwit. You repeat this same fucking lie all the time. I posted evidence yesterday and you fallaciously displayed the exact behavior you are now assigning to others.

                  4. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    Cite?

                  5. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

                    Everything Is So Terrible And Unfair, Jeff.

                4. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  Here you go:
                  Here is one example.

                  https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2020/06/19/blog-weo-chapter4-migration-to-advanced-economies-can-raise-growth

                  We find that immigrants in advanced economies increase output and productivity both in the short and medium term. Specifically, we show that a 1 percentage point increase in the inflow of immigrants relative to total employment increases output by almost 1 percent by the fifth year.

                  There we go, a positive benefit to migration.

                  Now the usual suspects are going to claim:
                  "It's from the IMF and they are globalists therefore it's all garbage."
                  "Why don't they talk about the closing of hospitals in Arizona? Everyone knows that is THE MOST IMPORTANT IMMIGRATION ISSUE EVER" (this argument will be presented by you know who from AZ)
                  "I don't understand their statistics therefore it is all wrong and lies."

                  1. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                    Specifically, we show that a 1 percentage point increase in the inflow of immigrants relative to total employment increases output by almost 1 percent by the fifth year.

                    So it takes five years for the productivity relative to the increased number of workers (including the new immigrants) to break even? Does that mean it reduces net productivity relative to the workforce for the first four years?

                    (I'm still reading the rest of the article, but this jumped out to me. It also doesn't seem to distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants, which I think is important. I would think legal immigrants, who are often more highly skilled and productive compared to illegal immigrants, would likely be a net positive. Illegal, often unskilled, immigrants would have the opposite effect, IMO.)

                    1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                      He was schooled for hours the other day in how dishonest it is to not separate illegal/legal issues and then posts the same garbage.

                      It is the same Marxist tactic the MSM uses: tell the lie until it becomes the truth.

                    2. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                      Oh, I know. I have been reading the comments for years now, and have seen him fail to distinguish the two. Even the few times he will, he'll claim that all of the current illegal aliens aren't illegal, since they're seeking asylum, despite the reality that the VAST majority are really here for economic reasons. But they said the magic word, "asylum," which NGOs have instructed them to say so they can stay, and that negates the reality of them coming for economic opportunities.

                      I was trying to engage him on the source he did provide, as it even seemed to indicate that immigration as a whole isn't even a net benefit for at least five years, according to his own source, which lumps all immigrants together into one category. I'm sure if it isolated illegal immigrants only, the timeframe for having a net positive effect on productivity would take much, much longer, if it ever came to a positive. Though it's much harder to get accurate data for just illegal immigrants, for obvious reasons.

                    3. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      Didn’t I just accuse Jeff of using a similar study using the same criticisms as he posted. Lol.

                      It also correlates the 5 year growth as caused by the immigration instead of correlated. Of course there is constantly an influx of new workers from population growth domestically as well. Plus production increases that historically have been above these estimates through efficiency gains.

                      The study is largely parsing data to try to find a correlation without much discussion on causation.

                    4. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                      So it takes five years for the productivity relative to the increased number of workers (including the new immigrants) to break even? Does that mean it reduces net productivity relative to the workforce for the first four years?

                      I don't think that is what they are saying. I think they simply used 1 year and 5 years as their time points for projecting the impact on migration in the future based on their model. If you look at Figure 4.17 in the report, all of the indicators show a positive effect even after just 1 year (just not up to 1%).

                    5. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      It is literally what they are doing. Assuming some point in the future there will be a gain. However it is devoid of actual links to causation as I already discussed.

                      This is much different than using rates of welfare and social programs YEARLY based on YEARLY data. It is no better than a bald hypothetical. It is similar to how your old defend Keyensian economics having a ratio greater than 1.

                      It also avoids the cost. Just like GPD includes government spending. Another reason you and shrike love that metric.

                  2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    Oddly enough your analysis has flaws. A) from 2019 before the surge so you are assuming the growth is linear. B) it discusses output or revenues so doesn't touch on the costs associated with the output.

                    More people come into the country, more food has to be produced. Amazing claim. Doesnt even touch on if taxpayer funds are used to pay for this increase.

                    The assumptions in that article of continued linear growth assumptions is just bad economics. Certain products like housing can't grow at the influx rate, meaning it just adds to inflationary costs.

                    This is why I love when you post data. It is often built on bad foundations.

                    1. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                      He's bemoaning that commenters just dismiss his evidence outright for fallacious reasons like the ad hominem fallacy. I replied a while ago to the first article he posted, taking the claims on, but he hasn't responded. True, he could be busy and just hasn't had the chance yet. But it's been a while and he's made other posts since.

                      You too have given a good-faith effort to tackle the points made in the article, without resorting to any fallacies or juvenile behavior, and he hasn't responded to you, either--though you only posted it a little while ago, to be fair.

                      He isn't required to respond to anyone, but, if his complaints about people not reading his sources and arguing it on the merits were true, I'd think he'd respond when someone does just what he asked for.

                    2. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                      See, there we go. This is a study which has a specific question to test and a specific model used to address that question. It's not trying to answer every question associated with migration. So you bringing up these other points about what this study didn't do, is just a red herring.

                      A) from 2019 before the surge so you are assuming the growth is linear.

                      Proof you didn't read it. It didn't assume anything about any growth. This study was specifically about trying to assess the impact on an economy after a "migration surge", where a large number of migrants come at once.

                      B) it discusses output or revenues so doesn’t touch on the costs associated with the output.

                      More people come into the country, more food has to be produced.

                      These are both bad faith criticisms as I mentioned above. I predict that if I do try to find some study about the impact of migration on food output, you will just move on to the next red herring of "oh yeah? well what about water consumption or traffic congestion? what a terrible study!"

                    3. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      Yes jeff. That is my explicit issue. It tests a model. The model is built on assumptions. The assumptions drive the model. It is not based on hindsight data analysis. Just a handful of the assumption used are the ones I criticized.

                      Meanwhile you continue to use ad hominem attacks on actual hindsight analysis of known numbers.

                      As George Box states, all models are wrong, some are useful.

                      Economic models with bad assumptions will always produce the result the designer wants. That is again why I pointed to the correlation action and not the causation action.

                      Economost assumes there is a benefit so the models shows a benefit. The exact same as the use of the Keyes multiplier for Keeneland economics which has been thoroughly refuted in hindsight analysis time and time again.

                      Your evidence is bald. The evidence I present is repeatable and easily analyzed by anyone who cares.

                5. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  Here is another example:

                  https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2001/01/2001a_bpea_borjas.pdf

                  And it has the additional benefit of being from Borjas, the leading economist skeptical of immigration.

                  I argue that immigration greases the wheels of the labor market by injecting into the economy a group of persons who are very responsive to regional differences in economic opportunities.

                  The basic idea seems to be, that as a group immigrants are more mobile than native-born citizens, so they are more willing to move to where the economic opportunities are, and in so doing, they provide additional economic opportunities to those purchasing their services at a lower cost than they would have had to pay otherwise in a less efficient labor market.

                  1. R Mac   1 year ago

                    Will you cry if I point out this is over 20 years old? Maybe a few things have changed over that time?

                  2. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                    I appreciate you providing a second source for your arguments, but I just don't have time to read 66 pages now. I too am at work and read Reason and the comments in my down time, but there is no way I can get through 66 pages in my down time. Can you summarize the gist of it for me?

                    1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                      I did "summarize the gist of it" above.

                    2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

                      It’s 20 years old.

                    3. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                      It’s 20 years old.

                      And irrelevant to the discussion of the day.

                    4. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                      Let's say it's true, and there are workers needed for an industry in the midwest, for example. Sure, immigrants might be more willing to uproot to take those jobs. But why is there such a dearth of American-born people to fill those positions? Could it have anything to do with the welfare-state incentives not to be productive for native-born Americans? Why not fight to end the welfare state before making the country open-borders? And in this instance, I'm talking about the welfare state for Americans, without regard to whether the immigrants (both legal and illegal) are receiving welfare benefits at all.

                      When you factor in the generous benefits (housing and food allowances, etc.) that migrants get in some areas, like New York, this study saying they would be more likely to uproot and go to where the jobs are seems not to be true now at least. They will stay at the city that is giving them the most free stuff.

                      There is also the example of Tyson Foods advertising that they will hire thousands of illegal immigrants to replace the Americans they already have working there, since the pay would be $2 an hour less for the immigrants. That certainly will benefit Tyson and the immigrants hired, but isn't good for the American workers who would now be without a job. Yes, many of them will find other employment eventually, but it will certainly be a hardship for them. I see no reason why America needs to prioritize the wellbeing of non-Americans. This isn't an example of a company just not being able to find American workers so they are forced to hire immigrants--illegal or legal.

                      In my libertopia, we wouldn't have any welfare programs (you would be free to voluntarily help anyone in need you felt was worthy, though), property rights would be enforced, and a company would be able to hire anyone for any agreed upon salary. We don't live in my libertopia, though, so illegal immigration is becoming a huge problem for this country.

                    5. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                      But why is there such a dearth of American-born people to fill those positions? Could it have anything to do with the welfare-state incentives not to be productive for native-born Americans?

                      Sure, it could. It could also be because migrants, as relative newcomers, haven't established as deep social and family connections with a particular geographic area as most native-born citizens have, and are more willing to move.

                      Why not fight to end the welfare state before making the country open-borders?

                      Embrace the power of and.

                      (and, "open borders" is a misnomer; virtually no one supports literal "open borders", I do not anyway.)

                      They will stay at the city that is giving them the most free stuff.

                      IF you assume that they would rather get "free stuff" instead of working for themselves.

                      I see no reason why America needs to prioritize the wellbeing of non-Americans.

                      What do you mean precisely by "America" here? The government? Companies based in America? Individual American citizens? I think that the government should, #1, protect and defend the natural rights of *everyone*, not just citizens, and #2, make sure to enforce the civil rights associated with citizenship, such as voting or serving on a jury. If the government wants to give preference to citizens when it comes to hiring for government jobs, that's fine. But I don't think the government should be enforcing that preference onto every American business. It should be up to each business to decide how best to meet their labor needs. That after all is part of *their* natural right of association. If individuals want to try to persuade a particular business why it should hire only American workers, they are free to do so, that is a part of *their* right of speech and association.

                  3. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                    The basic idea seems to be, that as a group immigrants are more mobile than native-born citizens, so they are more willing to move to where the economic opportunities are, and in so doing, they provide additional economic opportunities to those purchasing their services at a lower cost than they would have had to pay otherwise in a less efficient labor market.

                    Which is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand about the cost of illegal immigrants and refugees.

                    Did you think nobody would realize that you were moving the goalposts?

                    1. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

                      Per the 2017 Community Survey > 40% of American adults reside in a state other than they were born in. Of course this data has some caveats, when used as a proxy for worker mobility (e.g. I was born in California because my Dad was stationed at Ft Ord, and my oldest son was born in Spokane but we resided in Coeur d'Alene at the time and none of my children were born in Montana but the younger two have spent more time in Montana than other states) but even with these caveats it seems the US population is willing to relocate. History also suggests this. My Mom's father family arrived as indentured servants in the early 18th century and seemed to be constantly moving west with each successive generation. My father was born in South Dakota (actually just across the Minnesota border) but his family moved to Idaho when he was 13 because my Grandpa found a better job.

                    2. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

                      And the story of my Maternal Grandfather's family is far from unique, especially among the Scots-Irish.

                    3. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

                      Also, at no point between 1801 and the closing of the American frontier, was the population of American settlers ever even close to half foreign born. In fact, the majority of immigrants tended to stay within short distances of the major urban areas they entered the country through the end of the second world war.

                      Furthermore, in 1940, fifty percent of the country resided on a farm or ranch. It's about 1% today. That's nearly a five thousand percent decrease in eighty years. That population obviously went somewhere.

                    4. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

                      One final point, even today, the vast majority of immigrants (legal or otherwise) remain in the state they first immigrated to. All of this suggest any study saying immigrants are more likely to move to areas outside the state they first immigrated to, than native born Americans is strongly suspect.

                    5. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                      soldiermedic76, my father was also stationed at Ft. Ord when I was young. From 1986-1989, I believe. Small world. My sisters and I didn't like it because it rarely got warm enough to go swimming--though it rarely got cold too.

                    6. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

                      My Dad was their 75-79. His brother in law, my uncle was there 89 until it closed.

                  4. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    So an opinion piece?

                  5. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                    He’s giggling because he made you dance like a monkey.

                    When you respond to his lies you are his dancing monkey.

                    You’re making an effort to refute someone who will never admit that you are right, will never admit to being wrong, will always repeat lies, will never admit to telling lies, and is looked up to by trolls who wish they could be master baiters like him.

                    Mute the fucker. Watch him squirm. Granted it will be less interesting not defending yourself from things you never said, but watching him desperately pile replies onto all of your posts in a plea for attention is funny is a stupid kind of way.

                    1. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

                      "Mute the fucker. Watch him squirm."

                      You actually believe this is how people react?

                    2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      It is how he reacts. With sarc it is always projection.

                    3. R Mac   1 year ago

                      Yeah, the only person I remember ever throwing a tantrum was sarc when Ken muted him.

                  6. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                    Dance monkey! Dance! Be Jesse's dancing monkey!

                    1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                      Sober up, dude.

                    2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      Number 1 on your list with a bullet =D

                    3. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                      Why are you dehumanizing him? I thought using dehumanizing language was dangerous. You constantly accuse Trump of that, so I figured you wouldn't continue to resort to that type of thing. I guess I'm wrong.

                6. Super Scary   1 year ago

                  "but everyone can read the exchange. "

                  It feels like some users on this site don't understand that. Also, that everyone can see what they posted yesterday (or the day before).

        2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

          No, that’s your fallacy of what others say. Stop twisting their words for your agenda.

          1. sarcasmic   1 year ago

            Unlike those of you with "Illegal Immigrant Hunting Permit" stickers on your trucks, I don't have an agenda.

            1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

              Ok, Strawcastic.

            2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

              “Bumper sticker”. LOL

            3. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

              Unlike those of you with “Illegal Immigrant Hunting Permit” stickers

              lol, okay

              1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                How it started: jeff and sarc accuse everyone of using fallacies.

                How it is going: sarc and Jeff use only fallacies.

              2. sarcasmic   1 year ago

                I see this sticker and other variations all the time.

                https://www.militariapress.com/product/RG1153.html

                1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

                  Yeah, for sale online, not on a bumper.

                2. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                  A quick search could not turn up a single image of this bumper sticker on a vehicle on the road.

                  I see this sticker and other variations all the time.

                  In your dreams, Buttercup.

                  Dissemble, deflect, distract.

                  1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

                    I kinda suspected that.

                  2. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                    Doesn't Sarc live in rural Maine? How many cars does he see on the road regularly? It seems rather dubious that he sees this bumper sticker on cars all the time. Small population means fewer cars X percentage of Maine drivers who are vehemently opposed to illegal immigration (I'm sure there are some, but this isn't a border town in TX) X percentage that are so fed up by it they will buy this bumper sticker and put it on their cars publicly so everyone knows how strongly they feel = likely a VERY small percentage. I call bullshit.

                    1. JesseAz   1 year ago

                      Most of sarcs personal anecdotes are utter bullshit.

                    2. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

                      I was just showing logically why it appears to be bullshit.

                3. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

                  Add this to the list of your fake anecdotes.

                4. R Mac   1 year ago

                  Honk honk!

            4. R Mac   1 year ago

              Clown show time. Honk honk sarc!

        3. JesseAz   1 year ago

          Look how quickly jeff and sarc resort to strawman arguments. Nobody is using the word all.

          Ironically both jeff and sarc also dismiss data and facts about aggregate coats with ad hominem attacks.

          But they will always go to strawman to accuse others with their own argument style.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

            Nobody is using the word all.

            You are right! Nobody is using the word "all"! It is just a huge coincidence that every anecdotal story about immigrants that you cite describes ones that are behaving badly, every set of statistics that you cite about immigrants show immigrants in a negative light. But you are right, nobody used the word "all".

            1. R Mac   1 year ago

              Lots of people have made positive comments about Elon Musk. Does that count?

              1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

                Don’t forget all the immigrant CEO’s. (Weren’t CEO’s the bad guys not too long ago?)

        4. Azathoth!!   1 year ago

          Some immigrants

          Not 'some'.

          ILLEGAL immgrants are bad.

          ALL of them. Because they came here ILLEGALLY

          Simple. Just like you two.

      4. JesseAz   1 year ago

        We have to ignore negative externalities of mass migration because your marxist sources said it was always net profit.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

          No no no. We have to ignore the positive benefits of mass migration because they don’t exist. All migration is negative.

          1. JesseAz   1 year ago

            When are you and sarc going to actually provide the data? Because all you’ve done for the last year is dismiss the actual data with ad hominem attacks.

            How many articles have I provided regarding their welfare use, benefit use, and costs? How many have you provided? Lol.

            This exactly proves you simply ignore costs.

          2. damikesc   1 year ago

            Explains why cities that get them beg it to stop.

            Because it is too beneficial for said cities.

            NYC has certainly THRIVED with mass illegals (not nearly as mass as border states, mind you). Denver? KILLING IT! LA? Certainly no problems there.

            1. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

              "Desantis and Abbott turned them into nazis with their political stunt"

              -Jeff

          3. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

            All immigrants are now CEO’s of major corporations.

            See? It’s easy to do.

          4. Red Rocks White Privilege   1 year ago

            No no no. We have to ignore the positive benefits of mass migration because they don’t exist. All migration is negative.

            Fatass piece of shit who said keeping child molesters from claiming asylum is “reducing their liberty” deflects from two child rapists who claimed asylum.

            Here’s an idea–how about taking these two monsters out back and beheading them?

            1. R Mac   1 year ago

              In case you missed it, yesterday he admitted he thinks minors can consent.

              1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

                And if not right away, then after a few weeks chained in a dark basement.

                1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

                  What, did he visit Pluggo’s house recently?

            2. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

              Migration includes both immigration and emigration by definition. In every single instance of mass migration in the US emigrants far surpassed immigrants in the migrant population. It's disingenuousness at its core to equate migration with immigration. Migration can be both a benefit and a detriment, depending upon the reason behind the migration, but, throughout US history, emigrants have always far surpassed immigrants in all major migration periods.

              1. markm23   1 year ago

                WTF do you mean by "emigrants far surpassed immigrants"? Do you even know what the words mean?

                If you mean that emigrants from the USA exceeded immigrants to the USA, you are a total idiot. If you mean from other countries, every one emigrated from one country and to another country (except those that died on the ship), so mathematically the numbers are almost equal. But we call them immigrants when they come here.

          5. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

            ""We have to ignore the positive benefits of mass migration because they don’t exist.""

            Positive or negative benefits be damned. Follow the law.

            I see lots of benefits from immigrants that followed the law.

            I don't know of any benefits from MASS migration. I am seeing my State and City governments hemorrhaging tax payer dollars faster than they can collect over the current mass migration. I do clearly see negatives as they are in my face and my pocket. How long will it take the current round of mass migrants to be a net positive with the billions being spent in this state alone? And NYS has a relatively low number of migrants compared to what has entered.

            Yeah, yeah. Sure, the budget issues are self inflicted by claiming to be a sanctuary city. I agree.

      5. Mike Parsons   1 year ago

        Well hold on, were they bad things? If a "child raising expert" came along and declared them to be good things, it would be ok, surely.

        1. JesseAz   1 year ago

          Jeff does love his appeal to authority even when the problems with those arguments are exposed. Because even when his chosen expert is wrong, they are actually right.

          1. Mike Parsons   1 year ago

            I mean if the expert says abusing the child is good and everyone agrees, it must be the right thing to do.

            Are YOU a PHD in parent-child bludgeoning and affection relations?!?! Dr. Jesse Rogan?!?!

            1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

              They came to a collective agreement.

        2. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

          such a silly argument. your argument presupposes that genuine, bona-fide experts will support any position on any topic, even ones that are demonstrably wrong.

          1. Mike Parsons   1 year ago

            chemically castrating a kid who is clearly delusional and cant consent to it doesn't meet this bar...weird

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

              The standard of care, written by the experts, which I directly copy and pasted for you, does not say that surgical or chemical gender transition therapy is permissible by getting the consent of the child ONLY. So this is a strawman. You have a habit of this - you mischaracterize what the actual experts are saying, and then you use your mischaracterization to trash the experts.

              1. Mike Parsons   1 year ago

                "by getting the consent of the child ONLY."

                This was never my accusation, nor the point at all.

                The point is the munchy parents, the delusional kid, and "the experts" all agree in this scenario, that we should castrate the kid and infuse them with cross-sex hormones that will irreparably harm them.

                The point is "everyone agrees" to the abuse, including the experts.

                Try and keep up.

                Ill ask you again, how far are we away from a democrat "pediatric sex expert" saying if the parents and child consent to sex, then who are we to stand in the way, and actually its a good thing. Why cant this be OK if we can castrate them. Will you be first in line to sign on to that expert?

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

                  But you're stealing a base by assuming it is abuse. It is no more "child abuse" than giving chemotherapy to a pediatric cancer patient.

                  You are just upset that the experts don't agree with your characterization of abuse. You want your policy choices ratified by experts, and when the experts disagree with your policy choices, you trash the experts instead of trying to re-examine why in good faith they disagree with you.

                  1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

                    It is no more “child abuse” than giving chemotherapy to a pediatric cancer patient.

                    Comparing lifesaving treatment to peddling psychological nonsense that a healthy body should be altered to conform to a delusion that one was "born in the wrong body". There is absolutely zero justification for the medical intervention of transgender treatments for a child.

                  2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                    European studies over the last month show:

                    Double the suicide attempts post surgery.
                    Same suicidal behaviors for those who do and don't transition.
                    Average time being monitored by a psychiatrist until some procedure or drug under 10 hours.
                    95% of kids claiming gender issues transition to normal adult hood without being confused.

                    1. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

                      Well yeah, but were these studies done by “experts”, smart guy, hmmm?

                  3. DesigNate   1 year ago

                    One of these things is not like the other. One of these things is not the same.

                2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

                  Jeff’s displays his idiotic ideas for all to see.
                  **puke**

                  1. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

                    Normal adolescent growth and development are exactly the same as cancer. /Jeffy

                    1. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

                      Well when you're sexual proclivities lean towards the pre-pubescent body...

                    2. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

                      That's why they're so enthusiastic about puberty blockers.

              2. JesseAz   1 year ago

                Are you saying WPATH are still experts no matter how many if their studies are shown to be wrong? While ignoring all other studies from non WPATH authors? Didnt see the WPATH files where even their members admit their evidence and procedures are false for the most part? They are activists.

              3. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

                Lol. Jeffy boy, there should be no such thing as an “expert” in child transitioning, you fucking moron.

      6. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

        Most immigrants are ok. It’s illegals that are the problem. Or were you disingenuously attempting to conflate the two?

    2. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

      Children should be raped and beaten only with the approval of parents and slave owners in consultation with teachers and health professionals. You're not a libertarian if you think the state should intervene. /Jeffy

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

        Children should be raised according to the wishes of their parents, except if the parents are left-wingers, then the parents are obviously unfit and suffering Munchausen syndrome or something, and so the moral titans of Ron DeSantis and Donald Trump should be telling them how to raise their kids.
        /most of you here

        1. R Mac   1 year ago

          Children should be raised according to the wishes of their parents, except if the parents want to do harm to their children.

          1. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

            Jeffy believes that poisoning children with puberty blockers and hormones and cutting their tits off is not harming them.

            1. R Mac   1 year ago

              Now he’s comparing it to cancer treatment above. Such a disingenuous cunt.

            2. Red Rocks White Privilege   1 year ago

              Which is particularly interesting considering the WPATH files show doctors admitting that putting kids on hormone blockers for too long increased their risk of cancer and other physiological harms. Doctors like that zealot on Matt Walsh's documentary claiming that taking puberty blockers is just like hitting a "pause button" are a big reason the "experts" have little credibility these days.

              Too many institutions have been fully captured to just blame this on munchie parents. A parent can still be responsible, get second and third opinions, do their own independent research, and never see the red flags because of the manufactured narratives, which are used to beat them over the head with appeals to authority--or even more maliciously, asking them "Do you want a dead son or an alive daughter?" to manipulate them into the preferred ideological choice.

              Doctors telling parents "Give us all this money to mutilate your kids or they will kill themselves" has been a significant driver of this social contagion, not just parents expecting to have smoke blown up their ass when they announce their kid is a genderspecial, and be told how stunning and brave they are for fucking their kids up in an unfixable way.

              1. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

                Any physician who does this to a kid should be executed.

              2. markm23   1 year ago

                Anyone saying, “Give us all this money to mutilate your kids or they will kill themselves” is being dishonest about the rather high chance that when the mutilated kids grow up, they’ll kill themselves.

                The end game of this is always to surgically remove their sex organs and build fake ones – and this is irreversible. They won’t be able to reproduce. They might be able to give a sex partner pleasure, but are likely to be unable to experience it themselves. They may have to take a cocktail of powerful hormones every day or their faked gender will unravel as some characteristics return to their genetic gender - but those hormones will reduce their life expectancy. If a trans person grows up and is deemed mentally and physically healthy enough, they may be able to adopt a new born, but they’ll never nurse it – either they never had the right organs, or they were cut off and discarded. Besides, if they could make milk, it would be toxic from the hormones they are taking.

                Adults who knowingly consented to this often find they made a mistake – but they have to live with it or kill themselves. What are the chances when the choice was made by a teenager to whom the warnings were just words? (Assuming they even received the warnings from a surgeon trying to sell them on the procedure.) When the mutilated kid grows up and kills himself, did the counselors and surgeon commit felony murder?

  13. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

    "check out this week's edition of Elizabeth Nolan Brown's newsletter, Sex & Tech."

    Sign me up!

    1. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

      What are her sandwhich recipes

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

        Don't order the tuna.

        1. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

          If it smells fishy, it isn't fresh.

  14. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

    Seeing as it's a wapost article behind a pay wall and the picture of the guy appears to be a high school graduation photo I am going to assume reason, and wapo is hiding if he shot at the cops, was high etc.

    1. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

      The ‘kid’ was 26. They’re Trayvoning this.

    2. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

      He fired multiple shots first and even wounded one of the cops before they returned fire.

  15. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

    On Truth Social, Trump urged lawmakers to "KILL FISA" because it had been used to spy on his campaign.

    That hot line to the Kremlin caught their attention, Donnie.

    1. damikesc   1 year ago

      It's amazing how ignorant you are.

      1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

        No, just dishonest. He knows otherwise.

      2. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

        Why do you think the FBI obtained a warrant? Because the Trump campaign was playing kissy-face with the Kremlin is the correct answer.

        1. damikesc   1 year ago

          There are times when it is better to be silent and let people assume you're an idiot rather than typing and removing all of that doubt.

          1. DesigNate   1 year ago

            He can’t help himself.

        2. Sevo   1 year ago

          turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
          turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.

        3. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

          Remember when Trump got caught on a hot mike, whispering to Medvedev that he would have more flexibility after the election?

          That was trump, right?

        4. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

          Why do you think the FBI obtained a warrant?

          The Durham report said political interference, which I know that you know, so why did you even try this argument?

          1. R Mac   1 year ago

            He’s a lying piece of shit.

        5. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

          Fucking hilarious, dude. Are you now trying to Babylon Bee yourself?

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

            He’s walking, talking satire in motion.

        6. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

          I would jump in on this, but you’ve already thoroughly humiliated yourself. You’re just too stupid to understand that.

        7. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

          You mean when one of the FIve Eyes countries setup George Papadopoulos by baiting him that the Russians had dirt on the Clintons in order to give pretext? When in reality it was a DNC lawyer buying unverified rumors from a Russian source via a former British agent?

    2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

      I guess we’re still probing the abyssal depths of your stupidity, ignorance, and retardity.

      1. R Mac   1 year ago

        To infinity and beyond!

        1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

          That’s from Pluggz Dimyear.

    3. Sevo   1 year ago

      turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
      If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
      turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.

    4. Ajsloss   1 year ago

      Just wondering how your “Don is a Putin puppet” theory works.

      Before Trump was president, Putin invaded Ukraine.
      While Trump was president, Putin did not invade Ukraine.
      After Trump was president, Putin invaded Ukraine again.

      So is Putin using Trump to control his own terrible impulses? Like when I set my alarm clock across the room to make sure that I have to get out of bed to turn it off, as opposed to just reaching over and hitting the snooze.

      1. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

        The primary enemy of the Russia/Syria/Iran axis is NATO.

        By weakening NATO and nuking up Iran Donnie was playing to Vlad's inside straight.

        Remember that the MAGA loyalty pyramid places Vlad at the top with Donnie nearby on his knees.

        1. damikesc   1 year ago

          Having NATO improve their military capabilities helps Russia...how?

        2. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

          Can you elucidate for us Trump's role in Putin's Ukraine invasion circa 2014?

        3. Red Rocks White Privilege   1 year ago

          The primary enemy of the Russia/Syria/Iran axis is NATO.

          Is that why your side constantly gives Iran the Danegeld?

          1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

            You don't understand, giving Iran billions in badly needed hard currency actually weakens it somehow.

        4. Sevo   1 year ago

          turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
          If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
          turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a TDS-addled lying pile of lefty shit.

        5. Super Scary   1 year ago

          "Remember that the MAGA loyalty pyramid "

          Are you referencing an actual image of some sort or are you just being your normal schizo self?

        6. JesseAz   1 year ago

          Trump weakened NATO by demanding the NATO members increase their defense spending?

        7. DesigNate   1 year ago

          You’ve said a lot of stupid shit over the years.

          This is one of them.

          1. JesseAz   1 year ago

            POST THE LIST!

            1. DesigNate   1 year ago

              LOL

          2. markm23   1 year ago

            What do you expect from a person who claims to be an anal appliance? When he says his head is up someone’s rear, believe him.

    5. R Mac   1 year ago

      Nobody buys your bullshit, pedo.

  16. Social Justice is neither   1 year ago

    For more on the fight over Section 702's reauthorization, check out this week's edition of Elizabeth Nolan Brown's newsletter,

    You mean the article where she fucking blames Republicans for the hold up? JFC you people are evil Leftist ideologues. If there was a scintilla of libertarian orientation to your thought you'd support the hold up not blast it as evidence of chaos in the Republican party and the hold outs being the fucking bad guys.

  17. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    Chicago cops fired 96 shots in 41 seconds and killed Dexter Reed, a black man, after pulling him over for failing to wear a seatbelt.

    It's Chicago so I reserve the right to assume everyone involved was at fault until the facts say otherwise.

    1. Moonrocks   1 year ago

      Forget it, Fist. It's Chicago.

    2. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

      We need to know the skin color of the cops before reaching any conclusions.

      1. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

        Haven’t you been paying attention?

        Skin color of cops = white, it’s white supremacy

        Skin color of cops = any other color, it’s also white supremacy

      2. n00bdragon   1 year ago

        One of the officers shot was black.

        1. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

          Not any more, he’s not.

  18. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    Waymo began offering driverless taxi rides in Los Angeles on Wednesday.

    If ever the taxi that responds to my hail is driverless it will also be riderless.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

      Sounds like the dream tech future. No humans required.

      1. Its_Not_Inevitable   1 year ago

        As long as a government subsidizes it, who needs riders?

        1. Longtobefree   1 year ago

          As long as the government can remotely lock the doors and deliver the rider to the re-education facility, it's all good.

  19. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    Georgia cops are still hassling vape stores over legal products like delta-8 and delta-10.

    Nowhere is it written that cops need to know the law.

    1. Dillinger   1 year ago

      1. everybody get home safe.
      2. see 1

  20. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    Americans are still not worried enough about the threat of global war.

    Meh.

  21. chemjeff radical individualist   1 year ago

    On Truth Social, Trump urged lawmakers to “KILL FISA” because it had been used to spy on his campaign.

    Now we know why Trump pushed tax cuts during his term - because HE wanted to pay less in taxes.

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      How is paying less taxes a bad thing?

      1. damikesc   1 year ago

        I'm trying to figure out his comparison here.

        A group committing a violation of his rights against him is, somehow, comparable to taxes...how?

        1. HorseConch   1 year ago

          That's a hell of a pile of stupid wedged into 2 sentences. I love Jeffy getting straight to the point on this retarded take.

      2. R Mac   1 year ago

        Everything Trump does is bad.

    2. Mike Parsons   1 year ago

      Something every libertarian should support

      Truly, the most libertarian prez of our times

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

        Since when was Jeffy a libertarian?

        1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

          Not being a libertarian is the only thing Jeff’s been honest about... or was that Tony?

          1. JesseAz   1 year ago

            Jeff is a socialist libertarian. He actually used that term. He also used libertarian globalist.

            1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

              Isn’t “libertarian globalist” kind of an oxymoron?

              1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

                Like libertarian fascist.

              2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

                No, just plain moron.

            2. EISTAU Gree-Vance   1 year ago

              He’s definitely no individualist.

              This, we know.

    3. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

      "Now we know why Trump pushed tax cuts during his term – because HE wanted to pay less in taxes."

      Oh no. How awful.

      1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

        I had to point out to Jeff the Chemist the other day that Trump is a fucking hero if Adam Smith is to be believed.

        He wrote in his Moral Sentiments the famous observation that he was to repeat later in The Wealth of Nations: that the self-seeking rich are often “led by an invisible hand…without knowing it, without intending it, [to] advance the interest of the society.”

    4. JesseAz   1 year ago

      Poor Jeff.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/14/business/economy/income-tax-cut.html

      And

      https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/584190-irs-data-prove-trump-tax-cuts-benefited-middle-working-class-americans-most/

      But keep pushing your false narratives buddy.

      1. R Mac   1 year ago

        I found out I was among the super rich when those tax cuts passed and my taxes went down!

        Unfortunately I didn’t buy a private jet before inflation hit.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

          So green of you.

          1. R Mac   1 year ago

            I’m the real hero here.

    5. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

      Pedo Jeffy, libertarian champion of tax hikes.

    6. DesigNate   1 year ago

      The horror.

  22. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

    BIDEN: "Elect me. I'm in the 20th Century."

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Dude is on top of his game.

      1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

        Remember how terrible Covfefe was? This is a small price to pay.

        1. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

          It was never about Covfefe. It was about the satisfaction of emoting hate. Covfefe was just a means to an end. These people have no issue with the mentally challenged being in the Whitehouse. But they do hate Trump.

          1. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

            Speaking of mentally unstable, it's quite possible both his stroke and his recent hospitalization reset something in Fetterman, he's starting to make a lot of sense.

    2. JesseAz   1 year ago

      One of the effects of dementia is thinking long term memories happened recently. So probably legit.

    3. Old Engineer   1 year ago

      That's why Biden supports 18th Century power sources. He should look up "Horse Latitudes".

    4. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

      Some days Biden thinks he is FDR. Then he comes to his senses, and just tells stories about how he advised FDR on policy.

      1. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

        Biden's birth year (1942) is closer to the Lincoln administration (1865) than to his own administration's (2021).

  23. Fist of Etiquette   1 year ago

    A government-enabled monopoly is responsible for the loss of 17,000 kidney transplants in the U.S. every year.

    WHERE'S MY GOVERNMENT KIDNEY?

  24. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

    Trump Media & Technology Group Corp. (DJT)
    Follow
    32.69
    -1.57

    Down over 50% since it began trading.

    Fair value = $1.25/sh

    1. Sevo   1 year ago

      turd, the TDS-addled ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
      If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
      turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit.

    2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Wild price swings have never happened to any other stock after an IPO.

      1. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

        When will it swing to the upside?

        Traded over $70 less than two weeks ago when it opened and has fallen daily since.

        With over 70% short interest it has to bounce soon (temporary of course)

        1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

          If I could predict the future, life would be grand.

        2. Sevo   1 year ago

          turd lies. That's not a surprise to anyone who reads his constant stream of bullshit.
          But it's becoming obvious that as Misek is too stupid to understand the concepts of "evidence" or "relevance", the concept of "honesty" is simply beyond turd's ken.

        3. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

          And if it rises next week like all IPO's do after an initial rise and subsequent fall? What will your narrative be then? How is this one's trajectory different from every IPO ever?

          1. n00bdragon   1 year ago

            It actually doesn’t matter what the “narrative” is. If anything Buttplug is overselling DJT’s value. The company is literally worthless. It has far more debt than assets. It has no realistic revenue stream and there is no imaginable universe where that revenue stream could ever expand to approach covering its costs, let alone servicing its debt. The most charitable possible evaluation of it is that it’s a vehicle to bilk unsophisticated investors out of money before leaving them holding the (worthless) bag. The conspiratorial evaluation is that it’s a way to launder foreign government money into Trump’s pocket as a way of peddling influence, but there’s no direct evidence of that. So take your pick. Is it a scam to rip off poor Americans or a way to sell out his own country to a foreign power?

  25. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

    Scottish Police Overwhelmed by 8,000 Reports of "Hate Crime" in First Week of New Law
    "Will Impact the Police Force's Ability to Deal With Actual Crimes"

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      It is a crime! Words and ideas are dangerous.

    2. Super Scary   1 year ago

      Now we get to see articles like “Hate Crime in Scotland Skyrockets! Up 3000% From Last Year!” Oh boy, I can’t wait.

    3. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

      What’s really funny here is that a large number of them were about First Minister Humza Yousef’s anti-white comments in a speech he made prior to the passage of the law.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

        But isn't a white guy criticizing a brown immigrant automatically "hate"?

      2. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

        A BBC reporter asked him about that and he handwaved it saying it was just the "far-right" doing it. That's a page right out of Justin Trudeau's playbook.

        Whenever he get's caught fucking up he says only the far-right thinks it's bad and then walks away like he gave a coherent answer. But it works.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

          It works at least with official state media, and their echo chamber audience.

  26. sarcasmic   1 year ago

    Of course, it’s worth noting that the last time Section 702 came up for reauthorization was in 2018—and Trump signed the bill to extend the spying authority without including any reforms.

    That’s because it hadn’t been used on him yet. He only opposes it because he’s not in power. Like everything else Trump gets right, it is only a result of the right thing accidentally aligning with his narcissistic personal interests. Because his opposition is personal, not principled, you can be certain that he will change his mind the moment he thinks it will benefit him personally. And his deranged supporters will swear we were always at war with Eastasia.

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      So now sarc is in favor of it because Trump isn’t.
      These are his principles.

    2. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

      "That’s because it hadn’t been used on him yet."

      I realize that this is mostly trolling, but the little fuckweasel is trying to pretend that in 2018 we were aware that the FBI had misused it 200,000+ times for everything from spying on a candidates campaign contributors to parents PO'd at schoolboards, that it was known in 2018 that in the future the FBI and DHS would use it as partial justification for censoring and spying on citizens in social media, and that back in 2018 we knew the FBI was illegally spying on the Democrats political opponents.

      1. sarcasmic   1 year ago

        You sure slayed that strawman.

        The only pretenders here are the Trump defenders who pretend he does things out of principle instead of pure self interest.

        1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

          Perhaps his interests align with the interests of many.

        2. JesseAz   1 year ago

          When did you settle on thinking saying Trump only accidentally does something as a valid defense?

          I get you excuse liberal bad acts as good intentions, is this just the opposite side so you can dismiss anything good he does?

          Talk about principles.

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

            But principles are white privilege and get in the way of social justice.

        3. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

          So as usual, Sarc is all in with the democrats to destroy our rights, and ready to make up any bullshit his little pickled brain can come up with to attack Trump. Sarc is a good little doggie for his democrat masters.

          I wonder if Sarc has put up a ‘Biden/Harris’ sign in front of his refrigerator box yet?

        4. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

          “he does things out of principle instead of pure self interest.”

          It can be both. Do principles clash with self-interest 100% of the time? No of course not.

          “You sure slayed that strawman.”

          It’s not strawman to accuse you of doing exactly what you were doing.

    3. JesseAz   1 year ago

      It was used on his 2016 campaign team you retarded fuck.

    4. HorseConch   1 year ago

      Of course he will use it to help him lock up his opposition just like last time he was the fucking president. Can someone put up a counter on all the political prisoners Biden has had to free after Trump locked them up, or is that only a 2nd term deal?

      1. sarcasmic   1 year ago

        Great takedown of an argument I didn't make. Bravo!

        1. R Mac   1 year ago

          Poor sarc.

  27. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

    Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee tells schoolkids that moon is a ‘planet’ and ‘made up mostly of gas

    1. Randy Sax   1 year ago

      “The sun is a mighty powerful heat, but it’s almost impossible to go near the sun. The moon is more manageable.” Fire hot. Yes Fry, fire indeed hot.

    2. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

      Does this tie into the sat article from earlier?

    3. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Gas? I thought it was made of cheese.

      1. Dillinger   1 year ago

        gas isn't made by cutting cheese?

    4. Mike Parsons   1 year ago

      Taking on Katanji Brown Jackson for lowest IQ affirmative action hire

      1. Randy Sax   1 year ago

        Oh, Sheila Jackson wins for sure. KBJ knows what a woman is and made the political choice to pretend not to know. Dumb choice, but she does know what one is. Sheila Jackson on the other hand, I'm genuinely concerned she didn't know what the moon is made up of until someone pointed it out to her. Kamala Harris I can't get a read on. Is she genuinely a dumfuq or just a horrible public speaker? Hard to say.

        1. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

          Kamala is dumb as fuck, she blew her way to the top

          1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

            And here I thought Kamala just sucked.

            1. Commenter_XY   1 year ago

              Nah, she went heels up.

            2. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

              She lezzed out for Willie Brown too.

      2. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

        Taking on Katanji Brown Jackson for lowest IQ affirmative action hire

        Uncle Clarence a candidate.

        1. Sevo   1 year ago

          turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
          turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.

        2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

          You just can’t help it, can you? You have this need to put your racism on display for all to clearly see.

          1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

            Got to be a favorite masturbation fetish.

            1. Dillinger   1 year ago

              is freakishly something ...

        3. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

          "Uncle Clarence a candidate."

          Starch that cone, Kleagle.

        4. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

          Pluggo showing off how much he hates black people. And considering that he’s a pedophile, it isn’t much of a stretch that he’s in the Klan. His socialist ideals are certainly in line with the Klan, and he already hates blacks.

    5. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

      She be an idiot.

      1. Sevo   1 year ago

        The TDS-addled turd lies. turd lies when he knows he’s lying. turd lies when we know he’s lying. turd lies when he knows that we know he’s lying.
        turd lies. turd is a lying pile of lefty shit and a pederast besides.

      2. Bertram Guilfoyle   1 year ago

        She's about even with your level of intelligence.

    6. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Jeff will be along to say that we are claiming that all representatives are stupid .

      1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

        Jeff will be along to say imply that we are claiming that all representatives blacks are stupid .

        Fixed it for you. Jeff the Chemist is a special kind of stupid.

        1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

          Yes, that’s better.

    7. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

      See how the terrible legacy of slavery still keeps black people down!

      or

      Thank god a heroic minority voice can challenge oppressive colonial white "science"!

      1. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

        Here's a question that was on Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader.
        It was a first grade science question.

        What is the closest star to the earth?

        I don't think she would get that one either. But to be fair, surprising a lot of people don't.

    8. markm23   1 year ago

      This was the top Democrat on the House Science Committee’s space subcommittee. Other Democrats selected her for that post!

  28. Moonrocks   1 year ago

    On Truth Social, Trump urged lawmakers to "KILL"

    When will this madman and his violent rhetoric be stopped?

    1. Sevo   1 year ago

      Did you hear what Trump SAID?!

      1. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

        Not even dog whistling anymore!

        1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

          Pure hate speech.

  29. Mike Parsons   1 year ago

    "Chicago cops fired 96 shots in 41 seconds and killed Dexter Reed, a black man, after pulling him over for failing to wear a seatbelt."
    ...
    how about...

    "after being pulled over, failing to follow any commands, refusing to put his hands where he was told, and then opening fire on and shooting one of the police officers"

    I was going to say cmon Liz you can do better, but should have known it was one of the lefty hacks

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

      Yeah, it’s Eric “I’m as disingenuous as Jeffy” Boehm.

    2. Super Scary   1 year ago

      "The pigs should have just shot the gun out of his hand!"
      -Someone on Reddit right now, probably

      1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

        “Just wait it out until he runs out of ammo”, then give him a warning “.

        1. Ajsloss   1 year ago

          Or call in the social workers!

      2. soldiermedic76   1 year ago

        Close, they are saying the response wasn’t proportional, there new favorite response since October 7th. It's like someone bought the left a word a day calendar but they keep forgetting to change the day.

    3. Michael Ejercito   1 year ago

      Even Chicago police officers have the right to defend themselves.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

        Let's not get crazy here.

  30. Sevo   1 year ago

    "UN climate chief presses for faster action, says humans have 2 years left 'to save the world'"
    [...]
    "OXFORD, England -- Humanity has only two years left “to save the world” by making dramatic changes in the way it spews heat-trapping emissions and it has even less time to act to get the finances behind such a massive shift, the head of the United Nations climate agency said..."
    https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/climate-chief-presses-faster-action-humans-2-years-109082284

    Just guessing but it's likely the 'finances' part of the comment are of prime importance.
    Oh, and this is the 2024 version of the claim, not the 1990 one or the 1995 one or the 2001 one or the...

    1. Rev Arthur L kuckland   1 year ago

      That thing also want all white people to die

    2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      It’s all about the Benjamins.

    3. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

      Two years huh? Might be a good time to sell that life insurance policy.

    4. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   1 year ago

      Thank God! In two years, they'll finally shut up and switch to something more existential, like hangnails.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

        Nah, this is like the jelly of the month club, where the same crap keeps showing up in your mailbox even after you trashed the previous 10 deliveries.

        1. Jefferson Paul   1 year ago

          Jelly of the Month Club: "It's the gift that keeps on giving, Clark."

    5. Diarrheality   1 year ago

      I'm curious how many times the world has to end before we can reasonably expect to get on with the rest of our lives.

  31. mad.casual   1 year ago

    In other words, Trump’s tariff would disrupt huge amounts of trade, make many products more expensive, and wouldn’t even help reduce the budget deficit. That’s a serious lose-lose-lose.

    I’m going to need someone to clarify for me, the libertarian precept behind the idea that our government making less money off of private trade with a communist dictatorship is a lose-lose-lose situation.

    Because it doesn’t make any sense unless, of course, you consider those fees owed to the government and are, yourself, conflating “managed trade” or “command trade” with actual people freely trading among themselves.

    I guess maybe I must just be one of those anti-progressive, anti-globalist cranks and not some actual libertarian.

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      According to sarc, we should be taking full advantage of stolen IP and slave labor by buying cheap shit from China.

      1. JesseAz   1 year ago

        To be fair. He thinks free market is unilateral disadvantaged trade. A one sided trade agreement.

        sarcasmic 1 week ago
        Flag Comment
        Mute User
        He knows that the “free” in free trade means the freedom to trade with people in other political jurisdictions without interference from yours. Even he isn’t that stupid. Which means he’s arguing in bad faith by trying to slip in false premises, like always.

      2. mad.casual   1 year ago

        If Trump passed a 60% tax on Chinese Communist protection rackets, Boehm would write an article about the lose-lose-lose of businesses losing Chinese protection, Communists losing income, and the US Government losing revenue on the transaction.

    2. JesseAz   1 year ago

      I can't figure out why Boehm and the other leftists masking themselves as libertarian, has such a laser like focus on this one topic while ignoring the US regulatory costs. The latter dwarfs tariff costs. But rarely a whimper. The entire reason China is cheaper is through theft and regulatory advantage. They have no novel technology. They do have slave labor. They steal and resell items from what they stole. Even this theft costs and domestic security costs dwarf the costs of tariffs.

      But there is this weird fucking belief that we should just accept these costs domestically and ignore it. Despite it being an acceptance of the violation of the NAP on consumers and domestic business. It is very much like the arguments for illegal immigration. Ignore all costs.

      It is dishonest economic analysis.

  32. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

    Chicago cops fired 96 shots in 41 seconds and killed Dexter Reed, a black man, after pulling him over for failing to wear a seatbelt.

    Fuck you Boehm. Fuck you for failing to note that the dead man fired shots before the police did. Fuck you for linking to a paywalled article. Fuck you for linking to that fucking lefty rag WaPo. If I think of anything else, I will get back to you on it.

    1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

      Keep it up and Boehm will put another BLM sticker on his Prius.

  33. Old Engineer   1 year ago

    Speaker Johnson flipped his position after viewing secret evidence and now supports section 702. Amazing what a photo of him with a dead hooker can do.

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Plausible.

    2. Dillinger   1 year ago

      pics whether it happened or not!

    3. R Mac   1 year ago

      Could be. Or it could be just “your wife is about to have a car accident”.

    4. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

      ""Speaker Johnson flipped his position after viewing secret evidence ""
      The secret evidence is a visit from someone who quickly explains who killed JFK and their willingness to do it again.

  34. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   1 year ago

    Who are you to decide what is enough?

    Americans are still not worried enough about the threat of global war.

    Oh, that's right, you're the "libertarian" who reluctantly and strategically voted for the least libertarian and most authoritarian candidate with the longest record of malfeasance.

    1. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

      We have always been at war with Eastasia and Eurasia.

  35. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

    OJ dead, Peanuts.

    1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

      I’m sorry to hear that the OJ you had went bad. Might want to put it in the refrigerator next time.

    2. Sevo   1 year ago

      turd, the ass-clown of the commentariat, lies; it’s all he ever does. turd is a kiddie diddler, and a pathological liar, entirely too stupid to remember which lies he posted even minutes ago, and also too stupid to understand we all know he’s a liar.
      If anything he posts isn’t a lie, it’s totally accidental.
      turd lies; it’s what he does. turd is an asshole and a lying pile of lefty shit.

    3. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

      How about you next?

  36. Randy Sax   1 year ago

    OJ just died.
    https://www.newsweek.com/oj-simpson-dead-family-reacts-1889411

    1. damikesc   1 year ago

      He will find the real killers in Hell.

      1. Ajsloss   1 year ago

        When my uncle retired, somebody asked him what he was going to do. "I dunno, help OJ find the real killers."

      2. Red Rocks White Privilege   1 year ago

        Shit, all he had to do was look in the mirror.

        "Well, it's official--murder is finally legal in the state of California."

      3. Old Engineer   1 year ago

        He'll be able to compare notes with Robert Blake.

    2. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Won’t be missed.

    3. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

      So Nordberg took one too many falls at the hands of Lieutenant Frank Drebin.

    4. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

      They should have encouraged him to end it himself during the Bronco chase.

      "Mr. Simpson. We know you killed your wife and Mr. Goldman. Please do us all a favor and end it now."

      Instead they talked him down. Cops just love to get all that publicity of a big bust.

    5. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

      I know I'm probably going to get my ass kicked for this, but I'm one of the few people who still thinks he was probably innocent. And yes, I have looked at available evidence.

      1. DesigNate   1 year ago

        My money was always on the oldest son.

        1. R Mac   1 year ago

          They actually talked about this on my local sports talk radio show today.

  37. sarcasmic   1 year ago

    Moment Donald Trump treats entire Chick-fil-A restaurant to milkshakes and chicken during surprise Atlanta visit

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13296585/Donald-Trump-ChickfilA-restaurant-Atlanta-campaign-trail.html

    1. Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2   1 year ago

      Good PR.

      PR is the only thing he does well.

      1. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

        Still one more thing than you do well.

        1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

          He fiddles with kids pretty darn well, and no Klansman's cape is whiter.

      2. Sevo   1 year ago

        turd lies. That's not a surprise to anyone who reads his constant stream of bullshit.
        But it's becoming obvious that as Misek is too stupid to understand the concepts of "evidence" or "relevance", the concept of "honesty" is simply beyond the asshole's ken.

    2. Super Scary   1 year ago

      That chubby old man sure loves his fast food.

      1. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

        At least Bill Clinton would jog to the McDonalds.

        1. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

          Yes he did…..

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYt0khR_ej0

  38. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

    FBI campaign: Entrapping autistic teenagers:
    https://headlineusa.com/teenager-ensnared-in-fbi-terror-sting/
    Entrapping Autistic Teens
    Mercurio’s arrest marked at least the fifth teenager arrested by the FBI over the last year in highly dubious terrorism stings.
    Last July, then-18-year-old Davin Meyer was arrested as he was about to board an international flight—also out of Denver—allegedly to travel to the Middle East and fight for ISIS. Meyer’s mother, who originally approached law enforcement out of concern for her son, said that the FBI entrapped the boy.
    Before Meyer was arrested in July, the FBI announced in June that it arrested 18-year-old Mateo Ventura for intending to support ISIS. However, Ventura’s father, has also accused the FBI of entrapping his son.
    Along with Meyer and Ventura, the FBI arrested a 17-year-old boy last August for supposedly plotting to carry out an ISIS-inspired terrorist attack on American soil.
    Most recently, the FBI arrested arrested a teenager in December who was supposedly on his way from Denver to fight for ISIS in the Middle East. But like the others, the details of that case show that the teenager, 18-year-old Humzah Mashkoor, was targeted online since he was 16 by at least four undercover FBI agents. And moreover, Mashkoor suffers from mental illness and has high-functioning autism, according to his family.

    1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

      Needs more descriptions of the “trap”.

      1. Dillinger   1 year ago

        ip address for autisticterrorists.com tracks to Flowers By Irene.

        1. mad.casual   1 year ago

          I'm beginning to think "Autism" is a bit of a euphemism for deplorables, wrongthinkers, and people averse to The Narrative.

          Autism advocacy group's ad on the radio: It's time to look past the label of Autism and see the person.
          Me: Someone named their kid Autism?

          I consider myself lucky to have grown up where and when I did, because we absolutely improvised some things and blew some things up when nobody was around entirely without FBI encouragement (AFAIK).

          1. Dillinger   1 year ago

            when tennis balls still came in steel cans we made little butane cannons from them. flaming tennis balls shot at each other on our NJ streets lol

            1. Don't look at me!   1 year ago

              Those were good times. Almost got killed.

              1. Dillinger   1 year ago

                buddy had a 30-pump Daisy & mine was my uncle's top-load Daisy from like 1962 the bb gun wars were fun even if I was less-armed

              2. mad.casual   1 year ago

                Yeah, we definitely used more than dry ice to make things go boom.

                Dry ice was one of my favorites because, occasionally, if you didn’t get the air/water/CO2 mix right it would freeze a water shell around the dry ice it and it could take 20-30 min. or more before it would detonate.

                Is it teetering on the edge of exploding, waiting for you to get near it and poke it to see if it’s about to go off? Or waiting for someone to forget that it’s there and then explode? Nefariously underdosed such that it’s waiting for you to unscrew the cap a little bit like a champagne bottle from Hell?

                Safest way to find out is to clear everyone away from it and shoot it!

                1. Dillinger   1 year ago

                  love it.

    2. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

      Why is there a need for the GestapoFBI? Couldn't the states do most of their job with the rest being taken up by the United States Marshals Service?

      1. Dillinger   1 year ago

        would accept necessity of x-files.

      2. markm23   1 year ago

        When the FBI was founded, it _only_ did investigation. They were not issued guns and did not have authority to arrest anyone or initiate violence. Once they figured out who to arrest, they had to go to the state and local cops, or the US Marshals - who originally seem to have been an arm of the courts rather than the executive branch.

    3. TrickyVic (old school)   1 year ago

      FBI entrapping people for terrorism has been going on for decades.

  39. Dillinger   1 year ago

    OJ dying is confusing because he killed 2 people but for 20 years of my life before that he was a giant

    1. mad.casual   1 year ago

      I'm going to lose sleep trying to figure out if I can sleep knowing Nicole's killers will never be caught.

      1. Dillinger   1 year ago

        Hertz Rental never recovered either.

      2. InsaneTrollLogic   1 year ago

        Don’t worry, Lt Frank Drebin is on the case now that Nordberg is out of the picture.

    2. Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)   1 year ago

      61 rushing TDs. 62 fumbles. He was a fumbler.

      1. Dillinger   1 year ago

        the '78 topps card confused me because he was a 49er & I didn't yet know players changed teams

  40. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

    'Terrible tariff: Trump's proposal to slap a 60 percent tariff on all imports from China would be a massive tax hike on Americans but could actually be a net negative for federal revenue too.'

    OK, libertarians, if (when?) we get in a shooting war with China, what is the proper trade policy?

    1. mad.casual   1 year ago

      Massive uranium deficit depleted or other. Uranium dispenser go ‘brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr’.

    2. MWAocdoc   1 year ago

      We won't need a trade policy ever again if we get into a shooting war with China. All we will need to do is to stand well off the coast of China and drop bombs on their military facilities all day long for a few weeks. Then we can suspend the bombing and see whether anyone shoots back. Repeat as necessary. The point is not about what kind of trade policy the U.S. should have - it's about why the hell our officials cannot resist the temptation to even HAVE a trade policy in the first place. Like Heinlein, I too wish the government would wander off somewhere and get lost.

      1. Longtobefree   1 year ago

        Just for the record, we ain't got that many bombs left.
        Also for the record, if we kill 80% of them, they can still fight back.

        (remember a place called Viet Nam? A campaign called Linebacker?)

        1. MWAocdoc   1 year ago

          My point was that we should not care whether they can fight back or not. They're not going to leave China to do it. And, for the record, we WOULD have enough bombs to keep them on the mainland indefinitely if we weren't subsidizing Ukraine and every other tinpot dictator in the world against "terrists" for the last two decades and probably the next decade as well. Vietnam is a perfect example of what the U.S. should never EVER do. And I am not advocating war with China now or ever. I was talking about it having nothing whatever to do with trade policy, just the hypothetical if China started a war with us. But if you will recall, Japan launched the surprise attack against our sitting ducks in Pearl Harbor because of FDR's "trade policy" of denying Japan access to oil supplies to fuel their war to conquer China. As long as we're "remembering" past American stupid mistakes.

          1. R Mac   1 year ago

            China's navy is now larger than ours.

    3. Graf Fuddington von Fuddrick   1 year ago

      Unrestricted trade with our enemies so Sarc can get an extra 3% off of some cheap crap.

      1. MWAocdoc   1 year ago

        I don’t know how China might have become YOUR enemy, but China is not MY enemy. Go sell it to someone more xenophobic and ignorant like yourself.

        1. R Mac   1 year ago

          Ok commie.

    4. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

      Meet our new United States Trade Representative, Milo Minderbinder.

  41. Dillinger   1 year ago

    >>The 19 Republicans who voted to sink the preliminary vote

    momentary heroes. the moment has passed.

  42. Earth-based Human Skeptic   1 year ago

    'The widespread use of eminent domain against private landowners is a little-known, dark chapter in the history of many of America's national parks.'

    Even worse were actions to "relocate" those unsightly indigenous people from some western parks, in order to create a more idealized "unspoiled" landscape for the elites to enjoy.

  43. Dillinger   1 year ago

    >>in 2018—and Trump signed the bill

    different congress.

  44. Gaear Grimsrud   1 year ago

    DOJ: Fani isn't prosecuting enough white people.
    https://twitter.com/ultradane/status/1777872609742627001

    1. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

      She's doing her best, Merrick. There's only so many white people there. At 42% black and another 20% other, you really have to hunt for them.

      Plus you have her busy attacking the political oppo.

  45. Dillinger   1 year ago

    >>Former President Donald Trump's latest attempt at postponing his Manhattan trial has failed.

    are you crowing or is that link about the injustice?

    1. R Mac   1 year ago

      You know the answer.

      1. Dillinger   1 year ago

        it's a little painful this place is this place now.

    2. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

      "are you crowing or is that link about the injustice?"

      It's the guy that told us that a vote for Biden was 'strategic'.

      1. Dillinger   1 year ago

        lol see below.

  46. Dillinger   1 year ago

    >>Americans are still not worried enough about the threat of global war.

    the strategic ironing is delicious.

  47. Dillinger   1 year ago

    >>Iran draws a red line:

    votes have consequences.

  48. Dillinger   1 year ago

    >>Eminent domain was used to evict over 2,000 people who refused to leave voluntarily.

    geez were they even Mattaponi?

    1. mad.casual   1 year ago

      Unless they slaughtered and took some 2,000 other Virginians hostage and people sat in traffic while chanting "From the River to the Sea" I can't be bothered to care.

  49. Dillinger   1 year ago

    >>A government-enabled monopoly is responsible for the loss of 17,000 kidney transplants in the U.S. every year.

    monopolies don't lose kidneys. people lose kidneys.

  50. Uncle Jay   1 year ago

    Search warrants are not necessary in communist and fascist states. The problem for me is the US becoming a fascist or a communist state?

    1. middlefinger   1 year ago

      Yes, every single day. Climate fascism
      https://time.com/6958606/climate-change-transition-capitalism/

    2. Mother's Lament   1 year ago

      "is the US becoming a fascist or a communist state?"

      It's the twenty-first century, transphobe. They can be both.

      1. markm23   1 year ago

        Fascism is simply mild communism. The government doesn’t shoot businessmen and confiscate their business, but it regulates so heavily that it’s making more business decisions than the owners – and if the executive branch wants something that Congress or the courts will balk at requiring, it gets the businessmen to cooperate with vague threats. “That’s a nice social media company you’ve got there, so cancel this disinformation* or else.”

        *Disinformation = probably true posts that the government does not want revealed. If they can prove something is false, they don’t bother censoring it.

    3. DesigNate   1 year ago

      We’ve been a fascist state going on 100 years now.

  51. MWAocdoc   1 year ago

    "Americans are still not worried enough about the threat of global war."

    Nope, you're a Cassandra AND a fool. There is nothing whatever that any of us can do to "mitigate" a large-scale war with China. We are already deep into the middle of the Global War on Everything with no end in sight. Our "leaders" instead of holding their fire and keeping our powder dry have been squandering our ammunition and skimping on necessary maintenance and replacement of our aging military technology so that we would be at reduced capacity in the case of a not unexpected emergency. The article linked above is just silly - tantamount to "be afraid ... be VERY afraid!"

  52. Kyle T   1 year ago

    Did you intentionally omit the fact that the driver in Chicago failed to follow police instructions and actually fired the first shots at the officers?

    Do you really want a repeat of the Summer of 2020 based on a fallacy perpetuated by poor reporting?

    1. Vernon Depner   1 year ago

      Yes, they probably do want that.

      1. Michael Ejercito   1 year ago

        Arte these the same people who claimed that the riot in the Capitol was caused by Trump promoting Badthink®™>

  53. Incunabulum   1 year ago

    >Chicago cops fired 96 shots in 41 seconds and killed Dexter Reed, a black man, after pulling him over for failing to wear a seatbelt.

    No, asshole - they shot him because he shot at them first. Shot at them a lot first. *Then* they returned fire.

  54. Liberty_Belle   1 year ago

    Wasn't the crux of this whether they stopped him for and was it legit, proper stop? Something about the claim that 5 tactical officers (whatever that means) surrounded his car for not wearing a seatbelt, but also then claimed he had heavy tinted windows that he refused to roll down. Which lead to the question of how could you see if he was wearing a seatbelt with heavy tinted rolled up windows or something. Then the lead started flying with him shooting 11 times and the cops shooting 100 times with one officer alone firing 50 rounds, including 3 rounds at the motionless body on the ground.

    The ACLU previously sued over the department’s so-called stop-and-frisk practices, leading to a settlement that contributed to a significant drop-off in the number of street stops in recent years.

    There were, however, unintended consequences. “What the CPD did was shift from pedestrian stops to mass traffic stops to basically get around both the stop-and-frisk settlement and the consent decree,” Block said.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Freedom Lovers Can Reckon with Addicts and Addiction

Daniel Akst | 6.15.2025 7:00 AM

Ross Douthat on Digital Alienation, Birth Rates, and Demographic Collapse

Liz Wolfe and Zach Weissmueller | From the July 2025 issue

More Than 1,800 'No Kings' Protests Aim for Nonviolent Pushback Against Trump Policies

Nancy Rommelmann | 6.14.2025 10:10 AM

Have Presidents Grown Too Powerful To Be Removed From Office?

Gene Healy | 6.14.2025 8:00 AM

Some Federal Agencies Are Actually Getting More Efficient

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 6.14.2025 7:00 AM

Recommended

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

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

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

r

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

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

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!