Did You Ask the FCC If You Can Make That Joke?
Plus: America's cocaine habit, how Charlie Kirk handled South Park, and more...

Jimmy Kimmel pulled off the air: Yesterday evening, ABC News (a subsidiary of Disney) announced it was suspending comedian Jimmy Kimmel's late-night show "indefinitely" following factually inaccurate comments he made about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
Of course, comedians have no obligation to be factually correct. Kimmel's show is intended as a hybrid between comedy and news, though, so it's fair to wonder whether he does. "The MAGA Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it," said Kimmel during his Monday night monologue. "In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving." A montage of President Donald Trump followed, making fun of how, though people have claimed Kirk was like a son to the president, he's moved on rather quickly.
It wasn't especially good or funny. It also was somewhat anodyne. To overly psychologize for a moment, I wonder whether Trump pivoted to talking about construction at the White House when reporters asked him about Kirk's death because he is, in fact, distraught about it but didn't feel up to going there. We can't know. Kimmel's shot felt cheap. But Kimmel is allowed to be bad—he's been bad for a while.
The Reason Roundup Newsletter by Liz Wolfe Liz and Reason help you make sense of the day's news every morning.
The issue is that Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair Brendan Carr suggested the agency might punish ABC, pulling its broadcast license in retribution. On conservative Benny Johnson's podcast, Carr suggested Kimmel's comments were part of a "concerted effort to lie to the American people," and that the FCC was "going to have remedies that we can look at."
"We can do this the easy way or the hard way," said Carr, ominously. "These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the F.C.C. ahead."
"Just before ABC's announcement, Nexstar Media Group said that its stations that are affiliated with ABC would pre-empt Kimmel's show 'for the foreseeable future beginning with tonight's show,'" reports CNBC. Nexstar, which owns 10 percent of ABC's affiliate stations, is in the process of securing FCC approval for a $6.2 billion merger with Tegna, which owns roughly 5 percent of the affiliate stations.
"Great News for America: The ratings challenged Jimmy Kimmel Show is CANCELLED," wrote the president on Truth Social. "Congratulations to ABC for finally having the courage to do what had to be done. Kimmel has ZERO talent, and worse ratings than even Colbert, if that's possible. That leaves Jimmy and Seth, two total losers, on Fake News NBC. Their ratings are also horrible. Do it NBC!!!"
Courage sure is an interesting word choice, given that Trump's own agency threatened them with consequences (though he's not wrong if we're solely judging him as a media critic).
"I don't think this is a legal issue," said former federal prosecutor Joseph Moreno on CNN. "I don't think this can be pointed to the FCC or the Trump administration and say, well, this is about them going after Kimmel because of what he said. Personally, I think it's more of a cultural issue. And I got to tell you. I'm about as moderate a Republican as you can get. I'm from New York. I have not been comfortable watching late-night television for 15 years because when you have conservative leanings and you're constantly mocked and you're constantly feel like you're doing something wrong, you shut it off. You don't watch it anymore."
Some people have made the point that the FCC might have given Disney/ABC cover to do something they already wanted to do, and do it in a way that makes the Trump administration look like the bad guys:
My theory is that Disney/ABC brass saw Kimmel pick a fight and say some false and inflammatory things. They could have pulled him aside and made him set things right but they intentionally did not do that because they wanted to get rid of him
— PoIiMath (@politicalmath) September 18, 2025
I also think this point is very fair, which is that this didn't start yesterday. If you haven't noticed the extraordinary media jawboning—indirect censorial pressure directed at private companies from the federal government—over the last few years, you haven't been paying much attention:
i'm turning over how i feel about ABC shitcanning kimmel under duress
i'm thinking that while of course it's first order bad, it's maybe a net good; this because it establishes pretty clearly for everyone and not just the right that regulated media firms answer to washington
— eigenrobot (@eigenrobot) September 18, 2025
"The government pressured ABC—and ABC caved," wrote Ari Cohn of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. "The timing of ABC's decision, on the heels of the FCC chairman's pledge to the network to 'do this the easy way or the hard way,' tells the whole story. Another media outlet withered under government pressure, ensuring that the administration will continue to extort and exact retribution on broadcasters and publishers who criticize it. We cannot be a country where late night talk show hosts serve at the pleasure of the president. But until institutions grow a backbone and learn to resist government pressure, that is the country we are."
Cohn makes a good point, both that this is the direct result of government coercion that is wrong and disturbing, and that these institutions should not be in the business of caving. It's disturbing to see massive law firms, media outlets, and organizations that should have some amount of fuck-you money choose the path of cowardice. But given that Disney has been interested in fighting the government before (albeit in a different context), the fact that they weren't willing to do so this time makes me think maybe Kimmel was already a goner.
Jawboning done so explicitly, so publicly, serves to intimidate other networks and generate compliance. But jawboning done by the Biden administration, during the COVID-19 pandemic (both to suppress public health information and to promote Democratic candidates and bury scandals), possibly disturbs me more, because it was covert, hard to uncover and to see the full extent of. I can't decide; both are horrible. No matter which party's in power, you get government coercion—you just get the privilege of deciding which flavor.
Scenes from New York: "A Long Island cop swindled a sick fellow officer out of $200,000 with claims of business investment—but instead blew the cash on OnlyFans, gambling and luxury living like a new car, prosecutors said," reports The New York Post. "Nassau County police officer Leonard Cagno, 39, allegedly duped his colleague out of the cash as he recovered from an unnamed serious illness then blew it all within two months, cops said Wednesday as he was slapped with a grand larceny charge."
QUICK HITS
- For a contrast in how comedy can be dealt with, consider Charlie Kirk's reaction to being parodied on South Park.
- The right-wing take on all this, from Lomez, which I don't agree is aspirational but I think identifies the problem and describes the MAGA mindset quite well:
"We are finally seeing the first real consequences of major institutions having spent the last decade undermining the facade of liberal neutrality they at least used to claim as an ideal. This facade actually mattered quite a lot, and even though it was obviously never entirely sincere and even though conservatives were always out numbered and often poorly represented, they at least felt like participants and stakeholders in these institutions. During the Trump years this all went away. Conservatives were aggressively ousted, even as token voices, and the facade came down to reveal a perverse and illiberal set of political and cultural directives underneath it that were explicitly antagonistic to more than half of the country and denied them as legitimate participants in public life. Despite this, MAGA won (again), and, surprise, surprise, do not intend on preserving the institutions that declared them illegitimate political actors. This is, in fact, MAGA's core promise."
- "An immigration judge in Louisiana has ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., deported to Syria or Algeria for failing to disclose certain information on his green card application, according to documents filed in federal court Wednesday by his lawyers," reports Politico. "Khalil's lawyers suggested in a filing that they intend to appeal the deportation order, but expressed concern that the appeal process will likely be swift and unfavorable."
- "America loves cocaine again," by The Wall Street Journal. "Cocaine sold in the U.S. is cheaper and as pure as ever for retail buyers. Consumption in the western U.S. has increased 154% since 2019 and is up 19% during the same period in the eastern part of the country, according to the drug-testing company Millennium Health. In contrast, fentanyl use in the U.S. began to drop in mid-2023 and has been declining since, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."
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.
Please
to post comments
Heeeeeeeere’s Jimmy!
Sinclair Broadcasting and Nextar Communications, each owning a number of ABC affiliates, pulled Jimmy Kimmel from their programming schedule compelling ABC to suspend the failing late night talk show host after Kimmel made a number of insensitive and inappropriate comments regarding the assassination of Charlie Kirk. Sinclair has a list of requirements before they would consider allowing Kimmel to return to the air on their stations, regardless of how ABC proceeds. These requirements include Kimmel apologizing to the Kirk family and making a meaningful personal donation to them as well as to Turning Point USA. Their statement reads like Austro-Hungary’s July Ultimatum.
Kimmel’s ratings dropped 11% last month to about 1.1 million viewers and ranked behind Stephan Colbert’s 2.8 million viewers and Jimmy Fallon’s 1.3 million viewers. Colbert is not being renewed due to reported $40M annual losses suggesting Kimmel, with not even half the viewers, might be also be done. Kimmel’s contract runs through May.
Sinclair intends to air a Charlie Kirk tribute this Friday in Kimmel’s old time slot making the program available to other ABC affiliates suggesting Kimmel sealed his fate earlier when he decided to display poor quality regarding the assassination of a man that debated. According to the Hindustan Times, Kimmel had incorrectly called the suspected assassin a member of Trump’s MAGA movement, a lie that some team blue members have attempted to push (in addition to “nobody knows,” false equivalence, boaf sidez, mischaracterizations of Kirk, and even open celebrations as well as one known megatard saying it was a false flag).
Note that congress did not give the affiliates permission to pull Kimmel from their stations.
Where is jimmies DuE pRoCeSs?
He didn’t walk back his Monday lie or other statements on the Tuesday episode though apparently was going to address his comments last night, but was taken off the air before filming that episode.
It’s like he never had a chance!
I have friends that still have absolutely no idea how popular Trump is. He's no all time favorite to most people, but more people agree with him than don't. Making your sole business strategy hating on Trump isn't a sound one. Fox News made money hating on Obama, but that was it. No network show would have survived doing it. As much as I disliked the guy, enough liked him that it would have been career suicide. Now we just pretend that Trump did this and not the idiots ignoring their audiences.
What has become clear to me after watching a number of different reactions (mostly on the right) is that the mainstream left has no concept of how deep and visceral the rage over this is on the right. Almost every right-leaning pundit, comedian, journalist, influencer, politician, etc. feels this as a personal attack on them - the culmination of constant disparagement and harassment that has been going on since at least 2008.
Meanwhile, mainstream democrat journalists and politicians are treating this as just politics as usual - another excuse to talk about gun control and remind people that President Trump says mean things. They seem to believe that republicans are 'just trying to score political points' because that is what they themselves usually do with any big event.
They are wrong. It isn't political posturing, it is pure, unadulterated anger. Conservatives are about 5 seconds away from storming the bastille and it is only the fact they are nominally in charge of the government that has kept it from happening already.
Firing a guy without having a full trial with jurors is a violation of Kimmel's constitutional rights.
Tony is making the argument that Trump was involved in the assassination:
MollyGodiva 18 hours ago
False flag. Kirk and Trump knew they needed an excuse to go after the liberals, so they arranged for the "assassination". Kirk willingly gave up his life to push the MAGA cause closer to fascism. A true believer.
From Robby’s article yesterday.
The nuttiest shit I've seen in the comments in a long time. And that's saying something.
She’s fucking insane and retarded. I think I’ve seen less insane shit from the retarded squirrel.
Tony in lipstick and a dress isn’t a girl.
"...isn't a girl."
Agree, but do we still need to be a biologist to make that determination?
The 'Molly" is because he takes it to enhance his gay orgies, and 'Godiva' is because he likes to parade around naked.
I assumed he likes to dip his dick in chocolate at said orgies.
Packs with the best of 'em.
I didn’t know Tony was a Green Bay fan.
He's a fudgie [but you already knew that].
It sounds like parody, but Tony is stupid enough to actually believe something like that.
He has a vested interest in ABCs money - 1st circuit
"Firing a guy without having a full trial with jurors is a violation of Kimmel's constitutional rights."
Holy shit! Stupid Moose-Mammary Necrophiliac doesn't even know that Cunts-Tits-Tuitional rights apply to GOVERNMENT ALMIGHTY actions and SNOT to the actions of private businesses!!! Wow, twat UDDER stupidity!
Yeah. Add sarcasm to the big list of shit Sqrlsy doesn't understand, folks.
Is shit ALSO "sarcasm" when YOU preach the Gospels of Jesus, and then urge "politically wrong" people to commit suicide? AND engage in identity theft? HOW am I supposed to know when Your PervFected (Butt Mind-Infected) evil and stupid shit is "sarcasm"?
Or is Your REAL stance, that Jesus was a Pervfected Servant, Serpent, and Slurp-Pants of the Evil One, and YE are just trying to follow twat YE PervFectly "see" ass "His Slut-Steps"? Jesus was a Pervfected Slut-Stepper, so THAT is twat YE must do and be, too?
PS, Your Most Fashionable Beliefs, Purse, Hairstyle, and WhoreStyle will SNOT save Ye from Karma! (The results of Your words and deeds)
I don't think I've ever preached once. I have however pointed out when you got the basic stuff that everyone knows wrong.
I mean like even kids and YouTube atheists know better.
Have You figured out yet, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? I am waiting with bated breath!
Also, how is Your Followershit building up? I mean, for Your “Expert Theologians for Worshitful Methods of Identity Theft”? Where do we subscribe to Your Newslutter?
Hear, hear, HEAR ye the self-righteous preachings of MammaryBahnFuhrer! (Imported below). She knows JUST the right “Popular-with-the-Cool-Kids-in-Her-Own-Mind” theology to espouse, along with wearing JUST the right purse, hairstyle, whorestyle, and other accessories! Meanwhile, in the EXACT same source, She engaged in identity theft! Her heart, in truth, is a ravening black hole of hypocrisy, greedy self-righteousness, and other evils!
Now, the preachings of The Great Mammary. Note that She picks the verses that say that the right BELIEFS and whorestyles get you “in” with the “in” crowd, and then you’re free to engage in ID theft, suicide-slutting, and other evils, at swill!
Mammary-style whorestyles - preachings below:
It amazes me how Americans living in a purportedly Christian culture don't even understand the basic tenets of its theology.
Pretty much the whole point of Christianity is that everyone has sinned and is worthy of damnation so God became a human and took our punishment for us. And the libertarian angle is, that you still have a choice to accept or reject the gift already given.
Ephesians 2:8-9 ESV: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Romans 6:23 ESV: For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
John 3:16-17 ESV: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
(End of Mammary-Necrophilia-Farter-Fuhrer-style preachings.)
We can pick and chose our Bible verses to justify ANY evils we WANT TO justify! And YOU equate "fashionable theology to justify ANY evil shit that I want to do" with Your fashionable hairstyle and whorestyle! Got the right fashionable BELIEFS, and so then The Queen can do WHATEVER She wants! Your BELIEFS will protect You from the consequences of Your evil actions? Do You not GET this, Oh Fashionable Queen of the Internet Cesspools?
Yawn.
You know, when you don't even know the very basics of the religion your culture has steeped in for the last 1600 years, you're a little more than retarded.
I mean this was basic Nicene Creed foundational stuff like the doctrines of the new covenant and Christ's atonement I was correcting you on. Not obscure philosophical minutia.
When Ye PervFectly think and stink that Yer Mind-Infected BELIEFS will protect you from secular karma, You're Pervfectly MORE than a WEE tad infected with the EVIL CRAP of the Evil One! THEOLOGY will SNOT protect YOU from Your word-turds and actions!
"By their fruits, you will know them", is something that Jesus said. DEEDS, not "Magic Beliefs"!
So Great Theologian... How about Your DEEDS? Like identity theft? Was it YOU who stole "Buttplug the First"'s ID, to post child porn under his ID? How can we know either way, for SURE (how can we believe any denials that You might make), when you steal IDs, and implicitly in doing so, deliberately LIE, for malicious purposes? Stealing another person's ID is something that I would NEVER do!
So tell me again about Your Superior Theology?
PS, You (Oh Queen) are apparently saying that it's OK to act HOWEVER YOU WANT, and get a "free pass" with Your Magic Beliefs, fashionable hairstyle and whorestyle, etc. IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY!!! Your Magic Beliefs DO NOT protect You from the consequences of Your evil choices!!! If You drink a gallon of whiskey every day, is God going to forgive You because You have Magic Beliefs? AND give You Your healthy liver back? Have You SHOWN this to be true? Or do You know ANYONE who has demonstrated this?
If You spit in the faces of ALL of Your friends, will You have any friends left? You're not married, are You? Is this perhaps the pay-back that You have earned by being a Perfectly Superior One, in the face of EVERYONE that You meet? Can you NOT see my basic point, that Your Magic Beliefs are ZERO protection from "karma", or, "what comes around, goes around"? "Karma" can even be applied to the body... Treat your body like shit, and it will NOT be very kind to you, in return!
Your words speak for themselves, death-loving necrophiliac! Your “Christianity” is ALL about hate, self-righteousness, and lusting after DEATH for anyone who disagrees with Pervfect You! And Your “Christianity” has NOTHING to do with treating others as You’d like to be treated! How can You NAZI this, Oh Pervfect One?
That last question kinda answers itself, if you understand evil. You can’t see Your Own Perfect Evil, because… Part of Your Own Perfect Evil is that You DO believe that You Are Pervfect!
Hello, WAKE UP!!!!
Spam flag.
Lol, so dumb.
Puke, so evil!
HAHA, so retarded.
Perhaps Kimmel can get judge Boasberg to rule that Sinclair has to put him back on the air in perpetuity.
I'd feel bad for Jimmy...but I don't think Charlie got a heck of a lot of due process.
I am baffled that Reason is in opposition that private entities decided that they do not wish to broadcast a program. Free market and all, right?
Timing matters. And of course which team is getting the shaft.
"Free market and all, right?"
Ha! Double-ha! READ the stinkin' article and SEE that this is with THE heavy hand of Government Almighty! Butt... Sore-in-the-cunt cuntsorevaturds can ONLY see THE heavy hand of Government Almighty when shit is AGAINST them and Their Sacred Team!
You must be on the reason payroll? Who would spend time dreaming up, and typing out this bullshit without getting paid?
Wait SQrLSY, is this where we say "Show me who went to jail from the government. Where is the network that lost its license? The government isn't censoring here!"?
Isn't that the logic you used when Biden's jawboning was leading to conservative voices being deplatformed?
Private companies that happen to own the most and 2nd-most ABC affiliates decided the show wasn't worth airing, and they would rather show Sham-wow infomercial reruns. That's why he got pulled.
The Shamwow is great to have on a boat. Just don’t drop it overboard!
Can it block narco seeking missiles? Asking for a friend.
With your guns?
Or feed it after midnight.
Here is Jimmy making fun of Tucker getting fired.
https://x.com/mazemoore/status/1968502145788809291
This is reason covering Tucker leaving fox. No cries of government involvement. He was much more profitable than Jimmy.
https://reason.com/2023/04/24/tucker-carlson-fox-news-cnn-don-lemon-fired/
Kinmel’s current situation are the consequences of his decision to lie and not read the room regarding the affiliates.
Kimmel’s always been more than a bit obtuse and unable to read a room. It’s a wonder he’s lasted this long.
He’s always forced to suck up to the extreme left because the stuff he was doing in the 90s, when he was kinda relevant, could always get him cancelled. He has to be a loyal soldier to be worth keeping around.
And that worked out well....
Some idiots are less useful than others.
The thing about Tucker is that he was fired, not for anything he actually did, but what he represented. People try and tie Tucker to Fox settling when they were sued for saying something that actually happened, happened. But Tucker had criticized the others position and did the opposite of advocate for it, so that was just another Democrat narrative lie.
With Kimmel he deliberately and knowingly lied in an attempt to smear a dead man.
Yeah. And I don’t get Liz’s take on this. He wasn’t doing comedy. This wasn’t part of a joke. He was just lecturing people and making up a false narrative.
And this is what late night has become. The hosts say stuff to get applause instead of just finding funny things to say. I think there’s room for some amount of edgy humor even about the recently deceased, but you need to be actively joking. Just lying because it makes your audience happy to delude themselves isn’t comedy.
Kirk was the puppy and the right is John Wick. The left doesn’t get thus and keeps trying to mischaracterize, gaslight, boaf sidez, and even lie about the situation.
Exactly this. Just because you're unfunny doesn't make everything you said a joke.
Kimmel very seriously telling his extremely gullible viewers that the murderer was a known right-wing guy. This is beyond disproven, which means he was actively lying and spreading the dreaded misinformation. I know how much his kind fears misinformation, so I'm sure he'll take comfort in the threat of his lies being removed from the air.
Oh noes, not poor little Jimmy Himmel.
Maybe he'll go back and try to relive his "Man Show" glory days. Or, he'll go back home like a good little cuck, and let his wife peg him until he stops crying.
The Man Show was the only thing he ever did that was funny.
I think Adam Carolla had more to do with that.
Carolla was always way funnier.
I think Kimmel and Carolla are Lennon and McCartney. Working together their combined output is funnier than when they work separately.
Great skit. Boy selling beer. Introducing the original Karen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsmKFaBZXts
I remember the bit where he tried to get women to sign the petition to fight women’s suffrage.
They've been suffraging for far too long.
They've probably been trying to figure out how to shitcan him for months and the idiot and his writers gave them the perfect excuse. His ratings are worse than Colbert's, and he isn't anything other than an in-kind contributor for the DNC at this point. He literally brings nothing else to the table.
As I said when Colbert didn't get his contract renewed, late night talk is just one dying branch of a legacy media rotting throughout the whole trunk. Their ratings suck, they're losing advertising, their YouTube clips get the same numbers as guys like Reviewbrah who have a fraction of the subscribers, they've alienated half the country, and young people aren't tuning in. The only people who still watch it all consistently are Boomers. Even Gen-X has tuned them out.
In about a decade, network TV and talk radio will go the way of video rental stores.
He had to know it was coming either way. This makes him a martyr to the left and more likely to get a gig with one of the other leftist orgs.
this actually makes sense that he knew and needed a way to go out instead of admitting his act was drying up.
I don't think so. He's been acting like a spastic for years and clearly thought his contract made him untouchable. Colbert was done because his contract was going to be up, same as Stern.
Maybe he can become a guest columnist for Vox, Mother Jones, or Rolling Stone. They all like washed up, irrelevant far left kooks
"They've probably been trying to figure out how to shitcan him for months "
Its 100% this. Colbert was the writing on the wall, and same playbook. Thing happens with Trump/the-right, network sees it as an opportunity to cut the dead weight for good while also appearing like they were jawboned by an evil trump admin, its win win. They get to go on pretending to be resistance crusaders, and save a cool hundred mil while they are at it.
Late night has been an extension of CNN/MSNBC at this point since Obama. Its just propaganda
I'd love to see that in my lifetime [not all "boomers" are schmucks for the D Party]
Jimmy Kimmel pulled off the air...
They didn't do it clean. It needed to be clean.
ENB will have an article on how to properly pull a jimmy.
It was inevitable that he was going to be canceled. Now he's a shoo-in for next year's Emmy.
And the Emmy for the most progressive show cancelled due to low ratings and/or affiliates goes to….
Now THAT'S an award I can get behind; call it the Ben Dover award.
Ahem. That would be the Emmy for The Most Important Show Cancelled by MAGA. The award show tears are more delicious.
If you actually pull on it - you are doing it wrong. Same goes for tugging a jimmy - no actual tugging please.
The proper way a woman can give a handjob to her man is to use her mouth.
Thanks — that made me laugh.
I watched 10 minutes of his monologue, including the parts people are quoting and mad about.
I didn't laugh, but I didn't see anything that was *wrong*. He made fun of:
MAGA quickly and desperately spinning political motives for the shooter: True
Trump talking nonsensically about a new ballroom: true
Fox spoon feeding Trump the answers to their questions: true
Trump failing to hit the softball, and instead rambling about election conspiracy theories: true
What part of Jimmy's monologue was false?
"The MAGA Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it"
What part of Jimmy's monologue was false?
That it was delivered by a comedian.
Do I have to think of everything here, people?
So youre one of the 40% of democrat retards who thinks political affiliation is genetic. Noted.
Kimmel's show is intended as a hybrid between comedy and news...
Turns out it was neither.
If Jimmy Kimmel had a show and no viewers were around to laugh at it, is it still a comedy?
Lol. The sad devolution of the 'Man Show' Kimmel to today's Kimmel
iswas difficult to watch.That said, getting yanked off the air for nothing more than being stupid is the Lefty equivalent of COVID-era panic, canceling and lockdowns.
Dear MAGA: the jawboning you luxuriate in now IS going to backfire at some point, and not even necessarily when the Left inevitably regains power again. So enjoy it while you can, I guess.
Dear Dumbass Dude, don't start fights you can't win, and then complain when the people fight back.
The guy peaked with Girls Jumping on Trampolines, then did a nosedive after he started sticking his dick in Sarah Silverman.
To be frank, Kimmel did The Man Show with more than a little help from the much funnier Adam Carolla.
the Left already canceled several actors and media personalities. and nobody cried "their first amendment"
this is the payback
Backfire how? You fags already spent years doing this to actual Americans (non democrats) for nothing. This is like you threatening us with a gun after you already emptied the clip. Your kind have nowhere to go but an escalation of your violent rebellion. I’m which case you will be exterminated.
So feel free to go nuts.
"That said, getting yanked off the air for nothing more than being stupid"
He purposefully lied about dead man in order to smear him. That's more than being stupid. That's libel.
To sarcles, facts can change and so can feelings. If he was feeling it was truthful when he lied, then totes ok.
I think that's more Tony/Molly [Tollie?]; Sarc is mostly just drunk and posting while inebriated.
Dear MAGA: the jawboning you luxuriate in now IS going to backfire at some point
This would be funny if Kimmel getting canceled wasn't the actual backfire.
Dear MAGA: the jawboning you luxuriate in now IS going to backfire at some point,
Uh, this is the backfire.
Hannah Gatsby has viewers. She still isnt comedy.
Had to look her up. She appears to be an angry lesbian wokescold.
Glad I could share the cringe.
I just looked her up and good Lord, that mug is enough to give you nightmares. Woke-scold indeed. Same level as that crazy bitch you don't hear about anymore [Lena Dunham].
Girls on trampolines was his peak, which was also neither.
The Man Show was, great. Carolla, Rogan, Stanhope and yes even Jimmy for the win on that.
I think I saw every episode. My wife still bitches about it.
Like Stern, did Kimmel morph into a woke scold simply because he aged, or was it a persona affected as a survival instinct in the liberal world he began to inhabit? And if it's the latter, did he adopt the attitudes in earnest because of the animosity he gave and got from his former world? It would all be so fascinating if the two personalities weren't so fucking banal.
They're different creatures. Stern has a massive insecurity complex and was always desperate to be a part of the Hamptons crowd.
Kimmel went downhill after Sarah Silverman gave him political syphilis.
She really is a miserable, nasty cunt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xsaMcw69D8
"Political syphilis."
This is the kind of gem, in spite of the bots, trolls, and provocateurs, that makes the comments section worthwhile.
Well done.
My guess is leverage, explains why he didn't get canceled for Karl Malone.
https://youtu.be/mcSFXGW1w_E?si=18Y0O1s1qvnAO5ki
Stern was never really funny and always kind of an asshole. Mancow Mueller was always better in the Chicago market.
Kimmel always struck me like the sidekick who couldn’t do squat. Trying desperately to be funny, but always failing and flailing.
I forgot about the Silverman thing until RRWP mentioned it above. Either way, this intellectual exercise has probably run its course for me.
"Stern was never really funny"
All of Stern's popularity was with frat bros getting their cheapies watching him be a cunt to other people.
I think you're misled by your class status here. The most loyal Stern listeners were working class, not college guys.
Shock jocks are rarely funny. They thrive on a style of humor based on, "Oh my god, what will he do next?!!"
And then, since they can perform late term abortions [equivalent or literal] on the air, they run out of next.
Jimmy had outright insulting blackface performances as Karl Malone. He was the single most cancellable of the late night hosts, so he decided to suck the cock of the Left to protect himself.
If he was conservative, he would've been fired years ago.
Remember Harvey Weinstein defended himself by claiming he would dedicate his time, effort and resources to defeating Republicans. He did that because in all previous instances it worked. Non-leftists may have wondered why he would bring up such a non-sequitur, but left wingers didn't.
The MAGA Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it...
Are his writers so in a bubble, or do they think their audience is, or - NEW CONSPIRACY INCOMING - did they do it all to give FCC dumbass an excuse which then gave the show a way to go out while saving progressive face?
It wasn’t the FCC, it was the major affiliates. The FCC is a red herring.
Regardless, he gave the appearance. The correct response would have been, "Jimmy who?"
Yes, this is really the first time I have heard it it suggested that Kimmel was put on hiatus as a direct response to the FCC.
The FCC weighed in after the affiliates made their decision. I don’t like the FCC having done that, but it was a non-factor. Per CNN, Newsweek, Variety, Hindustan Times, and Agenda Free TV. The sources used for the first comment.
I’ll also agree I didn’t like the FCC guys comments, just for the record to preempt sarc’s bullshit when he recovers later this morning.
Once Sarckles finds a narrative he clings to it like a drowning man. Nothing can make him let go.
Not even the truth... especially not the truth.
Well, not YOUR truth.
I know, but I’ll have a chuckle copy and pasting my comment in response to him.
Bet a dollar that sarc drops a “Dems did it first” take whenever he sobers up enough to post.
This. Most major affiliates of ABC pulled Jimmy's show before Carr made his statement.
The amazing power of confirmation bias.
Indeed.
- NEW CONSPIRACY INCOMING - Fish use gills to breath oxygen underwater.
Regular Conspiracy Theory: These people rode the Biden horse until it literally dropped, then they jumped to the Kamala horse. Harassing normal people to get a response and crying victim is what these people have been doing for over 30 yrs. It's not a bubble, it's the pocket dimension that they've lived in for more than a generation at this point.
I truly believe WITHOUT EVIDENCE that once the USAID money dried up so did a lot of the unprofitables' profits.
Why do you hate unfree enterprise?
I had a friend that last night said Kimmel sucks good riddance. When X told him to blame Trump today, he goes on a 50 message tirade about Jimmy being oppressed. When the uncomfortable truth of the show bleeding money came up, he said not all things are about business. I guess Kimmel should just lose as much as he wants to spew dishonest bullshit that nobody watches.
Same for Colbert.
The timing of all this is pretty remarkable.
Especially for those of us that recognized how important it was at the time, while Reason et al poo poo’d it because it was such a small percentage of federal spending.
Like I said before, the USAID money was the core of the operations, because it went went into the hundreds of millions and even billions, which was then used to coordinate additional fundraising. The lefty billionaires money was simply a backstop for all of it.
Gaslighting us with our own tax money.
"The lefty billionaires money was simply a backstop for all of it."
I always imagined a rich guy like Soros was spending his innumerable billions on destroying the West, but it turned out he was spending his victims money.
Remember good old days when orphans in salt mines was the height of billionaire villainy?
LBJ go away and take your federal broadcasting licenses with you!
Kimmel would still be gone anyway as the two biggest ABC affiliates want him gone. He sucks, has sucked, and will continue to suck if kept as host.
Sure, but I'm also for getting rid of the FCC.
Uh huh. And this had nothing to do with the massive losses Kimmel generated for the network.
So your upset that I don't want a federal broadcast license? Please go ahead and make your case for the FCC.
Pull your head out of your ass and recognize reality Liz, you (well, media in general) keep demanding conservatives play by a feel good fantasy and minimizing or excusing Leftist attacks is exactly what got us to this place. You feeling good about a lie you want to be true is not worth my life or the future of my country. You're not offering solutions beyond "die quietly bigot" and that's just not acceptable.
+
But jawboning done by the Biden administration, during the COVID-19 pandemic (both to suppress public health information and to promote Democratic candidates and bury scandals), possibly disturbs me more, because it was covert, hard to uncover and to see the full extent of.
The oafishness of the Trump administration is a level of transparency we did not have with the somewhat less clumsy Biden handlers and is therefore a virtue of sorts. I reluctantly agree.
There is no evidence that the Biden administration _threatened_ social media companies. It _pressured_ those companies through appointed people that the companies voluntarily worked with, which makes me uncomfortable because it walks close to the censorship line.
But the Trump admin requiring firms to censor their speech to get a merger approved or to not get broadcast licenses pulled is an out-in-the-open mafia tactic designed to intimidate companies into suppressing 1A-protected speech.
Two things can be bad.
EDIT: And while I believe both things to be true, is there any more evidence that the Trump admin pressured anyone than did the Biden regime?
There's strong evidence that both pressured companies. We have emails that Biden admin said saying things like "we expect you to take this down". That's wrong.
We also have evidence that Trump admin would sic FCC on companies that wouldn't "voluntarily" censor. And he sued multiple media outlets for political speech. That's even wronger.
HAHA
"Wronger"
So you're defining pressure as having no threat - implied or stated - behind it.
There is no evidence that the Biden administration _threatened_ social media companies
Flat out lies. Zuck even confirmed he was pressured by the Brandon admin
Remember, left wing censorship is speech. Right wing censorship is a Nazi Holocaust.
LOL, that's exactly what I said: _pressured_ through angry emails, not _threatened_ like Trump admin is doing. And it's wrong either way but the mafia shakedown is way wronger
HAHA
And the banks asked nicely to consider if certain clients was just pressure.
Youre a fucking idiot shrike.
Here is Biden
https://www.cnet.com/videos/biden-calls-out-facebook-hubble-up-and-running/
Here are the threats.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/23/technology-202-researchers-warn-misinformation-facebook-threatens-undermine-biden-climate-agenda/
Under Biden the government literally funded censorship groups fucking retard.
They literally used these groups to go after advertisers.
And let's not forget Biden's Ministry of Truth.
#1 is about Biden calling out Facebook. Which is his 1A right. Again, pressured, not threatened.
#2: LOL did you just google "biden threat" and post whatever matched? That Wapo article is about researchers worrying about misinfo on Facebook, not Biden threatening Facebook. You can't even read the articles you post? Why do you waste my time on this crap?
The whole article is the threat you fucking retard.
"LOL, that's exactly what I said: _pressured_ through angry emails, not _threatened_ like Trump admin is doing."
Except that is a lie. They actually assigned people to each company to tell them what they wanted off, and every time they refused they threatened them.
At this point, their only defense is to lie.
Lucky for them they do it so naturally.
Threatened them *how*? This was a voluntary program companies ran to work with the White House and they could have told Biden to fuck off. And they probably should have.
Voluntary, Kung Fu Shrike? It was about as voluntary as taxes.
"Threatened them *how*?"
IN-THE-FUCKING-TWITTER-FILES-THERE-ARE-EMAILS-FROM-MEMBERS-OF-THE-WHITE-HOUSE-STAFF-DEMAMDING-COMPLIANCE.
As there are equivalent emails from the FBI. There are also emails going back from Twitter to the White House and the FBI, saying their lawyers think this is a bad idea and they don't want to do it, but they will.
In addition, and outside of Twitter, Zuckerberg says he was pressured by them to remove posts on certain subjects.
But you know this, Pluggo. You're a fucking Nazi for trying to minimize this shit.
He’s a pathological liar and pedophile. He knows he is always wrong. He’s here for supply.
"voluntary program"
shrike truly is the dumbest of dumbfucks.
This was a voluntary program companies ran to work with the White House and they could have told Biden to fuck off.
Just like media could have told The trump FCC to fuck off. As usual left wingers are lying to minimize the left's culpability. It's what they do.
Two wrongers don't make a righter.
pres·sure
/ˈpreSHər/
verb
past tense: pressured; past participle: pressured
attempt to persuade or coerce (someone) into doing something.
co·erce
/kōˈərs/
verb
persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.
He's arguing that "pressure" is not a threat.
Like how a gun-wielding dude "pressures" you for your money. He did not threaten, obviously.
Shrike is jealous of and trying to catch up to Molly's take from yesterday. Need to try harder to be most retarded buddy.
Tony hit megatard status with that one.
Sarc even seemed to have a moment of self realization. But I'm sure he drank that worry away. After he tried defending Tony of course.
Yup. It was like when Psaki had to attempt to answer a question about Biden and would first sigh before responding.
Molly (Tony) managed to steal the crown of Dumbest Commenter here from Shrike, and Shrike has a shitload of work to do to get it back. I kind of admire Molly for being able to take that crown with just a few very, extremely retarded comments yesterday. That shows real skill and talent. Absolute dedication to the craft of being totally retarded.
I don't know, Darth Biden was pretty transparent and just as oafish.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/show/biden-accuses-trump-and-his-supporters-of-undermining-the-nations-democratic-values
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nina_Jankowicz
The oafishness of the Trump administration is a level of transparency we did not have with the somewhat less clumsy Biden handlers and is therefore a virtue of sorts.
I think I disagree. Back in the Biden era we had daily complaints here that "they" do it openly because they don't even care enough about us to hide it. I think that was generally correct, but it was just a start.
I get what you're saying about the transparency of a lot of the partisan Trump moves, but I think it would only be beneficial if we used that as fodder to oppose the coercion rather than the "they deserve it" attitude. This government overreach ratchet goes one way and will come back to bite those who wield it now and the rest of us peons.
Perhaps it wasn't finesse by the Biden handlers then so much as cover given by all our cherished institutions.
Thank god for all those Ivy League humanities grads.
Fair enough.
It wasn't just jawboning.
Even being generous; they're literally comparing a/the street-level "It sure would be a shame if something were to happen to your business" extortion scheme with the "All the money that's been embezzled is laundered through a dozen or more fronts and fake corporations in various countries outside US jurisdiction." scheme.
Like they're actually OK with Big Brother controlling everything, as long as the trains run on time and nobody harasses them for their chocolate.
The campaign to get Glenn Beck off TV and the organized “boycott” of Tucker Carlson were run out of the Obama and Biden White House’s.
Much like the “local” prosecutions of Trump we’re run out of the Biden DOJ
Its like the democrats here remain intentionally ignorant.
Yeah, Obama was openly going after Fox as early as 2011, which means he had already coordinated shit behind the scenes.
When did he openly go after Fox?
There's a clip of him complaining about them pushing false narratives. Note that this is the same pretext they used to silence conservatives for publishing misinformation."
A lot of what we've seen in cancel culture the last 10-15 years stems directly from Choco Jesus and his "whole of society " program.
Hmm, he cut them from the WH Press Pool, even though the Chair of the WH Correspondents Association at the time was with Fox
Van Jones was an Obama guy, no? An actual political member of the Admin?
He led the charge to get potential advertisers to “drop” Fox over Glenn Beck
Van Jones was an Obama guy, no?
Yes, Obama appointed him the "Climate Czar" which was an admission climate hysteria is cover for generic left wing priorities since Van Jones was a generic left wing extremist without any climate expertise.
Did you see Obama admit to trying a "grand experiment" of migration yesterday? Weakening immigration in the process.
Speaking of Block Insane Yomomma, I'm starting to think this motherfucker is never going to go away and leave us the fuck alone with his unwanted bullshit lectures until the day he dies.
Literally every other former president in the last 100+ years other than this supremely arrogant asshole years had the common sense and basic human decency to mostly recede from the limelight, maybe popping up to do a paid lecture to a small group of donors once in a while but nothing more. I could understand it if his wife was interested in her own political career, but she clearly isn't.
For the love of God almighty, please go back to wherever the fuck it is you came from and disappear already, Block Insane Yomomma. Almost nobody cares what you think about anything anymore, not even most of the people who voted for you twice.
Why would he go away? He didn't accomplish everything in his third term that he set out to do.
'But jawboning done by the Biden administration, during the COVID-19 pandemic (both to suppress public health information and to promote Democratic candidates and bury scandals), possibly disturbs me more, because it was covert, hard to uncover and to see the full extent of.'
I do wonder how much elitist insiders hate Trump not just because of his ideology but because Trump acts outside the bounds of "polite" but still vicious and crooked politics.
A *lot*. I have a leftist friend who used to be sane. He just can't get over Trump's comments because they are not what he is used to from a politician.
Yeah. It's not just one and it's not just the elite.
It would be funny if it weren't so sad the number of people who were all "Killmonger was right." and "Why so serious?" who've lost their shit because Trump said the P-word once in private.
I do wonder how much elitist insiders hate Trump not just because of his ideology but because Trump acts outside the bounds of "polite" but still vicious and crooked politics.
I'm not trying to be mean here, but this has been discussed in depth and at length in various circles since 2016. It is probably the singular reason why Trump is so hated.
Hell, Dennis Miller unwittingly described Trump when he announced his support for Ross Perot back in 1992... paraphrased: "By method of sheer stumbling incompetence [Perot] will knock over a Klieg light which will bring into sharp relief the entire corrupt system"
The Biden Admin wagging its finger (with no actual or implied threat) at social media companies for posts that violate their own TOS was a grievous abuse of government power.
The Trump admin threatening media companies with the full weight of Federal bureaucracy and suing them for billions is perfectly fine. Because we can't allow anyone to insinuate anything bad about Saint Kirk or Lord Trump.
Loser.
Just the kind of intelligent reply I expect from you retards
Because it’s true.
^ This
Kill yourself.
Prove dlam false here, Kung Fu Shrike.
with no actual or implied threat
With the government, there is always an implied threat.
Not according to the loser fumanchu.
All Government suggestions come with an implicit threat of using the full weight of the Federal bureaucracy if action isn't taken.
Your wrong about post violating the TOS rules, it's why Berenson was able to win a settlement with Twitter. And Berenson has a good albeit a huge uphill battle against the Biden admin.
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2023cv03048/597054/127/
No matter how many times you lie, it doesn't make it the truth shrike. Links above retard.
They set up an entire government funded censorship apparatus dumb fuck. Even Reason, robby, had stories on this.
Maybe your fellow democrats are retarded enough for these lies, but not the rest of us.
Nobody’s buying your bullshit.
"The Biden Admin wagging its finger (with no actual or implied threat) at social media companies"
This is an enormous fucking lie. They actually assigned people to sit at each major social media outlet, to communicate what they wanted censored, and the threats weren't vague, but real. and with consequences. And not just the administration, but the Biden FBI and their CIA director's office did it too.
It's like you never bothered to read the Twitter files and just got an email with talking points, Shrike. But you wouldn't do that, would you? Just post some bullshit without even reading about it?
Anyway, fuck you, you greasy Nazi for trying to give what they did legitimacy.
Section 230 is the threat written openly into law. Do what we say or millions of "unnamed trolls" will litigate your company into the ground and we won't protect you.
A Long Island cop swindled a sick fellow officer out of $200,000 with claims of business investment...
They needed a thin, blue line between the thin, blue line.
For a contrast in how comedy can be dealt with, consider Charlie Kirk's reaction to being parodied on South Park.
That seems to come from a level of self confidence many don't possess.
Also, South Park doesn’t portray itself as a “ hybrid between comedy and news”.
You mean the mouse and Stan's dad didn't start COVID by fking a pangolin together?
No, it was a bat.
That seems to come from a level of self confidence many don't possess.
Is that a dig at me? I should have known better. I'm sorry. I always screw these things up.
Yes.
Poor QB.
thinking behind the decision to not air the episode on cable but keep it on streaming is that viewers have to intentionally opt to watch the episode on demand; whereas on cable, it’s possible to for viewers passively watching Comedy Central to stumble onto the Kirk content, which some may find disturbing.
HOLY SHIT! THE INTERNET FUCKING WORKED!!!!
Liz the word is lie.
You know who else lied on their immigration paperwork?
Adolph Hitler when he joined the Bavarian kingdom army as an Austrian?
I think you just broke "you know who else" etiquette.
Do you know who else broke "you know who else" etiquette?
My mom!
oh ... she breaks etiquette
Mengele when he sailed to Argentina?
Columbus when he applied for citizenship in India?
Illian Omar and her brother/husband
Mrs. Doubtfire?
Gavrilo Princip?
Bang, bang, Gavrilo Princip
Bang, bang, shoot me, Gavrilo
Bang, bang, the first six are for you
Bang, bang, the seventh is for me
Bang, bang, Gavrilo Princip
Bang, bang, Europe's going to weep
Despite this, MAGA won (again), and, surprise, surprise, do not intend on preserving the institutions that declared them illegitimate political actors.
If only they would follow through.
"Nassau County police officer Leonard Cagno, 39, allegedly duped his colleague out of the cash as he recovered from an unnamed serious illness then blew it all within two months, cops said Wednesday as he was slapped with a grand larceny charge."
Next time Cagno will do the righteous thing and take all his cop buddies to strip joints and fishing trips with hookers and blow. Not likely to face charges after that.
Is it really larceny if you spend it the exact same way the original recipient would've?
An immigration judge in Louisiana has ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., deported to Syria or Algeria for failing to disclose certain information on his green card application...
There, was that so fucking hard.
For lil Rubio, evidently yes. Luckily he must have someone with brains on his staff.
So Khalil had due process.
Yup, bye bye Mahmoud
Still haven't actually bothered reading the INA. Never change man. Argue from ignorance.
The law gives discretion to whom?
The green card application was always the secondary avenue. And Rubio mentioned months ago that Khalil lied on the form. Which means Rubio was right dumdum.
And yet Rubio makes no mention in his memo of lying.
The judge did:
'Rather, this Court finds that Respondent willfully misrepresented material fact(s) for the sole purpose of circumventing the immigration process and reducing the likelihood his applications could be denied. This Court cannot and will not condone such an action by granting a discretionary waiver,' Comans said.
Sure, I was just making fun of Marco Rubio and his memo. He could have stated lying on his Visa app, he could have left it at the illegal occupation; instead he brought into question Mahmoud's antisemitic statements and how they impeded the State Depts foreign policy - that part was stupid.
Khalil's lawyers suggested in a filing that they intend to appeal the deportation order, but expressed concern that the appeal process will likely be swift and unfavorable.
That would be a first.
Most of us are shocked that reality is what we've said it was.
For a contrast in how comedy can be dealt with, consider Charlie Kirk's reaction to being parodied on South Park.
They did have to delay their latest episode. Presumably because they had cartman do more Charlie Kirk impressions, and they had to re-write and reanimate it.
That was the Kirk episode? I thought it had already aired.
The first one aired before he was shot. This one was scheduled to air after he was shot. They delayed and haven't aired it presumably because it had more Charlie Kirk stuff in it. Episodes are written, produced, and animated in 6 days. They often air the same day they are finished.
He was the theme, or part of the theme, for their season? That can't be good for them.
AND NO ONE TWIST THAT TO MEAN I SAID SOUTH PARK IS THE TRUE VICTIM HERE.
Fist said South Park is the one true victim, after sarckles.
You heard it here fi
rst.I’ve been saying Fist oughta be banned
Seconded.
All in favor?
Sounds like something someone who thinks Southpark is the real victim would say.
Kirk was only in one episode of four this season. Don't think they were going to use him for a long term gag.
Cocaine sold in the U.S. is cheaper and as pure as ever for retail buyers.
Geez. You have me sold.
Better put a tariff on that shit.
Yet hunter still chose to smoke parmesan.
Kimmel tanked, and then went out with a fuck-it.
Much more succinct and to the point.
" . . . pulling its broadcast license in retribution . . . "
OR
" . . . pulling its broadcast license for violations of the condition of that license"
Seriously, Liz, is it "retribution" when a murderer is arrested, tried, and convicted by the state?
ABC agreed to conditions on what it does and says in exchange for access to the "public airwaves". The FCC could have just pulled their license instead of pointing out the consequences of the actions ABC took/was taking.
But is there really a condition of the license that means a late night comedian can't put forward batshit theories about the motivations of a murderer? The FCC should have stayed quiet. Pressure from affiliates and viewers, plus financial concerns, seems like it would have done the job on its own.
Public interest clause. Similar to what they threatened radio with after the war of the world's broadcast.
I guess, but if idiotic commentary on current events is against the public interest and actionable, they all should have lost their licenses decades ago.
I can agree with that. The licensing structure gives a lot of deference to government regulators. But that's what the broadcast entities agreed to. And scotus has upheld it.
ABC can go fully online or stream Kimmel and it wouldn't affect their license.
The primary issue is bandwidth is limited. An anarchy style system where you could broadcast at any frequency and most power wins would be worse.
Reason has entirely lost the plot on licenses and contracts. It bleeds in here and with visas. There is no concern to reality, only their desire.
'This facade actually mattered quite a lot, and even though it was obviously never entirely sincere and even though conservatives were always out numbered and often poorly represented, they at least felt like participants and stakeholders in these institutions. During the Trump years this all went away. Conservatives were aggressively ousted, even as token voices, and the facade came down to reveal a perverse and illiberal set of political and cultural directives underneath it that were explicitly antagonistic to more than half of the country and denied them as legitimate participants in public life.'
Is this like when your girlfriend comes out as a vegan communist lesbian and burns all your stuff while you are at work?
"An immigration judge in Louisiana has ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., deported to Syria or Algeria for failing to disclose certain information on his green card application, according to documents filed in federal court Wednesday by his lawyers," reports Politico. "Khalil's lawyers suggested in a filing that they intend to appeal the deportation order, but expressed concern that the appeal process will likely be swift and unfavorable."
NOT THAT DUE PROCESS!
"Due process" is what happens when the correct result is reached, i.e. no deportations. Somehow it has all gone horribly wrong, for the social liberals.
Constitution guarantees a speedy trial.
Not That Speedy!
The Constitution guarantees a "speedy trial" so that the accused doesn't a) have to sit in jail with no bail for a long time waiting for trial or b) have their freedom of movement restricted for a long time while on bail and waiting for trial, and c) have the shadow of an unproven accusation hanging over them and being ostracized for by those in society that are quick to make judgements without all of the facts.
As always, none of that would seem unfair applied to someone that is guilty of the crime they are accused of committing, but the point of the presumption of innocence is to be sure that those punishments are not inflicted on people until after the accusations have been proven at trial.
The thing here is that the presumption of innocence, the right to effective counsel, and the right to confront witnesses and other evidence also requires that the accused be allowed the time that they need to defend themselves.
Rushing to judgement before a defendant has the time to examine evidence that will be used against them, consider arguments presented by the government against them, preventing them from being able to effectively dispute or counter them, is just as much a due process violation as someone charged with a crime, but not convicted, sitting in jail for months without so much as a hearing in court.
This reminds me of all those times the federal government would make "suggestions" to an industry, which promptly caved, and leftists would say, "but it was only a suggestion! They didn't force anyone!" Now the shoe is on the other foot.
this is how we ended up with Movie ratings the government said do something or we will. so Theaters came up with ratings.
its not uncommon and it is questionable if it is wrong for the government to do that. I say it is wrong but others say that is the governments job
It's instructive that a lot of their actions were incentivized by government jawboning and Blackrock/Vanguard money lines. Remember Larry Fink blatantly declaring that they were going to use their money to "force behaviors."
This reminds me of all those times the federal government would make "suggestions" to an industry, which promptly caved, and leftists would say, "but it was only a suggestion! They didn't force anyone!" Now the shoe is on the other foot.
The FCC commissioner said, "When we see stuff like this, look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way." How is that a "suggestion"?
If describing this as "the shoe [being] on the other foot" means that you agree with the FCC commissioner for saying that, and you are glad that ABC 'caved' and pulled Kimmel, then there was never a principle you were holding. You are just happy that your side gets to punish the other side now.
"America loves cocaine again,"
DEA wack-a-mole
Poor Cato:
I checked their domestic terror list and went back through every right wing case up till 2020. There were only 12. Five of them are highly questionable. Let’s get into them.
https://x.com/memeticsisyphus/status/1968503082322383122
Up first: Henderson, Solomon Sahmad Charlie. Umm look at him. They called him right wing because he was an incel and shot up his school.
https://x.com/memeticsisyphus/status/1968503088764924368
Considering how all white supremacist violence is categorized as right wing it’s surprising how much diversity is classified as right wing violence. The second one is Garcia, Mauricio Martinez. Now, I’m not one to take the ADL as a source of truth, but I thought it worth sharing their commentary on this one:
https://x.com/memeticsisyphus/status/1968503095869997251
Next is Robert Aaron long. He’s the guy who shotup those Asian massage parlors because he was mad that he kept hiring prostitutes. Someone might need to walk me through how this makes him right wing…
https://x.com/memeticsisyphus/status/1968503103864394220
Finally a double, two men (two races) did a drive by shooting of federal officers during a blm riot. You know, the famous right wing riots directed against law enforcement.
https://x.com/memeticsisyphus/status/1968503111917400135
Bonus from the foreign terrorism list. I didn’t really bother with this one because it’s basically 100% islamist, but one marked as right wing extremism is an Indian man who tried to drive a u-haul through the White House gates, thinking he could kill the president and make himself the new Nazi leader of the United States. Like I said lots of racial diversity in the far right.
https://x.com/memeticsisyphus/status/1968503119513354432
I suppose you could call Islamists right wing in a sense. But not in any sense that has anything to do with the American right.
Correct, and Cato is clearly trying to portray it as the latter. Which is also how it is being used all over media.
The pr9blen is ADL defines it as left wing v right wing but in practice it is left wing vs everything else.
They lump in black national separatists as right wing. They've classified antifa violence as right wing. We had a black drug dealer killing a nazi drug dealer listed as right wing.
Then we have the shrikes of the world use this for narrative building.
Any anti government action is listed as right wing, even from a left wing group.
Hilarious.
Jimmy Kimmel's writers are allowed to lie legally (though we have been going through years of Leftist pundits saying there is no right to spread disinformation). At least until their lies are seen as a liability by the Disney Corporation, which is what seemed to have happened.
I'm good with Kimmel fired for being an ass and pushing bullshit like that (I can't fucking believe that's what people are actually going with). I do wish the feds would tone it down, though. Seems like the pressure from affiliates was all that was needed here, and we need some consistency on free speech and government pressure on media companies from the right.
Another factor not mentioned is there’s some talk of Mrs. Kirk bringing lawsuits. I don’t know the validity of that, but even being adjacent to lawsuits for slandering a murder victim isn’t gonna be good for business.
It's very real. Something about keeping tabs and that they have excellent lawyers.
She is not vengeful, I do not believe, but lessons have to be taught.
The response should have been a video of an Antifa chant during the Floyd riots--"we didn't see shit"
Colbert is gone. Kimmel is gone. Long live Fallon! *barf*
Seth Myers is likely next. Fallon is political but he's not a full-blown DNC mouthpiece like Myers, Colbert, and Kimmel. That's basically been their whole act for a decade.
I don’t really watch, but from what I’ve seen Fallon seems to still focus on actually telling jokes for the purpose of making people laugh. Plus he had Gutfeld on, which was pretty ballsy.
I like Fallon. The rest can go.
Come back Conan and Craig!
Long live Conan and the year 2000!
There’s a petition to bring back Craig Ferguson, which is who Leno suggested take over after him.
Never watched Craig, less some clips. Seemed pretty good.
Craig Ferguson is great, and also has some pretty strong libertarian tendencies.
At least Jimmy didn’t claim the murder was a false flag.
It's just astonishing to me (I know, I shouldn't be that surprised). With some other incidents where the perpetrator was more nutzo and politically all over the place I could see trying to make the argument (even if it's still largely BS), but here it's just such a ridiculous stretch.
This should be a warning to all of us (and I'm in no way signaling you out, because you're the last commenter I would accuse of this) that with confirmation bias and living in media bubbles we can all fall for the most ridiculous stories and come off looking this dumb or hackey to more reasoned people.
Yeah, we all need to be careful about that. It's an easy trap to fall into.
I'm always open to new information, but this case seems pretty clear cut. Most supposed political killings seem to be (often) suicidal crazies. This guy seems to have been a lot more grounded and deliberate and based on what he has apparently said or written, his motivations seem pretty clear.
I said "signaling" instead of "singling?" That can't be a good sign.
Yeah, at the risk of hypocrisy, I agree this one is clear.
No no to the clear motivations. We just don't know for sure.
I suppose you can call it a media bubble. It's really a political bubble and the media part is part of it as it plays the role of the party mouthpiece.
Thinking about it, it is more than a media bubble. The left built a bubble since at least 2016. It was part of why conservative family members were not allowed to come to holiday dinners.
Yeah, you are correct.
They've been building the bubble since the 1970s when the liberals who then controlled our institutions invited the far left to take them over.
+1 Then he could get fleeced for $5B by an activist judge and the proceeds given directly to Kirk's widow illegally by an arbiter and it would all be hunky-dory free speech because the FCC wasn't involved.
that may be the real reason fear of being sued for billions since that happened to Alex Jones, Disney has far more money to lose
So the FCC won't let me be
Or let me be me, so let me see
They tried to shut me down on MTV
But it feels so empty without me
Two trailer park sarcs go round the outside
Round the outside
Round the outside
Look who's back, back again,
Jeffy's back, tell a friend,
Tempest in a teacup; my response is the same as last week: "Charlie who?" / "Jimmy who?".
Too many people spending too much time listening to what other people think instead of thinking themselves. Yes, I get the irony since I come to Reason to get info and editorial opinion that is a relative oasis of common sense.
Yes, I get the irony
I don't think you do. See, *anybody* can *say*, "People spend too much time listening and not enough time thinking for themselves."
"Charlie who?" / "Jimmy who? Too many people spending too much time listening to what other people think instead of thinking themselves."
Wut?
Are you saying being familiar with Kirk and Kimmel are means you can't think for yourself? What about Friedman, Hayek, and Mises? They aren't necessarily on the same tier but the idea would be the same.
Yes, I get the irony since I come to Reason to get info and editorial opinion that is a relative oasis of common sense.
Well, Reason articles are virtually all opinion in purpose. I can't recall seeing any articles with original reporting. I don't recall any articles that simply present information from other sources without also spending more time offering opinions about it than it spent dispensing the facts. People complain about them "both sides"-ing issues routinely, but there is a lot of bias in what they don't write about on top of any bias in what they do write.
Even so, the articles themselves are a "relative oasis" compared to, which outlets, in particular? And common sense? What we usually call "common sense" is really just our cognitive shortcuts getting us to an answer quickly without having to do any logical and evidence-based reasoning. That makes common sense really just whatever has gone through our cultural, political, and emotional filters and been wired into our surface level thinking.
Sometimes, useful heuristics make it through those filters and "common sense" is actually valid and reliable. Other times, the filters preferentially select things that align with our beliefs, things that "feel" right and true, but that we would recognize as being invalid, inaccurate, or even harmful if we spent the time to examine them rationally.
Not only is common sense not always common. It is also not always true.
This is what makes Trump so different and causes so much TDS in all political partisans.
Trump's meddling is all out in public. Every other politicians does almost all their meddling in back rooms behind closed doors. I'd much rather have no meddling, but the government is too damned powerful to put that genie back in the bottle. I'll settle for open meddling over the closeted variety any time.
We'll all know the instant Trump starts to go senile. Anyone who thinks Biden's silence was good is an idiot. Don't cut the rattle off the snake. Its silence is more dangerous to you than the snake.
Please explain to me what excuse there might still be for government to regulate "broadcasters?" Is there still as many as even a million people who watch NBC or ABC or CBS News over the airwaves? Isn't the audience, whatever might be left, watching over cable for the last ten or twenty years? Could they not turn off the broadcast antennae completely without losing even one percent of their audience?
You realize, as small a number as it might be, that some people live in places where cable isn’t available, right?
So what? This was about the networks. Not about people who choose to live off the grid. Do you actually think the networks CARE about those people getting their spewage? And wouldn't we all be better off if fewer people were exposed to left wing propaganda?
Lol, there’s people that don’t have cable that don’t live off the grid.
They license the wave spectrum dumdum. There are many reasons to do this.
Did you actually read what I wrote? The question was: will the "broadcast" networks even miss the airwaves if Trump cancelled their permits?
Your first sentence.
Please explain to me what excuse there might still be for government to regulate "broadcasters?"
They aren't regulating broadcasters retard. They are regulating the wave spectrum through licensing. You seem to not understand this.
Mr Quibble here lighting up the comments.
Yeah, how dare he answer the actual question asked!
They are also regulating broadcasters. Above you point out the "public good" requirement of the licenses. If it was just about regulating the use of the different frequencies to prevent chaos, content wouldn't be an issue.
Cable is losing more viewers than antenna viewers, around 30% of U.S. adults are over-the-air TV users. Digital TV has added dozens of new stations. In the Chicago area there more than 88 stations available. In the mean time cable is dropping channels and raising prices. 83% of adults use streaming services, but also likely to use an antenna.
Yeah, unfortunately I live in a hilly wooded area, so I can’t get an antenna to work, otherwise I could save a lot of money streaming without local tv.
Thanks! Finally some actual information in a discussion.
Lol, some of the information he just gave you matches what I said asshole.
Based on ad rates...yes. Very much so.
And that requires fairness doctrine, net neutrality, and so many more regulations; all created and enforced by unelected bureaucrats at the FCC?
If they could turn off the antennae do you not think that they would?
"Is there still as many as even a million people who watch NBC or ABC or CBS News over the airwaves?"
There are more people who watch YouTube channels on decorating aquariums than there are CNN or NBC viewers for most programs.
People would rather watch "pimple poppers" or "cow-hoof trimmers" than woke scolds masquerading as comedians.
Sounds like you should be doing some research instead of crying in the comments.
And insulting people that respond with pertinent information to his question.
He looks to be here to push a narrative.
The original justification for regulation of broadcast radio and TV was so that each part of the radio spectrum could be kept clear of interference. Each station would have the exclusive use of the frequency range needed for their signal in a particular area, so that people could receive that station's signal without interference from other broadcasters.
Justification for regulating the content of broadcasters is much thinner. They say something like, "The airwaves are public space, and the ability to broadcast into it that space is a public good, so, we can make sure that people aren't broadcasting things that would harm the public." Simply put, they will try and shut down whatever the government decides it doesn't like.
This has always been heavy handed, but it didn't usually get to the point where the administration in charge at that moment would abuse the power for political advantage in big and obvious ways. It helped that the FCC is an "independent" agency run by a commission of officials appointed for set terms that could extend beyond a given President's time in office. And they had to be confirmed by a Senate that had the filibuster for a 41-49 seat minority party to block anyone too biased.
Conservatives have been pushing the "unitary executive" theory for so long now, and the filibuster got nuked multiple times. That has destroyed any check on partisanship by the FCC and probably any other independent agencies. The Senate lost any sense of tradition remaining that would reserve the filibuster for use against egregiously biased or unqualified nominees, so it got nuked multiple times by both sides. Now, we see that all executive branch appointees are going to be exactly what the President wants, and they will do whatever the President wants, as long as the Senate majority is his party. Checks on partisan abuse of government power were always dependent on the willingness of voters to punish their side when their side abused power. Of course, it also depended on voters not rewarding candidates for saying that they would use government to punish the other side.
This is all just to point out that no checks and balances written into the Constitution will be worth the paper it's written on if voters aren't the ones that value them and enforce them.
Here's the problem with MAGA as I see it: how many voters voted for another Trump term because he promised to deregulate? How much deregulation has the Trump administration actually accomplished? Or even attempted? So far Trump has used the impressive power of government and its various unconstitutional agencies to punish his enemies and impose his will on private enterprise - not unlike the way the Democrats have used government machinery in a more subtle way to achieve its socialist goals over a much longer period of time - rather than eliminate that authority as he promised. How many of his erstwhile supporters are starting to regret their vote. Not like we had a lot of choice in the last election. Nothing ever really changes.
TDS is multicultural phenomena. Jesse was great when finding Biden-era corruption and ineptitude. But it turns out it was not anti-power, just anti-Biden, and he refuses to even admit Trump makes mistakes and doesn't know everything. That's partisan politics, always has been, always will be.
The problem is that they either overreacted or lied and misrepresented Trump so much, that it's still hard to determine if the thing that Trump is accused of saying, he actually said.
Even today I have to look for the original footage to provide the context or the whole statement.
Yes, but you at least have something to look up. Every other politician buries that stuff too deep to ever know about it, and they pretend to be outraged when some other politicians forgets the mic is still live.
Jesse ... refuses to even admit Trump makes mistakes and doesn't know everything.
Stupid apparently also has Jesse Derangement Syndrome, and likes to make stuff up.
Pretty much none. I do not believe he even talked much about deregulating in his second campaign. It was all about undoing the damage of the Biden years.
It was about fighting Progressivism and kicking out illegals, not deregulation.
Links below. Just because media doesn't talk about things doesn't mean it isnt happening.
Ironically NYT and Brookings have articles about how trumps deregulation is bad.
No doubt. But when Reason doesn't talk about how Trump is deregulating and downsizing big government then the end must be nigh. Or are you contending that only the NYT is reporting on Trump's deregulating and downsizing?
How many of his erstwhile supporters are starting to regret their vote.
How many of his supporters said that they wanted Trump to "drain the swamp" (for real this time), bring back manufacturing to the U.S., "secure the border", get us out of foreign wars, balance the budget, among other things, but what they are the most happy about is how he is using government to punish
histheir enemies, impose his will on private companies, make life difficult for the "deviants" and "perverts" that use a bunch of letters to describe their group, deport any immigrant that isn't good enough to be in America, whether they crossed the border illegally or not, and force the GOP to be loyal to him?How many of his supporters said that they wanted Trump to "drain the swamp" (for real this time), bring back manufacturing to the U.S., "secure the border", get us out of foreign wars, balance the budget,
His cabinet picks were literally draining the swamp. Hence the 'hollowed out' articles about our beloved institutions.
Secure the border. Crossings went from thousands a day to dozens a day. So dramatic was the drop, the New York Times had to chin scratch on the cause.
Get us out of foreign wars: So far, he's keeping us well out of Ukraine which the EU wants to send boots on the ground for the singular purpose of escalating.
As far as 'bringing back manufacturing' and 'balancing the budget' on the first, probably not going to happen with Tariffs, at least in the medium term, on the latter, your choice was "trump" or "free healthcare for the entire planet". Choose wisely.
Trump is literally deregulating vast swaths of current regulation dumbfuck. Argumentation through ignorance is not a way to live your life.
Judges have tried stopping a lot of it theiugh claims of APA or animus dumbfuck.
Do you ever try to research your first impressions?
Biden added 5T in regulatory costs. Trump is cutting those down.
Your entire post is ignorance based solely on what the mainstream media narratives are. Have you bothered following Zeldin and others? They would show youre being intentionally ignorant.
Some examples.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/05/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-directs-reform-of-the-nuclear-regulatory-commission/
https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-launches-biggest-deregulatory-action-us-history
https://cei.org/opeds_articles/trumps-deregulation-score-mid-year-federal-rules-tally-is-the-lowest-ever-recorded/
https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/how-trumps-10-to-1-deregulation-initiative-is-taking-shape-in-financial-services/
https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/04/trump-directive-aims-speed-deregulation-nixing-public-input/404474/
Just admit you dont give a shit about arguing from reality.
This one alone has saved my company a lot of money.
https://www.parkerpoe.com/news/2025/02/executive-order-halts-osha-rulemaking
Looks good! If the administration's rule-making activity in the Federal Register is actually deregulatory then I would have to agree with your point.
Here's hoping for Kimmel's new career - blackface impersonations costarring shrike.
"The MAGA Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it," said Kimmel during his Monday night monologue.
This is a stupid thing to say. It is a very good reason to not watch Jimmy Kimmel, for anyone that did watch him. It is a very good reason to criticize him for being stupid, feeding the flames, and, worst of all, not being funny.
But even setting aside the government threats of censorship, the first paragraph in this article has a problem.
Yesterday evening, ABC News (a subsidiary of Disney) announced it was suspending comedian Jimmy Kimmel's late-night show "indefinitely" following factually inaccurate comments he made about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
For Kimmel's comment that Wolfe quotes to be factually inaccurate, it has to make claims that can be evaluated as being either true or false. So, what are those claims? Let's break it down:
"The MAGA Gang..."
I don't know what "Gang" is capitalized here, since this is something he said, and it isn't being used as a proper noun. That is important, because "MAGA gang" is not a specific group of people that can be named or counted. This group of people that Kimmel is saying did something is ambiguous. It's a rhetorical technique to attribute something to vague, unspecified people so that you don't have to provide direct evidence that any specific people did or said something, or believe something. And, you can then paint a lot of people associated with whatever vague group you are naming as doing, saying, or thinking that thing despite there being no evidence that they did, said, or thought that thing. There could even be evidence to the contrary, but you're still making it seem like they are part of it, and some in your audience will believe you instead of any contrary evidence.
That is how we all use our biases when we talk about politics, unfortunately. "Conservatives" think something that is wrong, "leftists" believe something else that is wrong. Even referring to "Democrats" or "Republicans" can be ambiguous as to whether we are talking about politicians that are members of those parties, whether it includes them and voters registered with those parties, or whether it includes anyone that shows any approval toward those parties.
Right off the bat, Kimmel was trying to make his statement unfalsifiable through ambiguity.
"...desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk..."
"Desperately" is a subjective adverb, so nothing verifiably true or false about that.
"trying to characterize" is making a claim about intent or purpose as well as describing what the "MAGA gang" was doing vaguely. He was mind-reading them, and he isn't clear about what he is talking about that they did.
"...as anything other than one of them..."
This is going to be almost certainly true, which is what is deceptive about it. Anyone that points to verified facts about the accused* that would show him to be politically aligned with opponents of the "MAGA gang" would be "characteriz[ing]" him as "anything other than one of them." That's another misleading rhetorical trick. Take something obviously true and not wrong in any way, but word it so that it becomes an accusation of something bad.
*I'm convinced by everything I've seen so far that they have the right guy, but I say "accused" because he hasn't been convicted. A habit we should all try to have.
"...and doing everything they can to score political points from it."
This is also too vague to prove true or false. Every time that one person says that someone else is "just trying to score political points," there is no way to prove or disprove that statement. It is vague as to what it means, and it relies on the unprovable intent of another person.
What we choose to believe, when faced with a claim that is unfalsifiable, is a subjective choice on our part. My choice to think that Kimmel was wrong to say what he did, because I think that it was misleading, contains implications that are the opposite of how I interpret facts, and is doing exactly what he is accusing those he opposes of doing (trying to score political points), that is my subjective opinion of his statement. He was not "factually inaccurate".
So it's not at all clear whom you are criticizing here? The network said that it was suspending Kimmel for making false claims, not the author of this article. Are you saying the network lied to excuse their knuckling under to government tyranny? Or are you just saying they were mistaken?
The network had their hand forced when the top and second largest station owners said they were going to pull Kimmel indefinitely. Losing that many stations basically guarantees a need to reimburse ad buys (won't even approach promised viewers without them). With a show that is, no doubt, losing money already --- it's cheaper to not run it in the first place.
Also, odds are, they wanted him gone anyway.
But I don't mind the FCC saying something is bullshit. I do not like them saying they might "do something"
Well, Wolfe wasn't just quoting ABC, there, or even just paraphrasing them. To repeat what she wrote,
Yesterday evening, ABC News (a subsidiary of Disney) announced it was suspending comedian Jimmy Kimmel's late-night show "indefinitely" following factually inaccurate comments he made about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
I'm no grammar expert, but that reads like she is the one saying that his comments were factually inaccurate. It isn't a natural way to read her use of "following" as meaning that what comes after that word is part of the networks announcement. Instead, I read it as her description, in her words, of the timing of the announcement.
Regardless, she offers no pushback to that claim, even if it is entirely ABC's language instead of hers. Later, there is another statement claiming that Kimmel lied, but that it is a screenshot of a tweet. Again, no pushback or counter from Wolfe against the claim that Kimmel said something "false". Maybe she didn't think it was worth refuting, and she just wasn't thinking about whether she even needed to rebut those claims. That's the charitable version of her possible intent.
But I still think that it's more likely that she agrees that he said something provably false.
Are you saying the network lied to excuse their knuckling under to government tyranny? Or are you just saying they were mistaken?
As for the network, either could be true. Maybe they knew that his comments weren't making testable claims and thus couldn't be said to be "factually inaccurate" or "false", and they lied. Maybe they didn't think that deeply and just based it on how they resolved the ambiguities in his statement in a way that turns it into something testable. (Which they then concluded was provably false.) Or maybe they did think about it, but used reasoning that I am calling incorrect. I have no way of knowing their intent, which is required to know if someone is lying or just wrong.
Just like I can't tell whether they lied or were mistaken, I can't tell if they really did cave to pressure, made that decision without caring what the FCC chairman or Trump said, or something in between. But it sure as hell looks like they caved, and they would have been fully aware that it would look that way to anyone with a slight bit of cynicism in them. They made a statement that they knew many would interpret as them caving to pressure. Which is dangerous even if not true, because it makes politicians think that putting that kind of pressure on media outlets works.
[Edit: I will also allow for the possibility that my logic is wrong, and that it is a provably false statement that Kimmel made. I'm open to my argument being disputed.]
>Of course, comedians have no obligation to be factually correct.
When they're doing comedy, sure. Kimmel wasn't doing comedy.
Look, I don't agree the government should get involved - but a lot of Reason's writers were fine with the government jawboning over 'misinformation' in the past so . . . but there's only going to be one set of rules and this is what the Left wanted the rules to be.
Like the saying goes, I did not make the new rules, but these are the new rules.
Then the saying is wrong. The proper response to officials using the rules to abuse people is to change or eliminate the rules that have been abused, not to take your turn at bat to use those rules to abuse someone else.
Go ahead, fight human nature all you want.
Add me to the list of people that thinks the suspension for Jimmy's comments were pretextual. I think ABC was looking for an excuse to get rid of this show (probably for financial reasons) and this was just a convenient circumstance to do it.
^^
TL;DR? Ok… no problem, i got ya.
Free speech is important, you know. It’s bad that ABC cancelled the show. You know whose fault this is? Democrats and all the people who advocated back in 2020 that it was ok to fire someone who posted on Twitter that it was ok to kill n*ggers. Lay the blame where it belongs.
Predictably lame.
Jesus Christ… can conservative media stop putting pictures of Charlie Kirk’s wake on social media. I mean, I know they want a civil war with Leftists so they can carry out their bloodlust but you would have thought that out of a sense of decency and respect for his wife’s privacy they would have had the good sense to turn the camera the other way for like one fucking hour.
No chance of that I guess. These people have literally zero decency.
This is really chapping your ass, isn't it KAR? Reminds me of the time here you doxxed a dead cop's widow, in order to attack a commentor who knew them, just because he was Mormon.
Also, pretty ironic that you're worrying about a civil war when it's been your side doing all the killing. "Oh nos! What if they start punching back! They're so awful!"
And again, if you're going to steal Sandra's nick at least spell the name right.
Every day I am reminded there can be no meeting in the middle with psychotic douchebag lefties like OBL. Just amazing to watch him expose himself this way.
Well, to be fair, this is KAR, aka Kill All Retards, under a new moniker.
Who watches late night tv anymore? Most people my age I know are in bed by 11, and younger generations haven’t watched in a long time. So that leaves the geezers. A dying audience.
plus there's an mst3k channel for bedtime
yes Liz even Jimmy Kimmel can be removed by his employers for shooting off his mouth
ABC canned Kimmel's predecessor, Bill Maher, for shooting off his mouth as well.
But Maher, a) is actually funnier than Kimmel (low bar, I know), b) seems to be slowly learning about the left, and c) not anywhere near as retarded as Kimmel.
Politically Incorrect was a fun show until is wasn't anymore
>>Of course, comedians have no obligation to be factually correct
oh I see ... you're apologizing for Dave Smith
Jimmy Kimmel pulled off the air: Yesterday evening, ABC News (a subsidiary of Disney) announced it was suspending comedian Jimmy Kimmel's late-night show "indefinitely" following factually inaccurate comments he made about the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
As RazorFist said, you created the game, you wrote the rules...
Oh, without the FCC, how will we know what's in our broadcasts?
It's disturbing to see massive law firms, media outlets, and organizations that should have some amount of fuck-you money choose the path of cowardice.
Wise move to get one's daily dose of courage and path selection from a pro-genocide shitrag like Reason.
If we are going to go after comedians then what the heck, let the games begin. How long would Gutfield last? But seriously, Kilmeade says we should kill homeless people, two homeless encampments get shot up over the weekend and then he apologizes. Can't find a better example of rhetoric correlating with violence. Look it up folks. People are afraid to report on it. Kilmeade still has a job.
This is all so predictable and yet so many people are still defending this administration. Trump himself blamed the "radical left" before we and he had any evidence. That was deeply irresponsible and no one cares. well, except Kimmel who basically alluded to it in his joke. We still don't know Robinson's exact motivations. That text exchange was just plain weird. He was not radicalized by college because he dropped out years ago. Maybe he was radicalized because he perceived his partner being on the receiving end of a lot of hate. Does anyone even bother to consider what it even means to be radicalized anymore? If I read the comments in any Reason comment section I could become "radicalized" because there sure is a lot of extremist rhetoric here. Does that sound silly to you? But now Trump is declaring an anti-fascist ideology a terrorist position. You can't make this up. There is no official antifa organization and so if you come out as against fascism you can now be drawn up on terrorism charges. Let that sink in folks. The courts will reject it but it is what Trump wants. Even Kirk himself slung around the fascist charge on Biden. Was he anti-fascist? We know Vance used similar rhetoric on Trump before he drunk the kool-aid.
No one is going to miss Kimmel. But that's beside the point. Nextar will get its merger because we now live in a mafia state. I won't be turning to the networks for comedy anymore. It's going to be weak from now on. How funny is it to butt snorkel?
>>I won't be turning to the networks for comedy anymore.
bro you're 42 years too late
If we are going to go after comedians
Did your time capsule just open up this morning?
Kilmeade says we should kill homeless people, two homeless encampments get shot up over the weekend and then he apologizes.
A homeless camp getting shot up is called a weekday, here in Seattle.
Don't be silly.
It happens on the weekends too.
Weekend days are two homeless camps getting shot up.
Iowa City, Iowa had an illegal drive over 5 at a homeless camp. The news reporters had a difficult time with this as how could they blame anyone? It was sadly funny to listen to them try to avoid either side.
Lol, they’re not sending their best.
Businesses should not have to ask the Government for permission to merge in the first place. Broadcasters should not need a license to broadcast (and by the way, broadcasting in the public interest is a sick joke!) although as pointed out elsewhere the bandwidth can plausibly be regulated. The less leverage government officials have over private enterprise the better.
Gutfield would be gone if Fox decided he was turning off viewers and affiliates in large numbers. That's what really happened with Kimmel.
>>A Long Island cop swindled a sick fellow officer out of $200,000 with claims of business investment—but instead blew the cash on OnlyFans, gambling and luxury living like a new car, prosecutors said
wasn't this like a 1996 Stallone movie with a handful of others? Liotta maybe? Robert Patrick?
Lmao:
Would suggest we all consider this. Cancel Disney and ABC until they reverse this
https://x.com/AdamKinzinger/status/1968650669092409508
What’s Kinzinger gonna do, cry until it happens?
It's disturbing to see massive law firms, media outlets, and organizations that should have some amount of fuck-you money choose the path of cowardice.
We must be living in a different universe. Did you believe that the corporate swing towards BLM/LGBTrannyQI2MAP+/Bring your true self to work/HEY LOOK, WE FEATURE BLACK PEOPLE IN OUR ADS! was bravery?
But given that Disney has been interested in fighting the government before (albeit in a different context), the fact that they weren't willing to do so this time makes me think maybe Kimmel was already a goner.
All of late night TV has been a 'goner' for several years now.
Liz gets it wrong; it wasn’t the government it was the affiliates that got Kimmel taken off the air. It didn’t help that Jimmy’s ratings were less than half of “not going to be renewed” Colbert.
The only meaningful thing I learned from the entire post was that Jimmy Kimmel was still on the air. I had no idea.
Jimmy who?
What were we even talking about?
>>Cocaine sold in the U.S. is cheaper and as pure as ever for retail buyers.
dang I swore it off several years ago.
Back in the 80s again for the third time in my lifetime.
I couldn't come down the last time & was like ... no mas!
Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop snorting blow.
this will never not be funny
Summer's over, my friend. Time to get your parka out and hit the slopes.
Well constructed, might have been told (or said) the exact same thing 30 years ago.
I think we all know the real reason Kimmel was cancelled.
It's because he's a hateful right-wing MAGA Trump-loving Nazi America-hating Bible-thumper who doesn't think gays and crime are good things.
Which I am saying with an absolute straight face so you'll believe me, but will later pretend was "comedic free speech" because (allegedly) comedy is something I do at my job.
Look, the unsubtle subtext here is that Kimmel was an unperson in our book, and we're glad he's been assassinated. Deserved it, really. And I can say that confidently out loud knowing that everyone worth a damn will agree with me, and anyone who doesn't is our mortal enemy.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go throw some bricks and paint cans at the memorials set up for him. Because I'm a good person.
>>but will later pretend was "comedic free speech" because (allegedly) comedy is something I do at my job.
it's cute they all think they're still behind this supposed shield
"An immigration judge in Louisiana has ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., deported to Syria or Algeria for failing to disclose certain information on his green card application,
This is the right answer, but the article doesn't say what he "lied" about so it might be for the wrong reason. He should be deported because he supports terrorism.
I remember when Gina Carano was fired by the same company canceling Jimmy, for something far more vanilla, and not a single lefty was concerned about freedom of speech.
It's kinda like it has nothing to do with some social/moral principle at all, and entirely to do with whether they're on the same team.
I imagine it'll get easier to tell when they all start wearing their blue swastika armbands.
Look, I don't like the FCC and president pushing on a network like that.
But if Johnny Carson had come out a few days after, I don't know, the Lennon assassination in 1980 and tried to claim Chapman had been a Reaganite, and then didn't walk it back? That would have sparked an affiliate rebellion that ended Carson's show and career, even though Carson's Tonight Show was a cash machine and Carter was still in office.
(Now, of course, part of why it would have gotten Carson cancelled that is because Carson would have grievously offended half of his audience. I mean, hell, Carson would have been audibly hackled by the studio audience if he'd pulled what Kimmel did. Kimmel didn't risk offending his audience because he's been so nakedly partisan for so long.)
Jimmy Kimmel was doomed long before he made these stupid and idiotic comments. Nexstar Media Group pulling the show gave ABC/Disney Corp the excuse to do what was inevitable. Even though the FCC said some things, this really didn't hold much sway. It was more of a free market response than the government forcing something to happen.
Kimmel's remarks were particularly offensive to the majority of people even if they were not Charlie Kirk fans. There is something distasteful in mocking the assassination of another human even if you disagree with them.
It wasn't even that it was offensive to fans of Kirk. It was that it was just a brazen lie - and he knew it was - to distort the narrative about the guy that shot him and implicate both the Administration and Civil Rights Leaders in his killing. When that's prima facie absurd.
Here's what Charlie Kirk said when he was parodied by Eric Cartman on 'South Park':
"After the episode aired, Kirk seemed thrilled and posted a TikTok (below) calling the episode “hilarious” and noted “South Park gets this right.” The Turning Point USA founder added, “We have a good spirit about being made fun of. This is all a win. We as conservatives have thick skin, not thin skin, and you can make fun of us and it doesn’t matter."
Trump has extremely thin skin. TV execs want to make money. If Trump's FCC won't approve deals, or will threaten to take away their licenses, they are going to cancel or suppress anything that offends. Kimmel didn't mock an assassination, he mocked Trump's reaction to it (talking about his ballroom) and he said untrue things about the perp - who was the son of Mormon conservatives but obviously left-wing loony himself.
Maybe Kimmel did deserve cancellation. However, if the 'Cancel everyone who makes fun of Trump' trend goes on with other shows like South Park, John Oliver etc, I'm going to start to think we're on our way to Russian State TV.
Talk with the affiliates that pulled him off their stations.
Remember when Obama called Iger to get Barr fired?
Remember when Obama called Iger to get Barr fired?
>It's disturbing to see massive law firms, media outlets, and organizations that should have some amount of fuck-you money choose the path of cowardice.
What are you talking about? When there is a choice they've *always* taken the path of cowardice. You don't think the last decade plus of LGBT+ bullshit was because *they believed in it* do you? No, they did it because they thought it would make money. Then they did it because they thought not doing it would get them yelled at and lose more money.
They're not doing it now because they have the social cover to stop - because they're unprincipled cowards.
No, that's not true - they are principled. The principle is 'do whatever is necessary to make money'. No other ethical concerns constrain them, only raw power does.
Fuck Kimmel and Fuck the FCC.
See, it isn't that hard.
In 2002 Senator Paul Wellstone died in a plane crash shortly before the Minnesota Senator was up for reelection. Democrats overplayed their hand and turned Paul Wellstone memorial service into a campaign rally for his replacement, Walter Mondale. Republican Norm Coleman was elected as Wellstone's replacement. I cannot help but wonder if Republicans are overplaying Charlie Kirk's death. I think pulling Jimmy Kimmel for some pretty routine mild comments was petty and will not play well. At some point, the public attention will be drawn back to the fact that those weeping for Charlie Kirk have little sympathy for children murdered in their schools and churches.