Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Politics
Eugene Volokh | 9.12.2025 3:00 AM
Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.
NEXT: Assessing the Extent of Political Violence in America
Hide Comments (225)
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Three former officials of the FBI who were fired by Kash Patel have filed suit against Patel and numerous other federal officials and agencies in federal district court in the District of Columbia. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/driscoll-v-patel-complaint-usdc-district-columbia.pdf
The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs were ultimately fired by Kash Patel, the eventual FBI director, for unlawful and politically motivated reasons that often appeared to be in response to social media posts from far-right critics.
“Patel not only acted unlawfully but deliberately chose to prioritize politicizing the FBI over protecting the American people,” the lawsuit states. “His decision to do so degraded the country’s national security by firing three of the FBI’s most experienced operational leaders, each of them experts in preventing terrorism and reducing violent crime.”
The Washington Post reports on the filing:
Before he was briefly named the FBI’s acting director early this year, Brian Driscoll says, he got a call from a Trump administration official who peppered him with a series of pointed questions that appeared to be a loyalty test. Among them: “Who did you vote for?” “When did you start supporting President Trump?” “Have you voted for a Democrat in the last five elections?” “Do you agree that the FBI agents who stormed Mar-a-Lago … should be held accountable?”
Before he was briefly named the FBI’s acting director early this year, Brian Driscoll says, he got a call from a Trump administration official who peppered him with a series of pointed questions that appeared to be a loyalty test.
Among them: “Who did you vote for?” “When did you start supporting President Trump?” “Have you voted for a Democrat in the last five elections?” “Do you agree that the FBI agents who stormed Mar-a-Lago … should be held accountable?”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/09/10/trump-fbi-fired-lawsuit-loyalty/
Countersuit?
What would be the factual and legal basis for any counterclaim(s)?
False & frivolous lawsuit. Abuse of process. Needing to be Arkansided.
"Among them: “Who did you vote for?” “When did you start supporting President Trump?” “Have you voted for a Democrat in the last five elections?” “Do you agree that the FBI agents who stormed Mar-a-Lago … should be held accountable?”
Yikes
Each of them lost the confidence of the FBI Director and were dismissed. Sour grapes. And they're not coming back.
Who is funding their lawsuit?
Some dark money foreign Democrat Supremacist funds, that's for sure.
If they were fired because of their answers to those questions that’s pretty horrible. But we get you’ve no principles other than tribalism.
About as horrible as not tenuring professors because they state publicly that they think marriage is between a man and a woman. Or in other words, that they don't think sodomizing another man in the rear is the holy grail.
Commenter really seems like he doesn't think talent or skill are things.
Or he just doesn't care if the FBI is good at it's job.
Two of these guys got promoted weeks before firing. I guess the “confidence” didn’t last long? I mean, Driscoll gets Kash TO ADMIT the firings are probably illegal and he’ll be deposed but his superiors are demanding it. “You can’t save everyone” Kash says. Doesn’t really sound like a lack of confidence, sounds like Kash wants to continue being Director.
Huh. That is an interesting dynamic coming from Kash. Like he's not really MAGA and so feels oppressed trying to conform to their crazy mania for blind loyalty.
Either way, not good! Plenty I don't like about the FBI, but I'm not such a fool as to think it's good when they're incompetent.
I mean, don’t you have to really wonder about a guy who thinks to himself “yeah, that Ke$ha was really onto something… maybe I’LL start spelling my name that way, too!”
And then his appearance at the press conference yesterday. He couldn’t have looked more in-over-his-head if he had wearing a sign around his neck that said “help me, I’m lost.”
If anyone is awake at the White House I can point out one person we are “losing confidence” in pretty quick!
Not that one can draw any conclusions from a photo, but I did notice they looked out of their depth.
More a commentary on who is good at faking confidence than anything else, though.
Many amusing tidbits in here. Most obviously, these veteran FBI agents back Kash and Bongino into certain corners during their interactions. They certainly seem to have gotten the requisite admissions from Kash in order to ask for President Trump to sit for a deposition. I also wonder how the conduct described in the lawsuit will affect Kash’s standing within the FBI.
Related to number 2, there are some tidbits designed to make Kash look silly. I have to ask— should be FBI Director really be drinking whiskey in the office? And the cigar obsession… it’s just a little childish, almost as if Kash is cosplaying J Edgar Hoover or something, rather than taking anything seriously. And the overly large challenge coin, inscribed with “Ka$h”! This is not a serious person. And of course now this lawsuit drops against the unfolding backdrop of Kash and Bongino completely stepping on their own dicks out in Utah. Whose idea was it to put podcasters in charge of the FBI, anyways?
"During these briefings, Jensen became alarmed at Bongino's intense focus on increasing online engagement through his social media profiles in an effort to change his followers' perception of the FBI," the lawsuit said. "The emphasis that Bongino placed on creating content for his social media pages could risk outweighing more deliberate analyses of investigations."
Again. Not a serious person.
It's not surprising that the Trump administration fired a Deep Swamp operative who thinks the FBI should operate under a veil of secrecy.
How is this responsive to a post about how Bongino is a social media obsessive first and a manager hardly at all?
“Upon arriving at FBI Headquarters, Jensen found Bongino in his Chief of Staff’s office. Bongino looked as if he had not slept for several days. He seemed extremely anxious and agitated. Jensen asked him what was wrong. Bongino explained that he had found a room filled with classified documents and “burn bags” related to the now-closed Crossfire Hurricane investigation. He expressed shock at the existence of these burn bags.
By his comments, it seemed to Jensen that Bongino might not have been fully aware that the use of “burn bags” is a standard method across multiple federal agencies for preparing classified material for destruction when an investigation is deemed closed, or when physical copies of the materials are no longer necessary. He also appeared unaware that the FBI also stored digital copies of materials on the FBI’s classified computer system, and that this was likely the case with these materials. At the meeting, Bongino also made an unfounded additional allegation about Giardina’s handling of data, claiming that the allegation was “just out there.” Giardina was never assigned to work on Crossfire Hurricane.”
Firing people on the basis of inaccurate rumors on right-wing social media. This is what you get when you put podcasters in charge of the FBI! Duh!
Are you also that gullible and credulous when reading a police write-up about a driver's glassy eyes, odor of alcohol, and so on? You're being played like a fiddle.
Uh, no, I think if you read through the filing you’ll see it was Kash who got played. Expertly done, as well— as one might expect from a veteran FBI agent who has actually done interviews.
"and that this was likely the case with these materials."
"Likely" seems to concede that it wasn't necessarily the case.
How is that relevant? He’s attempting to fire people on the basis of inaccurate allegations that are just “out there.”
Furthermore, if your speculation is actually correct I’m not sure you thought through the implications. Who was doing the investigation into the origins of Crossfire Hurricane?
Judging from news coverage about what was in those burn bags, there were a substantial number of government records in them that should have been properly retained under federal law, regulation and implementing policies and directives. Storage in burn bags is not an approved retention method, for obvious reasons.
Omg, what an asshole! He wanted to improve the FBI's reputation. That's violating the constitution!!!
Someone HALP!! We need some DEI magistrate without law degree to overrule the President and RESTORE OUR SACRED NORMS.
You people are fucking idiots. Look at how critical you are of something so fucking basic and acceptable. You didn't even consider that guys claim for one second or you would've realized how absurd it is.
“fucking idiots”
I think that would be our Leather-loving Director, no?
We got him! Oops, we don’t got him.
He should get back to his cigar business and whatever he was doing in Vegas and let an adult run things. Definitely not Bongino, though. He seems stressed enough as is.
Two fbi agents I deal with (and 2 federal prosecutors) have stated to me on multiple occasions that the field offices of the FBI are very non political where as the DC office of the FBI is a very left politically.
From reports, it looks like the fired individuals were very political
NG - Now do peter strozk
According to the complaint, 5 USC 7511(b)(8) exempts FBI employees from the obligation to seek relief from the Merit Systems Protection Board. The complaint makes their terminations look like a Lisa Cook situation where an employee subject to removal for cause was removed without cause.
It's looking like a tranny shot Kirk.
What should we do with trannies?
It might not. Fog of war, but if what I saw over that bullet etching pans out, boy will the FBI be embarrassed.
We shall see.
How about we just let them go about their lives as they let you go about your life? Or have you been harassed or somehow persecuted by transgendered individuals and you want something done to/about them? Please share the details with us, because it is decidedly strange that you have this preoccupation with transgendered individuals.
I always assume that these guys accidentaly stumbled upon TS-porn on the internet once, found themselves aroused, and ended up in a terminal state of gay panic ever since.
Is that how the vile trans industry in this and other countries operates? Seems to be a bit more to the trans grooming than that. Although I suppose some of the repulsive propaganda they try to force on children could be considered porn.
For 0.6% of the population, their body count is stacking up. They AREN'T allowing me to go about my life.
“They AREN'T allowing me to go about my life.”
This is pretty sad to hear. Nobody should live in constant fear.
They're out there hunting conservatives and Christian school children for sport.
The innocent children/adults murdered by the Trannies in Nashville, Minneapolis, Colorado Springs were certainly "Persecuted"
Francis is full of it.
https://www.newsweek.com/desmond-holly-evergreen-school-shooting-suspect-2128804
Evergreen is not even vaguely close to Colorado Springs.
It's looking like a kike shot Kirk.
What should we do with kikes?
There, I made the bigotry relatable to you. Besides, as antisemitic as Kirk was, the change makes for a good revenge fantasy.
How about the Kikes shoot you.
How about a a Judeo Christian Army of Decency -- a modern crusade to rid the world of freaks and crazies.
And in which dimension of reality was Kirk antisemetic? Or are you also claiming that Bibi N is too?
Bleep you.
Don't you have a meeting in Doha to get to?
Now be fair, Frankie. If you hayseeds weren't spewing vile bigotry and racism all the time, I wouldn't be forced to make these uncomfortable comparisons
So repulsive on so many levels. Are you vying for a position in democrat party leadership? Maybe The NY Times editorial board? Almost overqualified it seems.
There was a point being made. You missed it.
Maybe try again?
There was a point being made. You missed it. It is a tasteless repulsive way to present a childishly absurd analogy by a repulsive TDS deranged troll who has quite a reputation for posting race baiting, antisemitic crap here. And my comment points that out. Too effectively it would seem, hence the trolling.
Try again little communist girl who never smiled. Or just f’ing try thinking and attempt to conduct yourself like a reasonable adult. Try it for a day, you might like it better than your bullshit trolling.
Your refusal to engage act is getting tedious.
If you don't like the analogy, explain why.
And no 'the post made me mad' is not a good argument.
Try again. Your projection is way past tedious. But that’s not the point of the bullshit trolling is it?
hobie - you full of S---- with the claim the Kirk was anti-semitic
He said that the majority of Jews in America are Jewing it wrong, based on their politics.
If you're mad at people who call Clarence Thomas a traitor to his race, you should be mad at Kirk too.
If you’re going to defame someone just assassinated, at least have the fucking decency not to “quote” him out of context. And I thought you trolls were repulsive before this happened, apparently you were just getting started.
There was a lot of posting yesterday, maybe you missed it: https://reason.com/volokh/2025/09/11/a-note-on-toleration-religious-and-political/?comments=true#comment-11200942
Now quit with your drama queen 'I'm even MORE angy now!' act. It's lame as hell.
"It's looking like a tranny shot Kirk."
Factual basis?
FBI
Even right-leaning media isn't claiming this AFAICT. MAGA people love to claim this for every shooting, though. It's pretty gross.
They found tranny-tinged Democrat Supremacist language carved on the bullets and the leading suspect is a tranny who recently published a song titled "Charlie Kirk Dead At 31" and recently got schooled in a viral debate with Charlie.
Yeah, we're making unfounded assumptions!!!!
With all the racist attacks Kirk piled onto gay people, one could almost consider this as an act of self defense, ala Rittenhouse. The sniper will get off at trial ala Rittenhouse, then we can fete him with speaking engagements...ala Rittenhouse. Revenge of the trannies!
Hobie - Again you are full of S--- claiming Kirk was throwing racist attacks
Random Internet sleuths are not the FBI
Any transsexual who possesses a firearm with intent to commit murder should be imprisoned.
Should we shut down the college campi in response to this?
Just send in the National Guard to make sure no opponents of the Regime walk around campus unmolested.
If Glioblastomas can be caused by being a (redacted)
CPI came out today and it while it wasn't great it doesn't seem like its going to delay a rate cut next week.
All Items CPI went to .4% in August, it was .2% in July, but core CPi stay eyed the same at .3% in both July and August.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_09112025.htm
Market interest rates are falling in response to the projected fed rate cut, Mortgage rates hit 6.35%, down from 7% in January.
And the stock markets responded by hitting all time highs.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/11/investing/us-stock-market
Inflation has not meaningfully changed since 1/2025. So much for the resident economic genius doomsayers who confidently assured us that the economy would be crashed by now. What chumps.
To be fair, we have not seen the full impacts of tariff policy yet.
Who asserted the economy would be crashed by September?
And also: this is the highest inflation in Trump's term.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/3-experts-who-predicted-crash-under-trump-and-what-theyre-saying-comes-next https://www.businessinsider.com/burry-grantham-stock-market-crash-recession-trumpcession-tariffs-inflation-krugman-2025-3
You have an awfully short memory.
Neither of those articles mentions anyone who claimed there would be a recession by September. So seems like my memory is pretty good!
In any case the many TACOs would of course delay the consequences.
Am I the only person who would very much like to see changes to this website to make it easier to follow who is responding to whom? for example, how about if each comment got a sequential number to allow referencing?
Agreed. At these Open Threads often become unwieldy.
Probably the best solution would be to allow users to collapse parts of the thread. (Meaning like there would be a button under each comment to hide all the replies to it, like there is on Reddit and Disqus, I think.)
neurodoc — Be the change you seek.
You probably like what they did with NFL Kickoffs too. I'll stick with my Coke-Classic and analog TV thank you.
I agree. If a topic is important enough for the reader to follow they will find the thread. I think, and may guilty of this too, that there is sometimes just a silly back and forth response rather than good counter arguments. Want clean threads, think about what you want to say, make your point and move on.
It would be more desirable to have a block feature for some of the more obnoxious and deranged trolls.
They do, Riva. Just click "Mute User".
All the vile threats against me and other conservatives on here just get grey-boxed now.
I just wish there was some way to take a look at a particular muted user's immediate comment, (To see what others are replying to.) without having to globally unmute them, and then remute them again afterwards.
Riva's programming doesn't cover the use of that button apparently
It’s not the same thing. I can mute out obnoxious trolls like “jb” but that only means that I can’t view his bullshit when I’m logged in. Blocking would prevent the troll from replying at all.
The Republicans in the Senate changed the rules to allow faster confirmation of picks and make it much harder to obstruct them:
"WASHINGTON — Republicans triggered the "nuclear option" to change the rules of the Senate on a party-line basis Thursday, a move that will allow them to speed up confirmation of President Donald Trump's nominees for key executive branch positions.
The vote was 53-45 to establish a new rule that allows the Senate to confirm an unlimited number of nominees en bloc, rather than process each one individually."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-republicans-nuclear-option-change-rules-trump-nominees-rcna230565
I'm happy to see it, even though the Dems will be able to take advantage of the rule change too, next time they have the White House and the Senate, the same way Republicans benefited when Harry Reid ended the filibuster on judicial nominations.
It is not a welcome development. Team D intransigence is directly responsible for it.
What do you mean "intrancigence"? Are they supposed to vote in favour of their own oppressors? Voting against these fascist nutcases is literally the least the Democratic Senators can do, and they can't even be counted upon to do that.
The least they can do. What is the most? You seem on-board with political assassination, eurotrash.
I am not. But I am also not sad about the death of a radical extremist who contributed all his life to the toxic nature of American public life.
I am also puzzled by the gun nuts' approach to the 2nd amendment. Is armed resistance against tyranny only OK if you don't support the tyrant? Am I the fool for expecting at least a minimum of consistency?
"But I am also not sad about the death of a radical extremist who contributed all his life to the toxic nature of American public life."
That's fine, but we're discussing Charlie Kirk, not whoever this radical extremists you have mind is. Frankly, if that's your description of Charlie Kirk, all you're doing is revealing that you have no tolerance at all for anybody dissenting from your own views; Kirk's own views were right in the political mainstream, and mostly what he contributed to was civil discourse.
"Is armed resistance against tyranny only OK if you don't support the tyrant? Am I the fool for expecting at least a minimum of consistency?"
It would be nice if we had an objective definition of "tyranny". From Merriam Webster: "1 : oppressive power every form of tyranny over the mind of man— Thomas Jefferson especially : oppressive power exerted by government the tyranny of a police state 2 a : a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler especially : one characteristic of an ancient Greek city-state b : the office, authority, and administration of a tyrant 3 : a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force living under the tyranny of the clock— Dixon Wecter 4 : an oppressive, harsh, or unjust act : a tyrannical act workers who had suffered tyrannies"
On one level, government is, of course, always oppressive to the losing side in an election, which is why as little of our lives as possible should be given over to governance in the first place.
But on the other level, we have an elected, term limited President governing as he ran on governing, with an elected Congress of his own party supporting him. And if you don't like the lawful policies he was elected to pursue, maybe win the next election instead of losing it and demanding that your policies continue uninterrupted?
Here's a statement by the guy who was questioning Kirk when he was shot.
“The point I was trying to make is how peaceful the left was (long pause) right before he got shot."
"I am also puzzled by the gun nuts' approach to the 2nd amendment. Is armed resistance against tyranny only OK if you don't support the tyrant? Am I the fool for expecting at least a minimum of consistency?"
In other words, why would anyone engage in "armed resistance" consistent with the 2d Amendment against a tyrannical government which they otherwise support?
I agree, they should, but it seems to me that, in practice, anyone who supports a "tyrannical government" in the first place is not likely to have been much of a "principled constitutionalist" beforehand--or they would have switched over to opposing such a government already.
But as the MAGA movement fractures over the economy and Epstein (and, probably, Jews) some of them may eventually twig that their Beloved Leader is just using them for his own ends, and that his feigned "reverence" for the 2d Amendment--like everything else--is actually conditional.
As I said above, being on the losing end of an election is always experienced as a bit oppressive, which is why we should delegate as little of our lives to government as possible in the first place.
But anybody who thinks our current government qualifies as "tyrannical", who didn't equally complain about, oh, the last century of American government? They're just griping that they aren't getting their way despite losing an election.
Seriously, during my life, even, US governments have had people burned alive in their own homes. Show some perspective, already!
Despite the unambiguous current trajectory, Brett says, "keep hope alive!"
It’s pretty silly to see anyone at this point claiming this is a normal administration doing normal presidential things.
I'm not seeing any American citizens being relocated to concentration camps. We don't have government agencies going around laying siege to church compounds and setting them ablaze, either. And, frankly, Trump's immigration efforts don't look all that extreme compared to Operation Wetback.
I think you're suffering from more than a little presentism and lack of historical perspective.
You got used to a kind of 1 1/2 party system, where the federal Republican party could be counted on to leave Democratic party policies largely in place when it had the majority. So you find reversion to the historical norm of an actual 2 party system where policies actually CHANGE with administrations kind of disorienting.
But, really, that's what you're reacting to: A reversion to normal American two party politics, after a few decades of abnormality.
OK so no citizens in concentration camps and the not even normal in it's time Branch Davidian thing is your bar for a normal administration.
That's not going to play. Your attempts to normalize Trump are on their face ridiculous at this point.
And, yes, Trump's attacks on the bureaucracy, which hit uncomfortably close to home, are in that same vein; Civil service protections as we know them today only date back to the 1970's, and have become part of why that 1 1/2 party system exists at the federal level. It's quite natural that anybody trying to restore a federal 2 party system would have to attack them; You can't have a change of policy with administrations if the bureaucracy is free to continue pursuing the same party's priorities regardless of the election results!
"and the not even normal in it's time Branch Davidian thing"
It was a lot more "normal" at the time than you'd want to confront, which is exactly why the militia movement was seeing explosive growth. The "Branch Davidian thing" was just the biggest and most public of it's sort, the culmination of a long and escalating series of incidents where the federal government had, bluntly, murdered inconvenient people.
It's just more presentism on your part, Sarcastr0. You routinely lack historical perspective.
And there we are. You like it, based on your pinched little ideology, so it can't be tyranny.
I really hope I never become so blindly ends justifies the means as you.
Branch davidians was a clinton/janet reno f--u-
Trump number one among people who carry weird grudges about shit from over 30 years ago.
"Branch davidians was a clinton/janet reno f--u-"
That's a common mistake. The frank truth is that it was mostly a GHWB thing. Reagan had brought the BATF to heel, but when Bush took over, he slipped the choke chain off them and said "sic'em!". And they started going wild.
Ruby Ridge happened Bush's watch, and the Branch Davidian attack was planned on his watch, by people who'd been promoted instead of fired for what they did at Ruby Ridge.
I'm not saying that Reno wasn't absurdly easy for the BATF to manipulate, and you weren't going to get any push back from the Clinton administration on going after gun owners, but that massacre really was as much Bush's fault as Clinton's.
Nobody needs them to vote in favor of the political opposition's nominees. Republicans have a Senate majority, remember?
All that was needed was for them to be willing to allow a vote to be taken, and THAT is the point where the intransigence came in.
We gave Clinton and Obama their people.
Clinton and Obama appointees were often blocked by Republicans (most notably Merrick Garland).
What is meant by their intransigence? You profess to be so informed of current events yet are somehow oblivious on this? The democrats are engaging in unprecedented coordinated actions to block and delay nearly every Trump nominee. Senate democrats oppose unanimous consent motions on every Trump nominee when traditionally non-controversial nominations pass without extensive debate or roll-call votes. They’re forcing procedural and cloture votes, and demanding pointless extensive scrutiny and debate to slow down the confirmation process. No other administration has ever been subject to these tactics in the blatantly bad faith, coordinated manner employed by democrats.
RE: Charlie Kirk murder
Are you telling me that the same gov't that can fly spirit bombers 36 hours and bomb the shit out of three sites in a distant country, can spy on any point on the planet with a dizzying array of spy satellites, but somehow cannot identify a person they have extensive surveillance video upon. What is wrong with that picture?
This leaves aside the question of political assassination as a means of civic intimidation becoming normalized.
If the perp is caught, does this murder warrant the death penalty?
You're right. It must be a Trumpist false flag.
Next thing, you'll be telling us that it was the analog of the murder of Horst Wessel
I'm not a Nazi, but Horst's song is a catchy tune with a beat you can Goose-Step to. Like Nena's 99 Luftballons, it's much better in the original German.
The bombing you mention was repeatedly planned for many years. I suspect it's just a matter of time before they identify Charlie Kirk's (apparent) shooter.
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox reminded the public that Utah still has the death penalty, and he intend to pursue it. Donald Trump also wants to pursue it from the federal level.
Not only does Utah still execute murderers, they have the option of using a Firing Squad if the drugs for Lethal Injection aren't available. Last used in 2010, they use 30-30 Winchester rounds from 25 feet, so even Dr. Ed2 might be able to hit the target (I'd still give him the blank round). Philippines once had a contraption where the weight of the condemned sitting on a chair started a timer that fired a rifle autonomously sparing any guilt feelings for a Human Executioner, must be a Catholic thing.
Frunk
Was Fronk a cameo? Is he dead? Is this a rotation? Unconstrained urges for innocuous change? Did I miss Frenk?
Like Limbaugh, Carlson and Shapiro, Kirk was just another racist outrage peddler getting wealthy off the rubes. I doubt his removal merits the death penalty
I doubt yours would either.
You have three generations of pissed off white males, just don't forget that.
Dr. Ed 2 with a decent retort (for once) of course it's Hobie-stank, who I picture as that Nerdy Fat Kid in "The Far Side" comics, you know, the one pushing with all his might on the door labeled "Pull" Dr. Ed 2 vs Hobie-Stank in an Oxford Style Debate? I'd pay to see that, wouldn't exactly be Lincoln/Douglas (More like Buckley/Gore Vidal)
Frank
Yeah, no mental illness on the left.
Because betting markets are legal now in the US, academics can do studies like this:
The Market Value of Fed Independence: High-Frequency Evidence from a Natural Experiment Jérôme Taillard, Linghang Zeng We study how financial markets price threats to Federal Reserve independence by analyzing one of the most direct challenges to Chair Powell’s tenure on July 16, 2025. Following media reports of escalating efforts to dismiss him, prediction markets sharply repriced dismissal risk within a two-hour window, creating a unique high-frequency setting to estimate market responses. Regression estimates imply that the certainty of Powell’s dismissal could erase $0.88–1.51 trillion in total market capitalization. Losses were larger for financial and credit-dependent firms, consistent with the credit channel of monetary policy transmission, and for high-beta firms. Treasury yields declined at short maturities but increased at longer horizons, steepening the yield curve, while the dollar depreciated against major currencies. These results show that markets price not only near-term policy-rate expectations but also the Federal Reserve’s ability to act independently.
The Market Value of Fed Independence: High-Frequency Evidence from a Natural Experiment
Jérôme Taillard, Linghang Zeng
We study how financial markets price threats to Federal Reserve independence by analyzing one of the most direct challenges to Chair Powell’s tenure on July 16, 2025. Following media reports of escalating efforts to dismiss him, prediction markets sharply repriced dismissal risk within a two-hour window, creating a unique high-frequency setting to estimate market responses. Regression estimates imply that the certainty of Powell’s dismissal could erase $0.88–1.51 trillion in total market capitalization. Losses were larger for financial and credit-dependent firms, consistent with the credit channel of monetary policy transmission, and for high-beta firms. Treasury yields declined at short maturities but increased at longer horizons, steepening the yield curve, while the dollar depreciated against major currencies. These results show that markets price not only near-term policy-rate expectations but also the Federal Reserve’s ability to act independently.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5436816
(h/t Matt Levine)
Kaz Has a Sad (Doesn’t Look Great!)
President Trump spent his 2024 campaign promising Americans he'd lower grocery prices.
Virtually all major grocery categories are now more expensive than they were a year ago, some substantially so
https://www.axios.com/2025/09/11/trump-tariffs-grocery-prices-rise-cpi
“We're going to get the prices down. We have to get them down. It's too much. Groceries, cars, everything. We're going to get the prices down.” Speech: Donald Trump Holds a Campaign Rally in Erie, Pennsylvania, Roll Call(September 29, 2024).
Oh, come on. Trump was just "being a little bit sarcastic" about lowering consumer prices. What he really meant, therefore, was that he'd raise prices--and he's kept that promise. They love that about him!
Locker room talk!
Must be sad to be in a financial state where you care about prices. Me? I'm like Bush the Elder circa 1992, amazed at the Checkout Scanners. Paid $70 for 2 Old Fashioneds and a Tall Dos Equis at DFW recently (it was a long layover, 2 hours) Of course, that's including the $20 Tip, and the drinks were actually in an Old Fashioned Glass, Makers Mark, and the guy smoked the Orange Peel with a Torch like he was friggin David Copperfield (or was it he made my $70 disappear like David Copperfield) The Dos Equis had a lime, and salt around the rim (Like Queenie likes it, but with an entirely different rim) You know what I won't spring for though? TSA Pre-Check, not because of the cost, I just love mixing with the Hoi Polloi, especially now that you don't have to take your shoes off, with the way the lines snake back and forth at the bigger airports, gets you some close up views of some Prime (Redacted) It's just money, you can't take it with you (if you can, I'm gonna be pissed)
Fronk
“amazed at the Checkout Scanners.”
And English, it seems.
at least I got the part about you and the Rims correct.
God: "Did you bring your spending money?"
Fronk: "I thought the good times were all for you, Big Guy. Looks like I'm shit out of luck now. How long's this part supposed to last?"
God: "Strictly speaking, eternity has no analog in time. Anyway, we have a buddy system here. You can confer with your buddy. Here she comes now. Qu..."
I'd spend it all here if I were you, Frank. A hedge against possibility.
Scrutiny Mounts of F.B.I. Under Patel as Kirk’s Killer Remains at Large
Already, a series of missteps by Kash Patel, the F.B.I. director, in recent months have invited worries that he has eroded public confidence in the agency.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/11/us/politics/fbi-patel-kirk-shooting.html
Seems like firing career agents and putting podcasters in charge may not have been ideal….
I was so surprised to see the Ka$h tweets, expertly contradicting each other...
"... have invited worries that he has eroded public confidence in the agency." When was there "public confidence" in the agency? When Efrem Zimbalist Jr. was an FBI agent?
In 2014, 59% of Americans believed the FBI was doing an excellent or good job.
Apparent fixed-camera footage showed up on late night news. It was described as footage of the alleged Kirk murder suspect making his escape. It looked like output from a surprisingly high-resolution device, edited to deliver an appearance of zoomed-in/zoomed-out isolation on the subject, and panning to follow his escape route. In short, it looked like a Hollywood portrayal of a scripted performance, with human intelligence deployed real-time to focus viewer attention, and to exclude distractions. Which is to say the news footage looked unlike any surveillance camera output I have seen previously.
I am so accustomed to Hollywood's scripted performances that I had to do a double-take. With the second take necessary to notice the unlikelihood that a surveillance camera would have done any such thing without a director and/or cinematographer controlling its operation.
I mention that not to imply that the footage actually was scripted, nor to suggest that it was fake, but just to say for whatever it is worth that it appears remarkable, And if the footage as shown looks the way it does because of a combination of a wide-angle lens, a high-resolution sensor, and post-production editing to optimize its explanatory power—which I assume is the explanation—that ought to be explained to viewers who see it.
A remoter possibility is that the footage as shown is the output of multiple cameras, some closer to various parts of the overall scene than others, with output digitally spliced into a continuous presentation. But I think that is a long-shot guess; if it did explain what was shown, the continuity and lighting consistency achieved would be remarkable. Much more likely seems an assumption of a fixed camera with edited output, from a surprisingly high-resolution sensor.
As presented without explanation, that footage could become basis for any number of conspiracy theories. Here is what it looks like, click on the bit with duration 1:03:
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c206zm81z4gt
I mention that not to imply that the footage actually was scripted, nor to suggest that it was fake
Don’t worry, someone will come along soon and do that.
Yeah, I'd tend to think that's from multiple cameras, I count at least two, possibly three. You can tell from the way the angles change on the cars as it pans and shifts from one camera to the next. These are light pole mounted cameras in the parking area.
I do agree there should be more release of unedited footage in cases like this. Transparency should be a spinal reflex.
Like with the Epstein files...
Bellmore — Note my partial agreement below.
But be careful about interpreting angle changes. If you crop discontinuous frames out of an image made by an especially wide angle lens, you expect reliable verticals only in the exact center of the image. If the lens was pointed upward, you expect increasing convergence of the verticals upward (with the convergence shown relative to crops cut from opposite sides of the frame). If the lens was pointed downward, the opposite-crop verticals converge downward at the edges of the frame. That latter instance could account for what you see at the end of the clip, on the assumption that part of the video was cropped from the right edge of a wide-angle shot made with the lens pointed below horizontal.
I do not see enough information in the video to permit me to say with certainty how many cameras may have been used, and do not rule out just one of them. Apparent editing cuts could have been used to slightly adjust framing emphasis, or between zoom-in/zoom-out changes to framing, without necessarily implying a switch to another camera with a different directional orientation.
After reviewing my own link, I think output from at least two cameras must have been spliced to deliver an impression of continuity. I note also that the scene as shown in the link omits parts of a continuous presentation as seen by me on television last night.
The BBC link also shows a fairly obvious edit at the moment the subject prepares to jump off the building— an edit which was less obvious in the TV presentation, which also lacked the narrative presenter shown in the BBC link.
I think what showed up on TV last night may have been modified and subtly improved subsequent to what you see in the BBC link above.
Once again, with emphasis, I do not intend to suggest malfeasance or conspiracy—quite the opposite. I think what has been presented lends itself to misinterpretations which would be unwise to entertain.
When the camera zooms in as he jumps down, I think they just used whatever video editing they had to focus in on a section of the larger frame. I don't think there was some Hollywood-like robo tracker following some moving thing in the image, much less some director faking up a focus shot.
You should see what can now be done with a simple, consumer action camera like an Insta360 X5. It makes this video look pedestrian in comparison. I have no idea what campus surveillance cameras are capable of these days, but it doesn't seem to me like it would require a film crew to achieve those results.
Also, looking at the other pictures shown on your link, I see the "person of interest" and his black rucksack, but does the recovered rifle break down so that it would fit inside? He could have planted it nearby earlier, I suppose.
Cameras can recognize faces. If it is a camera monitoring a roof, where you usually don't have people, could it be programmed to follow anyone it finds?
It wasn't a camera monitoring a roof. It was a camera monitoring a parking lot, that had the roof in its field of view.
My personal conspiracy for this is that the shooter is a Russian asset. Putin knows Americans are easily massaged into internecine conflict with each other with just a little low-cost Russian meddling. Plus, that was a fairly impressive well-trained sniper shot.
Putin would have ordered the shooter use an "assault rifle", though, to maximize the stress this would place on the US gun control debate. An "assault rifle" ban would be much easier to achieve than anything more comprehensive.
By using a simple, bolt-action hunting rifle, the assassin has shown that effective "common sense gun control" capable of preventing this kind of political violence would need to cover ALL firearms, not just the "evil-looking" ones, and remove them from circulation in the US entirely.
I'm a little bummed as well that it wasn't an assault rifle. Getting offed by his preferred student slayer would have been deliciously poetic
His name is Charlie Kirk
JFK was killed with a bolt action rifle, MLK Jr. with a pump action one, Malcolm the Xth with a sawed off Shotgun (they should make those Illegal, or at least highly restricted, oh wait, they are) RFK with a .22 Revolver, Brenda Spencer (She didn't like Mondays) used a .22 Semi Automatic Rifle, Meir Kahane with a .357 Magnum Revolver, and Nicole Simpson with a Knife (I hope they find the guy some day)
Frink
So, Francis, do you not know basic third grade English rules of capitalization, punctuation and such after what you say is extended schooling in the US or are you consciously performing some sad emulation of our weird POTUS? Apart from your past explanations of “I’m left handed” and ESL.
I mean, both are incredibly pathetic, but which is it?
I've told you a Gazillion times, I went to Pubic Screw-els, many of them were "ESL" (Ebonics was the Primary Lingua Franca) Only 2 Engrish courses in College (Literature isn't really "Engrish") where they treated Grammar like the outdated, unimportant, trivial subject it is, I think we had one test on it, rest of "Engrish 101/102" was the TA talking about his PhD Thesis... No Engrish Grammar required in Med-Screwel, and my Left Handed Scrawl was a "Feature, not a Bug" we were actually encouraged to write illegibly, harder to be used as evidence in a Malpractice Suit. (and just try writing left handed in one of those old fashioned Medical Charts that were in 3 Ring notebooks) and there were no "Accommodations" in 1982, Today they have the Menu in Braile at the Taco Bell Drive-threw, I took the MCAT at UAB, sitting in a cramped Movie Theater Style Auditorium Seat, with one of those fold-down (Right Handed of course) desks, and I Still scored 95th % Only reason I got in, (Oh, I had the 3.8 Science GPA, everyone did, even back then)
That story is full of shit. Or, in Francis language:
that Story is Full of )Shit
What a QAnon Shaman level weirdo. MAGA brings all the nuts to the yard!
Assault rifles are already extensively regulated. Legally, they're machineguns. Normal citizens cannot buy any that were made after 1986, and around a dozen states prohibit new transfers or ownership entirely.
By your argument, a left-winger would order the use of a hunting rifle in order to maximize the political mileage for gun grabbers. However, circumstances make Trump's more targeted ban look more sensible.
Oh, Michael, Michael, Michael (I'm sounding like a "The Office" character) You're using the term "Assault Rifle" in an outdated (but correct) way. You'll notice the Marxist Stream Media has moved to "Assault-STYLE Rifle" "Military-Style Rifle", it's a "Style" like Espadrilles.
and like trying to explain how the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free a single slave, it's like trying to explain Quantum Mechanics to Tim Waltz, but briefly, for the Huddled Asses yearning to eat for free, An assault rifle is a select fire rifle that uses an intermediate-rifle cartridge and a detachable magazine. Assault rifles were first put into mass production and accepted into widespread service during World War II. The first assault rifle to see major usage was the German StG 44, a development of the earlier Mkb 42. While immediately after World War II, NATO countries were equipped with battle rifles, the development of the M16 rifle during the Vietnam War prompted the adoption of assault rifles by the rest of NATO. By the end of the 20th century, assault rifles had become the standard weapon in most of the world's armies, replacing full-powered rifles and submachine guns in most roles.[8] The two most successful modern assault rifles are the AK-47 and the M16 designs and their derivatives
I'm glad you took that post seriously.
Hence, my use of the text style, "assault rifle", rather than assault rifle. I suppose I could have used the entirely made-up term "assault weapon", but I didn't. My bad. (I should add that you're making a distinction which very few people--and even fewer of the people who you should be addressing it to--even understand. It will convince no one. Maybe you're just trying to reassure yourself?)
A left-winger who wanted to completely fail would do that, yes. Any left-winger who wanted to achieve the realistically maximum gun control result, however, would use the nastiest-looking, most photogenic "assault weapon" available.
I'm not sure why your core defense is that you *meant* to use misleading words.
The meaning of "assault rifle" is such a recurring theme in the comments here that I think most readers already know it, and don't need my explanation to understand it.
"Plus, that was a fairly impressive well-trained sniper shot."
No, actually. The range was something between 140 and 200 yards. For someone skilled with a rifle (as I am), shooting off a rest with a scope, that is a fairly trivial shot. The target was the size of the 10-ring on a typical 200 yard target (7" diameter). Off a rest with a scope and a bolt action rifle I can bang 10's all day long.
and with a common 6-18X variable power Telescopic sight it's like shooting from 10-30 yards. I hit 2 Liter Coke bottles at 400 yards all the time. (If we're ever invaded by 2 Liter Coke bottles, I'm your man!)
Hitting the neck makes me think the shot was probably several inches off target. I figure the intended target was the head or chest. A little less accurate than the shot against Trump which missed the target by 4-5 inches.
Yes, as I speculated in the Wednesday Open Thread, it looked like an intended head shot with a "trigger yank," perhaps due to nerves, that usually results in a hit low and right for a right handed shooter.
Stephen, I am not a video expert but I agree that the clips shown appears to be a composite made from the output of several cameras. The resolution looks to be good but not better that many surveillance cameras that I have seen used recently to scan areas for humans starting wildfires
Nico, to even guess how good the sensor resolution is, you have to factor in the angle encompassed by the lens used full-frame. If you suspect you are looking at a cropped image, you do not know that angle, and it can be hard to guess.
Experience with image distortions characteristic of various framing angles can help with a guess. But for more direct evidence, zoomed-in visual examination of a cropped image can deliver approximate inferences about sensor resolution, based on how well-resolved fine details of approximately known sizes appear to be—such as grains of sand on a beach, or bird feather details shown in good light. But that is still complicated by expectation that such details will be better resolved with longer lenses, and less resolved with wider-angle lenses, which is the unknown factor your problem began with.
Note also that as sensor resolution increases in one dimension, data storage requirements go up in proportion to the square of that resolution value. And surveillance cameras designed to deliver anything but jerky-looking motion need to make and store a lot of images per second, and keep doing it continuously 24/7, which means even interim storage requirements can become large, expensive to manage, and slow to review. Computers depicted on NCIS deliver analytical performance and speeds still unavailable elsewhere. Hence the practicality of relatively low-resolution surveillance cameras, and improbability for high-resolution sensors routinely used for extended periods.
Also, you might suppose with some accuracy that there is emphasis in surveillance camera design to optimize low-light performance. For reasons related to electronic limits, high-resolution sensors deliver less-satisfactory contrast in low light conditions, making optimization of low-light imaging a trade-off exercise between opposite-tending requirements for two factors: resolution vs. contrast. As sensor capacity to record the finest variations in contrast decreases, adjacent pixels become more likely to get equal values, which degrades resolution.
Then, consider that the resolution vs. contrast result is affected by the length of exposure used for each frame. Longer per-frame exposures ameliorate somewhat that tendency of low light to degrade contrast. That comes at the cost of lost data with fewer frames, but with the advantages of lower cost sensors, less expensive data storage, and quicker review.
Trade-offs drive such decisions no matter what technological advancement has delivered. And lately, the technological advances in sensor resolution have been coming slower than previously. It may take some unforeseen technical revolution to deliver sensor performance much better than the best available for at least the last 5 years.
For at least twenty years, the standard for high-speed digital sports photography, and for some other imaging tasks demanding short exposures in low-light conditions (birds in flight, under jungle canopy), has been to reduce sensor resolution, in favor of improved contrast. The highest-performance, most in-demand, most-expensive camera bodies from Canon and Nikon, target that market segment. They typically feature sensor resolutions notably smaller than the highest available in less-expensive camera bodies from those same companies. Trade-offs.
It never ends with you sick bastards does it? How about giving the bullshit a rest, just this week? Next week you can go back to the bullshit, if you really want.
The murder of a nice guy has triggered blood lust in the Democrat Supremacists as graffiti and signs are popping up all over Democrat Supremacist strongholds in support of the political terrorism and advocating for more. "Kill all Charlie Kirks" is the war cry getting popularized among the Democrat Supremacist foot soldiers.
A Reign of Terror is nigh. At the moment, the good guys have the edge and are self organizing and holding account Democrat Supremacist ghouls and demons who are publicly celebrating, but this may not be enough to stem the tide of fomented rage and bloodlust from the violent Left.
I've spent my share of time adding to the public database at https://charliesmurderers.com I encourage others to do the same. I personally target public servants: doctors, government officials, school faculty, enlisted, etc as I find those roles particularly dangerous to be held by a bloodlusted Democrat Supremacist.
The threat is real. Lives are at stake. People must be held accountable for their ghoulish desires.
One good outcome - apart from Kirk's removal from the lecture circuit - is that unamerican racists such as yourself are losing your minds.
His name is Charlie Kirk.
Speaking of lost minds!
Correction, Frankie...his name WAS Charlie Kirk.
his Name was Charlie )kirk
Frankie-bot appears to be stuck in a loop
And hate-filled Democrat Supremacists such as yourself are losing their jobs and having their businesses destroyed.
Fuck all Democrat Supremacists. Saving lives is more important than their rotten, demonic feelings.
May they rot in hell.
In Roblox, Democrat Supremacists have created a world where five year old's can take turns killing Charlie Kirk.
But yeah, it's me whose lost my mind...
Have you no decency, Hobie?
This you?
"It's looking like a tranny shot Kirk.
What should we do with trannies?"
You know, this is the same dynamic that got you Trump; You take out the nice opposition, it doesn't make opposition go away, it just means you get less nice opposition.
More "you made me vote for Trump" from Brett
On Ukraine and Gaza, Trump Casts Himself as a Bystander, if He Can’t Be a Peacemaker
President Trump often insists he can bring peace to global conflicts. But when allies and adversaries alike appear to be ignoring him or testing American will, he adopts a what-can-you-do shrug.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/11/us/politics/trump-gaza-ukraine-peace.html
“Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, I will have the disastrous war between Russia and Ukraine settled. It will be settled quickly. Quickly.“
Unfortunately Roosha and You-Crane have a say in whether they'll keep fighting. Barry Hussein said "If you like your Doctor you can keep your Doctor!" (very White of Him) That's something he supposedly had control over, it's still called "Obama-Care" after all. But hey, He did get the Insurance companies to cover your HIV meds, how are those CD4's doing?
“Unfortunately Roosha and You-Crane have a say in whether they'll keep fighting.”
It’s almost like the dotard should have thought about this before his stupid claim!
So what was Barry Hussein's excuse?
Frankie's just mad that, when finally given a choice, no one opted to keep him as their doctor at the free clinic
You're wrong as usual, as with your choice of Orifices, they're still trying to guilt me into coming back, I didn't mind that I had to pay Malpractice, didn't get paid, and they'd put me on the schedule without asking first, It's when a "Suit" questioned why I called 9-11 when a patient was having an Acute Coronary Syndrome, and didn't like that I brought my own Oxygen tank and Defibrillator (they had neither, and the Defibrillator was required for all the Immunizations they gave) I wouldn't prescribe Amphetamines to Kids (or Adults), Antibiotics for Colds, or Viagra to Vagrants Oh, and the NP's would use my DEA # (they didn't want to spend the $888 for their own) which is Ill-legal at Bushwood (and everywhere else) It was "No Good Deed goes Unpunished" (HT Y. Berra)
I do love when a Surgeon will ask my "Opinion about Anesthesia" (they're meaning what specific technique" I always say "I definitely recommend Anesthesia, otherwise it's really going to hurt when you cut his belly open"
PS His name is Charlie Kirk
He’s on record here as losing his prescriptions because of the Medicaid work requirements.
Or Maybe he filled out his Forms )like ) this
You've got me confrused with some other "Frank" (You're such a Slut, can't even keep your Schlong calls straight) No Prescription Meds (not saying I might not benefit from any) OK, yes, my "Glaucoma Medication" but that was (redacted), just a way for me to get some legal Mary Jane, now that my Glaucoma's improved (and they test for THC) I get along fine with just jerking off. 81mg ASA is OTC, and the Kroger brand is just fine, Acetylsalicylic Acid is Acetylsalicyic Acid, When you had to renew your Medical License with a mail in form, I did have a few Typos that had to be corrected (they put down I was born in 1862) but now it's all on AlGores High-Speed Interwebs, and they'll tell you if you haven't been born yet
Senate Republicans on Wednesday blocked Chuck Schumer’s attempt to compel the release of the Jeffrey Epstein case files, hours after the Democratic leader made a bold procedural move to force a vote on the issue.
The Senate voted 51-49 to block the measure, with GOP Sens. Josh Hawley and Rand Paul joining with Democrats in support of it.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/10/politics/epstein-files-schumer-vote
“Listen, that Jeffrey Epstein story is a big deal, please do not let that story go. Keep your eye on this,” Bongino told his listeners in 2023.
It took 7 weeks to arrest Kohberger, a little longer to get James Earl Ray, almost 10 years to kill Bin Laden, guy was an Idiot to leave the Rifle behind, if the Governor has any sense of Style he'll have one of the Firing Squad use it. OK, they still haven't got the guy who butchered Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman Actually J-hovah did. (and the state of Nevada, 9 years? and not in a "Resort" Prison but in a State-Pound-me-in the-Ass Prison (they're harsh on guys who steal their own stuff back)
Rifles made before 1968 may not have a serial number. Or one the ATF can trace.
If so, leaving it is a GOOD idea -- they won't find you with it later, and it does them no good now.
Totally not shocked by the number of "professionals" in hot water right now. The number of doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. that couldn't contain their glee at the death of Charlie Kirk and thought it wise to share it with the world. Imagine being that educated, credentialed, lauded, and STILL retarded as hell. And you can begin to add "unemployed" to their impressive records. The FAFO is real but the surprising part (so far) has been how quickly the FO part has been. And there will be more to follow. The sadly hilarious thing about it? These people are probably certain to think they're the smartest people in any room they occupy. The real irony here? Kirk, who was not college educated, often reminded those people who he was debating on campus, who often mocked him for not having a degree, that being college educated was no guarantee of actual intelligence. Demonstrated in real time by these very people.
Holy shit, Swedish Chef mustered a paragraph! He’s really worked up!
Oh, look. My stocker showed up. Who could have predicted that?
Say the magic words so that I can fill my bingo card up.
What's even more stocking is that you are proving the need for better education
Especially when it comes to spelling. Or did you not understand the words that you meant to use?
He typo pounced on one your use of 'stocker' earlier.
He isn't intelligent enough to really debate. So he just kibitz's and shits up the joint every once in awhile with low-brow, smooth-brained comments.
What a shocker! A huge number of Americans despise racist, pedo, rapist MAGAs...and ain't afraid to say so.
LOL! Some of them may not have been afraid. But they probably understand what regret feels like...now.
... and are losing their jobs and businesses.
They have Freedom of Speech, but not Freedom From Consequences.
What do you do if you're the dean of something unimportant at some middle university and you get fired for showing the world that you're a shit human being? Like, where do you go from there? Probably some NGO to hang out for a while. But NGO's aren't having their best year, are they? What to do, what to do.
Similar to Rush Limbo, who was a College drop out but ended up advising POTUS's, still think his most genius work were his "Caller Abortions" briefly, when Rush got a call he didn't want, he would "Abort" it, terminating the call with a Vacuum Cleaner/Scream sound clip, adhering to "Roe" he wouldn't terminate a call once it was "Viable" (conversation had started). Response was furious, stations dropped him, sponsors dropped him, how dare he equate a woman's right to choose with a Vacuum Cleaner and a Scream!! Rush yielded to the pressure (even he couldn't broadcast without stations) noting that the Uproar was over his playing a Sound Clip on the Radio, and not the thousands of dead babies (back then in all 50 states)
What would America look like if we adopted Israel's attitudes towards Palestinian children but towards the children of Democrat Supremacists here, an equally deadly threat in the US.
They wouldn't be rushing to film themselves saying this if they didn't believe there was a wide audience applauding them and cultural cachet to be had. That is the culture Democrats have fostered. Now they have to take responsibility and un-foster it. Not both sides. Them.
https://x.com/mirandadevine/status/1966151930759229739
Wow. I can't stop thinking about this. We can't coexist with a culture who celebrates political violence and has normalized it's acceptance.
The utmost principle must be our survival, all other principles must be secondary to that.
I am really appalled.
All along, all these years I've been following and commenting on the Volokh Conspiracy, maybe 17 years (?), I though all the arguing on here among commenters, even while it sometimes became quite strident and insulting and mean, was all good natured, and that people were generally good, according to their own personal and political philosophies. But not any more.
The event of Charlie Kirk's assassination has revealed that some here are genuinely bad and evil. They applaud his death, mock him at his passing. That's downright despicable and evil. And now I know who you are, you've been driven from the woodwork by this tragic event. God help you.
I'm equally appalled at all of the people who are also celebrating his demise: teachers, professors, government employees, soldiers, doctors, health care workers, and on and on. What motivates these people? Have they ever really listened to Kirk, or are they just exhibiting herd behavior? Leaders of that hate herd mischaracterize, or even make up things about him, and legions just follow along, repeating the lies. There was almost no one in the political sphere who was as objective and polite, willing to listen to any side, and respectfully debate and respond. No one. And someone, presumably on the left, or driven by the left, or employed by the left, took his life. Was he so scary, so terrifying to the left that he had to be eliminated?
What has this world come to?
The only thing that I find a little amazing is that these people don't seem to learn. There are several recent examples of supposedly smart people doing this exact same thing, and suffering the exact same consequences. How did you not see this coming? It makes no sense. Other than to come to the conclusion that they're so blindly hateful that they actually can't help themselves. What else could it be? The internet is forever. Your fucktardedness on display forever. Who hires you now? Was it worth it? LOL! Let us know!
Actually, they had learned: That they could get away with it. Because they had been, for years.
You can't blame them for not realizing in time that things had changed.
Even notable public figures like Stephen King have been out there making some of these defamatory claims too. I hope he gets held accountable.
The event of Charlie Kirk's assassination has revealed that some here are genuinely bad and evil.
My moment was COVID. The COVID tyranny by the Democrat Supremacists opened my eyes to the true evil that infests the human condition. I never believed in true evil before then. Now I know evil is real. Satan is real.
Stephen King is an arsehole and has been one for 50 years -- he is the biggest one in Bangor, Maine. Typical new money.
That said, he never really came back from when he was hit by a car 20+ years back.
People like Kirk have been tormenting and humiliating gays, women and blacks for most of his short-ass career. Whether dead or alive, it is perfectly apt to smear him with his own style of hatred. I'm not at all surprised at all the pearl clutching this morning. But Kirk is being accurately described as the kind of person he proudly was...a eulogy of truth so to speak. And I'm not about to betray the truth and describe the man as being something he was not
LOL! You sound unemployed. Something recent, TikTok boy?
lmao yeah, he definitely sounds bitter.
Monsters are being held accountable.
It feels good.
No need to reinforce it, hobie, I've got your number.
Suspect in Custody
Yes!
Could it be?
Skye Valadez
https://x.com/SpikeDiet/status/1966478881470243181/photo/1
YES!
Watch this if you want to warm your heart this morning.
https://x.com/SaltyBeach/status/1966306477976826180
We need to get the government to put pressure and debank these people to, like they did to us under Biden.
Hold them to account.
My favorite comment:
"The dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed."
If you like that comment you might also like the novel Complicity by Iain Banks. If memory serves, it was a vibrator in the novel rather than a dildo.
Good news for Ilya Somin and Alex Nowrasteh: While an illegal immigrant with a long record of both immigration and violent crime was released by the Biden administration in January and went on to decapitate a hotel manager in front of the manager's wife and child for not talking directly to the illegal immigrant ... this crime was merely yet another "random, personal" murder and won't have to count as a political killing or terrorist attack.
https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/dallas-beheading-motel-police-yordanis-cobos-martinez/
So, a "Texas man" in MSM speak.
A "White Texas Man" according to the crime data they will collect.
Chuck Schumer @SenSchumer
"We must work together to bring political violence and the scourge of gun violence in America to a swift end."
Matt Van Swol @matt_vanswol
"Then please tell your party to stop shooting conservatives.
Start there.
Tell them Trump is not a fascist.
Tell them conservatives they disagree with are not a Nazis.
Go tell them that, then come back and tell us how that went."
Yesterday we had Democrat Supremacists on this site telling us that if we didn't want to be shot by one of them, we should stop expressing our beliefs in public. That it's our fault for enraging them by having an opinion they have declared as illegal.
They will never look inward on their own. They must be forced to do so through accountability and the suffering that comes from it.
The one thing I noticed is that virtually all these Democrat Supremacists who are being held accountable for their social media celebrations have pronouns in their bios.
lmao, the result of the great "purge" is we may not have to see this pronoun nonsense anymore.
I wonder if you could even use that as your heuristic for identifying a vicious and evil Democrat Supremacist?
If you see a person using pronouns, assume first your life, your family, or your job is in danger.
So having had a night to reflect on it, and seeing the comment from ThePublius above, I will say this.
I am already on the record stating that the death of Charlie Kirk is a tragedy, and my heart goes out to his family. That is true.
With that said, I think the following is also true. The idea that people (like ThePublius) are .... somehow shocked that everyone isn't falling to the ground and prostrating themselves in grief over this or otherwise acting in a performative manner for his benefit? Yeah, no.
Look, let's be clear. Not very long ago, a person had a hitlist of a bunch of Democratic politicians and killed one of them (and their spouse) and wounded another (and their spouse). What did we see? Mocking ... from prominent members of the GOP. No calls for anything. No flags at half mast. Commenters here who (even yesterday) said it was a Democratic plot or something.
Or ... how about all of the school shootings? They happen so often (even on the same day that Charlie Kirk was killed) that we don't even bother registering them most of the time. As Charlie Kirk put it "I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational." Even more, when one happens to register because the body count can't be ignored, we are told that the deaths are "fake," or due to "crisis actors" or other nonsense.
We're also constantly told that the real problem with political violence is from the left. Despite, um, reality. And statistics. And every time ... every single time ... you get the Website formerly known as Twitter (and now known as NaziHell) spreading lies that a transgendered person committed a crime- protip- it's never true (even in Massachusetts, Dr. Ed).
In short, let me try and explain the problem to you succinctly. We've been asking for empathy for the victims of violence. Repeatedly. And we've been dismissed. Over and over and over again. We've been told that gun deaths are rational- heck, just a small price for freedom. We've been told that tragedies aren't real- they're fake, they're crisis actors, they're false flag operations, or that the Democrats are using hit lists against themselves. We are told that the only problem in America is left-wing violence (the BUT ANTIFA! argument) despite the fact that we repeatedly see right-wing violence. We keep getting lied to and gaslighted when we ask that our very real pain gets acknowledged.
So now you ask- well, what about our pain? Why won't you acknowledge our feels and our hurt over this gun death? Sure, he might be someone that spent his life making sure the person that you believe is ruining the country gets elected. He might have said terrible things that hurt people you know and love. He might have helped increase the very culture of violence and divisiveness that led to this moment. But he was a person!
Yeah, he was. You're right. But why not apply some of that new-found perspective to yourself.
...first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Remember when loki13 used to run around here and pretend to be the "common-sense middle"?
Nothing in that comment suggests he was ever in the center. Nothing in that comment even suggests he is grounded in reality.
The mask is off of these people.
"He might have helped increase the very culture of violence and divisiveness that led to this moment. But he was a person!"
Again blaming us for the violence they perpetuate on us.
Our very survival is at stake. The next step for all these excuse makers and victim blamers is to take guns into their own hands like these deranged trannies have been doing.
Loki13. You need to get off the Koolaid.
LOL! That's a lot of words to say you've missed the point. Nobody is saying anybody has to kiss Charlie Kirk's ass or anything like it. Maybe just share with some of your fellow shitlibs that public dancing on the graves of murder victims isn't a good look. Because for supposedly smart people, they sure do some awfully stupid, evil things. And, as they're discovering, there can be consequences for publicly displaying what retards they actually are. That's the shocking part. That they STILL haven't learned that. Once you get past the tragedy that they're celebrating, it is absolutely satisfying to see Lady Karma introduce herself to these people. Some of the groveling apologies that they've issued have been the pickle on the shit sandwich that they get to eat. Bon Appetit!
Wisconsin Democrats have introduced a bill to the Wisconsin legislature to allow individuals to sign onto a list that would prohibit them from purchasing a firearm. Guns are a common tool to commit suicide and it seems like a good idea to limit gun access to people who may want at some point use the gun for self harm. It also seems to me that it is a good ideas to allow an individual to make this decision when they are at a good state of mind. Wisconsin Republicans have yet to comment on the idea and I hope they find a way to support it. I will again say that while the Constitution gives an individual the right to own a fire arm, they Constitution does not tell you whether owning a gun is a good idea for you personally.
Very interesting idea. Do you have an article link or bill text link?
I have noted in various reports over the last year a declining enthusiasm for tourism in places that have a lot of tourism. Tourism brings in a lot of money for those catering to the needs of the tourist, but it seems to be a growing annoyance for those with no or little financial benefit from tourism. One particular area where I have noted conflict is the use of short term rentals for companies like AirBNBs and Vrbo. Locals see these short term rentals reduce the number of long term rentals that locals needs. What is the feeling on local governments limiting short term leasing to improve housing for the locals. BTW - I am myself guility of using short term rentals when traveling.
Tourism is ultimately low-quality economic activity.
The argument that we should let Canada and other "allies" abuse us with respect to trade so that we can get a few dollars from tourists is fallacious.
Please log in to post comments
Mute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?
Liz Wolfe | 9.12.2025 9:30 AM
Steven Greenhut | 9.12.2025 7:30 AM
Alex Gladstein | 9.12.2025 7:00 AM
Matthew Petti | From the October 2025 issue
Peter Suderman | From the October 2025 issue
