“I’ma Stab You”: Connecticut Woman Fired Over Pro-Black Lives Matter TikTok Video

Screen Shot 2020-07-03 at 7.15.06 AM
YouTube Screenshot

We have been discussing the free speech issues raised by efforts to terminate professors who criticize the Black Live Matter Movement or aspects of the protests following the killing of George Floyd.  However, there is another such controversy with the inverse fact pattern.  Claira Janover has been fired as an “incoming government and public business service analyst” at Deloitte after posting a video that suggested that she would stab people who said “all lives matter.”  Yesterday, we discussed a dean at the University of Massachusetts who says that she was fired for using such a line in an email. Ironically, Janover shows the same intolerance for anyone with an opposing view, but the case still raises some of the same free speech issues that we have previously discussed, including the punishment of individuals for their social media postings.

Janover just started the job after graduating from Harvard University but was fired after her TikTok video where she lashed out at anyone who tells her that “all lives matter.”  She attacked anyone with “the nerve, the sheer entitled Caucasity to say, ‘all lives matter.’ . . . I’ma stab you. I’ma stab you, and while you’re struggling and bleeding out, I’ma show you my paper cut and say, ‘My cut matters, too’”

She posted that video and later returned to social media to lash out at her termination.

Janover insists that  the clip was “clearly” an “analogous joke,” and noted a message with it explicitly stating: “For legal reasons this is a joke.”

I did not see the message but I honestly took the video as a poor joke.  We have seen other such jokes go awry. Indeed, while such jokes can often receive strikingly different treatment from universities and employers depending on who is the butt of the joke.  I would prefer a more tolerant approach that is not dependent on the content of such a posting.

For years, we have discussed the free speech concerns as private and public employers punish workers for their statements or actions in their private lives. We have addressed an array of such incidents, including social media controversies involving academics. In some cases, racially charged comments have been treated as free speech while in others they have resulted in discipline or termination. It is that lack of a consistent standard that has magnified free speech concerns.  We have previously discussed the issue of when it is appropriate to punishment people for conduct outside of the work place. We have followed cases where people have been fired after boorish or insulting conduct once their names and employers are made known. (here and here and here and here and here and here).

Janover has been mocked for saying that she fear being “murdered” and added “Apparently I’m threatening the lives of people — unlike cops, obviously.”

Janover seemed to careen from the defense to the attack, hitting her company on social media: “I’m sorry, Deloitte, that you can’t see that. That you were cowardice [sic] enough to fight somebody who’s going to make an indelible change in the world and is going to have an impact.” That would certainly rule out any reconciliation with the employer.  She also lashed out at Trump supporters: “I’m too strong for you. I’m too strong for any of you ‘All Lives Matter,’ racist Trump supporters. It sucks. But it doesn’t suck as much as systemic racism. And I’m not going to stop using my platform to advocate for it.”

The question however remains the same.  Does it matter if you believe (as I do) that this was meant as a dumb joke?  It should.  She made no connection to the company. That was done, yet again, by critics who wanted her fired.

I have previously raised my concern that the greatest threat to free speech values may be coming from “Little Brother” rather than “Big Brother.”  This comes in the form of private censorship of social media but also punishment by companies for statements on social media.  The result is a type of fishbowl society for free speech as everyone feels that they are being monitored for any controversial pictures or statements.  The result is chilling for those, like Janover, who want to speak out on political causes like Black Lives Matter.  One can certainly criticize her for her rhetoric and even her views but there is no reason why her personal views should be viewed as material to their work at Deloitte.

The controversy also shows the hypocrisy of many in these controversies, including Janover.  Those who fostered intolerance for opposing views are the first to demand tolerance for their own views. Those who criticize the “cancel culture” are the first to try to cancel others.  I fear that the loser in all of this will be free speech and the sense of freedom to engage others on social media or public forums.



389 thoughts on ““I’ma Stab You”: Connecticut Woman Fired Over Pro-Black Lives Matter TikTok Video”

  1. The dean at the University of Massachusetts said absolutely nothing suggesting she would commit violence; the intern stated an actual plan to commit violence with gory details. She is sick and needs mental health counseling and any firm that hires her is risking their employees and customers lives.

  2. She wasn’t even fired. She was in the intern pool and they withdrew an offer to her. Interns are a dime a dozen at big accounting firms and pretty much expendable.

  3. What’s amusing about this is that Harvard tosses > 90% of the applications it receives in the circular file. Their supercompetitive process yielded this young woman.

    Thomas Sowell suggested some years ago that colleges test their admissions process by randomly assigning applications to two piles. Half the berths in the freshman class would be allocated to each pile. Pile one would be screened by the admissions office staff using their usual hocus pocus. Pile two would be assigned to a set of statisticians who would derive a vector equation making use of the applicants’ board scores, achievement test scores, and high school GPA as arguments, admitting those who scored over a thresh-hold value. After four years, you’d compare the two subgroups and see how they performed in school. Sowell didn’t think any school would try this, because it’s a reasonable conjecture the admissions office staff are negative-marginal-product employees and that’s something people would rather not know.

    1. She can say anything she wants, but she can’t expect her speech to be free of consequences. What if her potential employer scrolled through her social media, found this post, and threw her application in the trash? No difference, they have a right to not want her associated with them.

    2. ” Pile one would be screened by the admissions office staff using their usual hocus pocus. Pile two would be assigned to a set of statisticians who would derive a vector ”

      The people that are chosen are in part a reflection of the inner person doing the choosing.

    1. The part is derived from a social fiction. Police killings are not common and people subject to police killings are not disproportionately black. This whole controversy is a fraud.

        1. Obviously, you would explain it coherently if possible. But you can’t, so you instead make it about the other guy.

            1. Right. You’re the one saying you won’t explain something and I’m the one not listening.

              If you have something to say, why not say it? Make the effort.

            2. Calm down, Enigma. You can relax some now. Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben are going away. Warning labels are going on Gone With The Wind, and The Dixie Chicks have changed their name! Now, blacks can become one with America, and all those black thugz killing other blacks will end, and black women will start getting married before having babies! Oh what a wonderful world we are entering of true racial equality!

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

                1. Enigma– You see yourself as an expert on racism so answer this:

                  ByTheBook said in an earlier thread that he believes blacks are born with inherent disabilities but are good at jumping.

                  Is that a racist statement?

                  Does it make him a racist?

                  1. Paul, I could start listing unlimited numbers of horrible white people and things they have done. You want to own them and be constantly reminded of them?

                    Sadie Mae is an ugly and ignorant racist along with antonio and Young. Your tolerance and even encouragement of them is on you.

                    1. Book is a straight up racist pretending to be anti-racist. He declared blacks are born with inherent disabilities. THE KKK couldn’t have been more clear.

                      Stop shooting ‘racist’ accusations in every direction Book. We know your racist game.

                    2. Anon – you can take on as much “white guilt” as you want. I ain’t going there.

                    3. Paul, I could start listing unlimited numbers of horrible white people and things they have done. You want to own them and be constantly reminded of them?

                      Except she didn’t do that. She pointed out that he’s ignoring actual common problems in order to fuss about rare events and fictional problems. That’s the salient feature of discussion of race matters in this country.

                  2. Paul,
                    There wasn’t. Which is why he responded with the only thing he could think of. She wins that exchange as she usually does.

              1. Prairie Rose, Black people are not monolithic and much depends on their individual circumstances including geography, family circumstances, and education. If you tried to answer the question about the biggest struggles for white people you might see what I’m saying.
                Having said that, ALL Black people in America face discrimination to some degree and also are subjected to varying degrees of systemic racism, because it’s systemic. The example I’ll give you is the G.I. Bill which is credited for helping to establish the middle-class in America. It provided the means for home ownership which led to generational wealth and was a huge factor in getting people on their feet. Now imagine that Black veterans were almost universally excluded from those benefits. It created a divergent economic path which didn’t all of a sudden get wiped away by the Federal Housing Act of 1968 or the elimination of redlining or steering. The next example would be education where Brown V Board of Education was merely a suggestion (“With all deliberate speed”) and segregated schools with limited resources have never been eliminated in the South. Law enforcement came form two tracks, to manage immigration in the North and slave patrols in the South. Their goal now as always is more about property protection and suppressing specific groups. Their motto “Protect & Serve” is technically correct when one realizes who they are protecting and serving which is more of a class argument than race.
                If you’re going to presume to tell me what I should think the biggest problems we face are, I’ll be happy to share the systemic reason that at least partially contributes to the situation. I personally spend zero percent of my day worrying about black on black crime whereas any interaction with the police has my Spider-sense tingling.

                1. “I personally spend zero percent of my day worrying about black on black crime whereas any interaction with the police has my Spider-sense tingling.”

                  And that, Sir, is your problem in a nutshell. I suspect you also spend zero percent of your day worrying about the black illegitimate birth rate, (77.%), and zero percent of your day worrying about the failure of black kids to graduate, or even speak passable English,

                  Therefore, you are doomed to spend the rest of your life wallowing around in impotency and doing jack squat nothing to help the black folks you pretend to care about.

                  Squeeky Fromm
                  Girl Reporter

                  1. I suppose I could have been more clear and said I personally spend zero percent of my day being concerned about being a victim of black on black crime.
                    Still, that you presume to dictate (not that you care in the slightest) what my concerns should be and how I must demonstrate concern for my people is illustrative.

                2. “I personally spend zero percent of my day worrying about black on black crime”


                  Enigma. You hit on the biggest challenge blacks face today: that attitude. You don’t give a crap. You want to whine and blame the rest of the world for whatever grievances you nurse and feed but will not come forward and accept responsibility. You are living up to a very negative stereotype.

                3. Enigma,
                  I appreciate your honesty in this post. I have no doubt you believe very strongly about what you wrote, but I was struck by your last sentence. My observation of your comments remind of my consulting work with organizations trying to do process improvement. Your opinion has value, but it’s limited by what you observe, much in the same way a line worker is not the only person you go to for recommendations to improve total quality output. You admit that you ignore data, that for some reason you don’t consider relevant to improving the situation. W. Edwards Deming would say to your limited observations and solutions: How could you know? The parable of The Blind Men and the Elephant would describe how you’re observing the situation:

                  It was six men of Indostan, to learning much inclined,
                  who went to see the elephant (Though all of them were blind),
                  that each by observation, might satisfy his mind.

                  The first approached the elephant, and, happening to fall,
                  against his broad and sturdy side, at once began to bawl:
                  ‘God bless me! but the elephant, is nothing but a wall!’

                  The second feeling of the tusk, cried: ‘Ho! what have we here,
                  so very round and smooth and sharp? To me tis mighty clear,
                  this wonder of an elephant, is very like a spear!’

                  The third approached the animal, and, happening to take,
                  the squirming trunk within his hands, ‘I see,’ quoth he,
                  the elephant is very like a snake!’

                  The fourth reached out his eager hand, and felt about the knee:
                  ‘What most this wondrous beast is like, is mighty plain,’ quoth he;
                  ‘Tis clear enough the elephant is very like a tree.’

                  The fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said; ‘E’en the blindest man
                  can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can,
                  This marvel of an elephant, is very like a fan!’

                  The sixth no sooner had begun, about the beast to grope,
                  than, seizing on the swinging tail, that fell within his scope,
                  ‘I see,’ quothe he, ‘the elephant is very like a rope!’

                  And so these men of Indostan, disputed loud and long,
                  each in his own opinion, exceeding stiff and strong,
                  Though each was partly in the right, and all were in the wrong!

                  So, oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween,
                  tread on in utter ignorance, of what each other mean,
                  and prate about the elephant, not one of them has seen!

                  John Godfrey Saxe

                4. Enigma,
                  I tried asking a question in response to the widespread protests that Black Lives Matter, which seems to be from the assumption that people don’t think black lives matter (or else why declare that they do).

                  “Black people are not monolithic and much depends on their individual circumstances including geography, family circumstances, and education. If you tried to answer the question about the biggest struggles for white people you might see what I’m saying.”

                  I do see what you’re saying, and that’s why people are annoyed with the group divisions being perpetuated in society.

                  I am quite aware black people are not monolithic. Do you support these protests? If so, you must have some opinion on why those supporting the protests feel upset. It isn’t just about poor policing. It is very complex, so the parts need to be examined. Laying the blame on ‘systemic racism’ is not very helpful because the multifaceted problems cannot be boiled down to one or even two causes.

                  “If you’re going to presume to tell me what I should think the biggest problems we face are”

                  I have presumed nothing. I have my thoughts, as do you, but I asked you what you think are some of the concerns are. What do you think are the biggest problems needing to be addressed?

                  “I personally spend zero percent of my day worrying about black on black crime”

                  Why is that?

                  1. Answering your last question first, it’s because I don’t feel unsafe as opposed to not having a concern about the issue. Regarding the protests, I’m 100% for the protests though they have been at least partially usurped by outsiders and also exhibit the frustration of Black people. Without the protests, you could make a case that without violence, nothing would change. Mississippi has taken down their state flag, many monuments and statues to racists were taken down voluntarily, others not so much. If you were Jewish and expected to happily walk past monuments to Nazi’s, yopu’d immediately get the point.
                    Poor policing isn’t the issue it’s disparate policing. Since the Minneapolis protest after an officer had his knee on George Floyd’s throat for minutes after he had no pulse, there have been several recorded instances of malicious police activity towards minorities. If any of those had happened to a blonde white girl there would be an uproar.

                    1. Why do you believe the officer who killed George Floyd was motivated by racism? There are videos online of white cops killing white men, so in those cases race likely isn’t a factor and people have to at least stop and wonder just why that is happening. Are the cops just jerks who do this? Are they good guys with bad training? Something else? I don’t have the answers and I don’t think any of us will figure out those answers because we’re not allowed to have the conversation. Instead, we’re told exactly what happened and ordered to believe it or be labeled a racist and part of the problem.

                    2. Yes I do, having to do with him clearly giving less value to George Floyd than we have given to someone white, or an animal for that matter. Who keeps their knee on someone’s neck after hearing their pulse can’t be found?

                    3. having to do with him clearly giving less value to George Floyd than we have given to someone white, or an animal for that matter. Who keeps their knee on someone’s neck after hearing their pulse can’t be found?

                      The intentional killing of another human being by definition, demonstrates the killer gave less value to the victim than other humans. If you truly believed this was racist and evidence of systemic racism, then you’re being willfully ignorant by paying no attention to the black on black crime/murder rate in this country. And here’s the tragic irony of that ignorance; while you and others effort to diminish the effectiveness of the enforcement of laws, violent crime is on the rise and the impact is being felt largely by the very communities you claim to care about.

                    4. Tell me if I’m missing something? I can’t believe George Floyd was murdered related to racism due to black on black crime? If you walked into a store and attempted to pay for goods with what may have been a counterfeit $20 bill, would you expect to end up dead? Do you believe the laws you say you cherish are being enforced without consideration of race?

                    5. Enigma virtually everyone believes the Floyd death was horrible. You can’t claim racism based on Floyd because virtually everyone says the officer was wrong. When you make it about racism you destroy all your other arguments

                    6. I’ll answer your question after you stop dodging the elephant in the room. I haven’t seen the evidence proving this murder was racially motivated. I and the rest of the country didn’t need to. What we saw was someone that didn’t seem to value the life of the person they had under complete control. What the rest of the country never gets to see pumped all over the airwaves is the number of violent crimes and murder by black people on black people. If you want find examples of what systemic is, then look no further than that. What’s the over/under on shootings and murder in Chicago for this weekend?

                    7. The “elephant in the room” is you trying to dictate what is and isn’t important. I am not one of those people who sees racism everywhere (though sometimes they’re not wrong). I am also not one who sees racism nowhere. Changing the subject to Chicago shootings doesn’t negate everything else that happens all over the country. A few officers in Aurora, CO got fired for mocking the death of a black teenager who died from a choke-hold in police custody. His crime? A citizen called the police because he looked “sketchy” while walking home.

                    8. Nope. You brought the elephant in the room by saying I personally spend zero percent of my day worrying about black on black crime. It’s a reality you’ve proven unable to address. I’ll ask you this: Will police reform address the root problems in black communities?

                    9. enigma – the cop is a cop not an EMT. They are rookies, one is on the street for the first time. Are you sure he can take a pulse? As a sidenote, I went to a college with a medical college and the med students used to run around experiment on the rest of us. When they first got their stethoscopes, most of them could not find a heart beat. The campus was full of zombies.

                    10. Enigma– “If you walked into a store and attempted to pay for goods with what may have been a counterfeit $20 bill, would you expect to end up dead? ”


                      You might expect to end up dead if you took fentanyl and methamphetamine in combination. That can kill you. You might expect to end up dead if you have hypertension and cardiovascular disease AND the drugs and you fight with three cops trying to arrest you. You might expect to end up dead if you have all of that plus COVID. Floyd was a diseased, drug-raddled thug who was a walking dead man. Too bad he died during arrest rather than the normal way being shot by another black man.

                    11. Tell me if I’m missing something? I can’t believe George Floyd was murdered related to racism due to black on black crime?

                      Once more with feeling. The quantum of fentanyl in his femoral blood was 11 nanograms per cc. That’s a concentration commonly found in the corpses of people who died from overdoses. The person who killed George Floyd was…George Floyd.

                    12. enigma – according to Dr Birx, George Floyd died of CV-19. Chauvin is charged with murder because of reasons.

                    13. His knee was not on George Floyd’s throat and the autopsy report averred that Floyd’s trachea was undamaged.

                    14. Enigma,
                      “How does it feel to advocate the same beliefs as Hitler?”

                      What is being advocated that is the same as Hitler?

                      This sort of reply is not very helpful in sorting out a complex problem. It is an ad hominem of sorts.

                    15. If you read the exerpt from Sowell that Allan was pushing, it’s no different that what Hitler was advocating. I hope you point out to Allan that it isn’t helpful instead of criticizing me for pointing it out.

                    16. Enigma,
                      Context matters. What portion of the Sowell quote is no different than what Hitler advocated? It would be helpful to cite what Hitler said that makes it no different than Sowell. Is it reasonable to believe that Sowell is advocating the same context that Hitler used his remarks?

                    17. Enigma, I just got this video of an interview with Thomas Sowell regarding his last book and perhaps most important. You likened him to Hitler only because Sowell spoke the truth that makes you have to question everything you believe. His interview is at:


                      In this book he is pointing to the solution for minority students based on facts and statistics. If fairly read by those in power that control the teaching profession there would be a good chance that the major problems faced by blacks would be alleviated. What stops the black child from being able to enter society like everyone else is not his poverty or his color rather it is the Vision of the Annointed (another book) that is destroying them. You act as if you are a part of the annointed and only care about protecting your beliefs leaving one generation after another to suffer.

                5. There are no segregated schools in the South and have not been for fifty years or more. You do have racial clustering in schools as a function of residence patterns. Expenditure on public primary and secondary schooling in this country is ample – it has bounced around 4% of gross domestic product for 50 years even as the % of the total population who are of school age declined by 1/3. It has also been known – first demonstrated by James Coleman in 1966 – that past a certain point expenditure per se is a weak vector in influencing school performance. A federal judge in Kansas City insisted 30 years ago on seizing control of local schools, levying taxes by diktat and equalizing expenditures. It had scant effect on performance.

                    1. It does not exist. There is no place in the Southern United States (or anywhere else) which has parallel school systems. These people are complaining about intra-metropolitan variation in school demographics, which is a silly complaint. If you don’t like your school demographics, rent an apartment in a different neighborhood.

                    2. enigma– if black people are concerned about segregation (as I hope they would be) why is it that some black college students who seem to be in the forefront of anti-racism protests, insist on being segregated by having a black student union, black dormitories, even black graduations? I noticed yesterday that the black university student in Chicago demanding that Lincoln’s statue be removed was writing on behalf of the black student union. And, the only actual video evidence I have seen of voter suppression was several years ago when two black men holding what appeared to be weapons, standing in front of a polling station on the east coast. As I recall, the Obama administration did not prosecute although I may be mistaken.

                    3. The two people (New Black Panthers) were standing outside a Philadelphia polling location that was 98% Black. There is no indication (other than Fox NEws) that any people Black or white were confronted or harassed about voting. The reason for Black Student Unions are likely related to having a stronger voice and self-preservation. I happened to attend an HBCU with a few white students and it wasn’t an issue.

                    4. Blacks shouldn’t be the least bit concerned about ‘segregation’. We have racial clustering in this country because of many individual decisions in re what people want on the margin. Blacks should be concerned about the quality of public services in black neighborhoods, but there is little agitation on such matters.

                    5. Yet another example of explaining what Black people should and shouldn’t be concerned about. Segregation is a precursor to inferior public services. To be sure, segregation is but one of a myriad of issues which can be included under the label systemic discrimination.

                    6. The irony here is that white republicans tend to support school vouchers that would help black families choose which school they attend. It’s the democratic leaders who fight school choice.

                    7. Strange as it may seem to you, Enigma, people will critique your priorities. It’s part of public discussion of public policy, because people have competing priorities.

                      The public services that are deficient in slum neighborhoods pretty much begin and end with law enforcement, though some amendments to refuse collection and building code enforcement are in order. Well, we’re all in the midst of a national campaign to deligitimize law enforcement, so you won’t be getting more assiduous policing. Heckuva job.

                    8. You obviously have no background as to how most slum neighborhoods came to be. These were policy decisions involving local municipalities and federal lending requirements. I have yet to weigh in on reorganizing law enforcement which I believe must happen because it has evolved little from the days of slave patrols and suppressing immigrants.

                    9. enigma – police departments grew from emerging municipalities and growing crime rates, not slavery. In fact, it will not be until after the Civil War that smaller communities would get police departments. The early ones were salary based, not fee based, although in some cases you could claim a reward, That would change.

                    10. enigma – slave patrols were not protecting property or investigating crime. You were painting with a broad brush and even your cited article notes the difference.

                    11. Their only function was to protect property and investigate the crime of running away. That and stoking fear to prevent uprisings. What is it you believe they did?

                    12. enigma – the job of northern police departments was to provide jobs for immigrant Irish who would vote Democatic.

                    13. There was patronage which led to a high percentage of Irish policemen. Police forces didn’t exist to provide jobs but to provide control. Irish p[policemen often worked alongside the still existing Irish gangs to quash the other immigrant groups. All to serve “the man.” Current police forces serve similar functions when needed. Some of that has been on display the past couple months.

                    14. ” high percentage of Irish policemen.”

                      Once again I think Enigma is using his telescopic vision where the lens is plastered with the word racism. He appears to say that in earlier times the police all over the country were Irish. I don’t think that is correct. Since early on the police were part of the patronage system that would mean most local governments throughout the country were controlled by the Irish.

                      I wonder it the Texas Rangers were Irish.

                    15. “My conversation with Pail was specifically about Northern policemen.”

                      Enigma, reducing the scope of the number of states to just the northern ones still doesn’t make your mathematics work. For what you say to be true most of the local governments throughout the nation would have been controlled by the Irish which you say through patronage would create Irish police departments all over. It just isn’t so but you want to keep pushing your racism claims as if it only happened to you. You want a monopoly on victimhood. You can have your victimhood because victimhood is not desieable even to those that faced far greater devastation. Most people want to go on with their lives and improve them rather than stay in the same place crying victimhood.

                    16. “Reading with comprehension”

                      Enigma, I was responding to your words, no one else’s. You have a lot of faulty information including those words and you are not very good at math. You are, however, a champ in victimhood which is essentially your point now and your point most of the times when you aren’t displaying TDS.

                      I’d like you to compare your victimhood to a lot of others but I don’t think you wish to engage. I am going to post an article by Thomas Sowell on culture separately. You should read the whole thing but perhaps with your mindset you should focus on his points about slavery. Though black, Thomas Sowell is not a victim. Instead he rose and applied himself to become an intellectual giant. He could have chosen victimhood and ended up nowhere.

                    17. From time to time, Olly. You’ve shownn yourself able to engage in conversation, even with those you disagree. At other times, you’re just Allan’s wing-man. Guess which one you are right now.

                    18. Olly, that is what is strange, Enigma is never concerned about black on black death. I don’t think he cares much about our other minorities either. He is totally hooked on victimhood and maybe he wants my family to pay reparations when the reparations should come our way instead. We don’t want them because we don’t play the victimhood game. It’s funny, even the first generation one’s are doing well and no one is asking for a government handout or any type of affirmative action.

                    19. His whole persona is centered on the victim status. Check out his blog. He would have to go into witsec if he chose the more noble cause.

                    20. Your blog says ENIGMA IN BLACK (Coming From All Directions). Unless you can direct me to a discussion on your own blog where you’ve discussed black on black crime, then you’re clearly avoiding at least one, massive issue facing the black community. So no, not all directions.

                    21. You obviously have no background as to how most slum neighborhoods came to be. These were policy decisions involving local municipalities and federal lending requirements.

                      Enigma, you have slums all over the world. You had slums prior to 1937 and you had slums after 1968. Doesn’t have anything to do with ephemeral mortgage insurance schemes. You have slums because there’s no end to the way nice things are nicer than not-so-nice things. You have slums because of a mutually reinforcing tendency of impecunious people to cluster, which reduces potential rent rolls, which generates a deteriorating building stock, which in turn reduces the willingness of ordinary people to live in those areas.

                      This sort of thing isn’t expressed in the same way in every kind of society and in every kind of locale. You want to improve conditions in the slums, work on deficient public services, on amendments to building codes and building code enforcement, on tax abatements, on enhanced trash removal, and on the quantum of street crime. Whining about real estate lending two generations ago among populations predominantly composed of people who hadn’t the credit history or income to qualify for a loan is a waste of time.

                6. Can you give us some examples of systematic racism from this century??? It would be helpful to provide some laws or or corporate policies that are racist If you do that, we can fight them together.

                    1. You were going to dismiss whatever I said. I have no obligation to try to convince anyone who has no interest in hearing what I’m saying. I’ll go to great length to share my opinion with someone who’s listening. You can decide for yourself what category you’re in?

                    2. @enigmainblackcom I have asked you repeatedly for information and tried to have a conversation. You keep making excuses, so please don’t pretend that I’m being dismissive.

                    3. No offense, but you’ve been nothing but an ass and I owe you nothing. Your idea of a conversation is telling me what I should do or think and therefore I’m pretty much ignoring you. Not as much as my perpetual trolls but you’re getting there.

                    4. enigma– you said “The reason for Black Student Unions are likely related to having a stronger voice and self-preservation.”

                      Wouldn’t that be a good justification for having a White Student Union and a Whites Only dormitory, particularly at an HBCU? At those schools, whites would be a minority and might need a stronger voice. I don’t suspect any administration would allow a White Student Union or Whites Only dormitory and I can only imagine the reaction of BLM and its comrades. What do you think?

                    5. The reason for Black Student Unions are likely related to having a stronger voice and self-preservation.”

                      Black students have no need of either in collegiate settings. They do need proper vocational guidance, which they’re not getting.

                    6. No offense, but you’ve been nothing but an ass

                      Thanks for sharing!

                    7. @enigmainblackcom wrote:
                      “No offense, but you’ve been nothing but an ass and I owe you nothing. Your idea of a conversation is telling me what I should do or think and therefore I’m pretty much ignoring you. Not as much as my perpetual trolls but you’re getting there.”

                      I am just asking you questions in an effort to get past all of the usual platitudes. If you think that is telling you want to do or think, then I can’t help you. I’ll let my comments to you stand for themselves.

        2. With all due respect, I hear your answer often from people saying it’s bad to say all lives matter. You are right I don’t get it. However, I am open to learning and ready to hear it. Since no one ever gives answers the question directly, I suspect the real reason is they either don’t understand it themselves or there just isn’t one.

          1. JMC, I’m glad to have caught your statement. I usually miss 90% of those not replying to me directly as I’d lose far too much time tracking the entire thread. It’s not wrong to have the sentiment that all lives matter equally because they should. Most times it’s used dismissively to counter the claim that Black Lives Matter, voiced by people still facing furious forms of suppression that aren’t generally acknowledged. If I said voter suppression exists, a number of people will deny it’s a thing, meanwhile reaping the benefits. The Governors of Georgia and Florida are hell-bent on suppressing votes, primarily minority votes but the denial whether honest or pretend is sufficient to keep suppression in place. If you’re open to discussion, I’m more than willing to engage.

                1. It does not exist. The ‘voter suppression’ complaint comes from people who want relict entries on voter rolls in order to commit absentee-ballot fraud.

                  1. Other than being a brainstorm point that didn’t make the cut at a Fox news talking point session WTF does that even mean?

                    1. It’s perfectly plain what it means, Gainesville. Can’t help you if you’re getting senile.

                    2. K. So I’ll just run with it being obvious evidence of your being a gaping b hole and leave it at that.

                  2. It not only exists, it’s GOP strategy across most of the south where there is still a large black population. Latest is Alabama will require notarized signatures on mail in ballots. SOP is fewer polling locations and machines in the black belts. Scrubbing voter rolls for missing 1 or 2 elections, denying ballots with name misspellings, and restrictions on past felons. We have GOP politicians and staff talking about it on record as an election time strategy. Gerrymandering is how Pennsylvania, Florida and NC can have razor thin GOP majorities in elections but have better than 2/3 to 3/4 of the congressional and state legislative seats.

                    It’s not surprising absurd doesn’t see it. He makes the extra effort to not see things.

                    1. It not only exists, it’s GOP strategy across most of the south where there is still a large black population. Latest is Alabama will require notarized signatures on mail in ballots.

                      I have news for you, Gainesville. These were ordinary measures of a sort in place for decades in New York. They are reconceptualized as something sinister because absentee ballot fraud is how the Democratic Party does business and shmucks like you need social fantasies to help feel better about yourself.

                    2. Doofus absurd, Republicans use absentee ballots at a higher rate than democrats. You don’t know WTF you are talking about, again.

                    3. BTB, You call everyone that disagrees with you a doofus. Listen to your discusion of Russians paying Afghans to kill Americans. You don’t bother with data, but data is now coming in. It looks like old news that occurred mostly during the Obama Administration. Obama did nothing, but he did let Russia take over the Crimea and Parts of Ukraine.

                      You make up facts as you go along. You count on hoaxes that take than a day to prove wrong, but they are.

                    4. You make up facts as you go along. You count on hoaxes that take than a day to prove wrong, but they are.

                      Dan Bongino came up with his rule that he uses when dealing with reports out of the MSM. Give it 48 to 72 hours and invariably the story starts to fall apart. That only works of course if you believe in facts and truth.

                    5. “reports out of the MSM. Give it 48 to 72 hours and invariably the story starts to fall apart.”

                      Olly, the problem with a blog where discussions last 2-3 days people like BTB can hide after the hoax has been debunked. He has gotten away with that for too long. He spouts nonsense virtually everytime he posts and that is proven at a later time.

                    6. He has gotten away with that for too long.

                      He hasn’t gotten away with anything. He has a reputation that you noted and that is his legacy. The archives prove this out.

                    7. Doofus absurd, Republicans use absentee ballots at a higher rate than democrats.

                      Perfectly irrelevant. Republicans are filling out their own ballot. They’re not filling out ballots in the name of someone who moved away in 2009.

                    8. That’s right! I forgot absurd thinks Republicans are uniquely moral. Nothing else explains his BS above.

                      “The Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank, has been studying voter fraud for years in order to provide support for more restrictive voting laws such as voter ID. The most recent report has an attention-grabbing headline: “Database Swells to 1,285 Proven Cases of Voter Fraud in America.” They admit that the report isn’t comprehensive because it doesn’t capture cases that aren’t investigated or prosecuted. Yet, on the basis of that report they argue that there is serious voter fraud in America.

                      Heritage makes their full database available, so we were able to look into the cases of voter fraud that they claim represent rampant illegal activity. We began with the five states that have already used universal vote-by-mail systems and thus have one or more elections under their belt. Then welooked at the way Heritage categorizes cases of voter fraud. Most of their categories, such as false voter registration or ballot petition fraud, can occur regardless of whether a state has implemented vote-by-mail. However, we might expect that duplicate voting and fraudulent use of an absentee ballot—both of which typically involve one person voting their own ballot and someone else’s ballot as well—would be easier in vote-by-mail states than in states where the voter would have to physically travel between precincts or from one county to another.

                      The following table lists the five states that have been using vote-by-mail prior to 2018. We looked at their fraud cases from the Heritage sample to see how many were of a type that vote-by-mail systems might be more vulnerable to and how many votes were affected. Our conclusion, from Heritage’s data: There is surprisingly little voter fraud and not nearly enough to justify blocking vote-by-mail systems in a pandemic.

                      Vote-by-mail state Total cases of voter fraud in Heritage sample Total cases of duplicate voting or absentee ballot fraud In Heritage sample Number of fraudulent votes attempted by mail Time period for collection of fraud cases Year vote-by-mail enacted Number of general election votes cast over the same time period

                      Colorado 14 8 8 2005–2018 2013 15,955,704
                      Hawaii 2 0 0 1982– 2016 2019 6,908,429
                      Oregon 15 9 14 2000–2019 1998 15,476,519
                      Utah 1 0 0 2008 2013 971,185
                      Washington 12 7 7 2004–2010 2005 10,605,749

                      The above chart refutes the contention that mail-in ballot systems are rife with fraud in several ways. First, note the small number of voter fraud cases overall. Next, note that a subset of those cases involve types of fraud to which mail-in ballot systems would be especially susceptible. Next, look at the time periods covered by these data. In Oregon, the first state to adopt a universal vote-by-mail system, the Heritage researchers had to cover a period of 19 years in order to find 15 cases of voter fraud! Less than one case a year hardly qualifies as rampant voter fraud.

                      But perhaps the most revealing column is the one listing the number of fraudulent votes attempted by mail. Republicans would have you believe that vote fraud is widespread enough to affect elections. But the fraud uncovered by the Heritage study is inconsequential. What has been uncovered in these five vote-by-mail states is on the individual level and not on an organized level. For instance, Janice Waters of Marysville, Washington, was found guilty of voting a ballot for her son who was a convicted felon and thus not eligible to vote. Jane Kay Balogh, also from Washington, was convicted of registering her dog Duncan to vote at her address and filling out an absentee ballot for him. Waters was sentenced to jail time, later converted to community service; Balogh got a deferred sentence plus community service and had to pay court costs. In Oregon, Terri Louise Kobialka was convicted of filling out a ballot mailed to her apartment in the name of a former roommate. She was fined $500 and ordered to do 120 hours of community service.

                      Of course, there are instances of large-scale vote fraud. The most famous one occurred in the 9th congressional district of North Carolina in the 2018 election cycle where political operatives for the Republican congressional candidate illegally collected absentee ballots. They were caught and convicted. The election was overturned and a new one held.”


                2. I agree voter suppression has always existed. So has voter fraud. And Democrats have been experts at it since the late 1950s. Robert Cooley a mob lawyer and federal informant who was credible enough to be a key witness in numerous successful RICO trials against the Chicago Outfit, describes in his book how the local mobsters used to take stacks of abstentee ballots into Ida B Wells homes, Robert taylor homes, and Cabrini Green in Chicago and pay black citizens $5 per signature on an otherwise completely blank abstentee ballot.

                  Then they would take all those to a First Ward Alderman Pat Marcy, who used to hijack trucks for Al Capone, and him and the Democrat party workers would fill those out to ensure a sufficient margin of victory in every key election. You see, I say sufficient margin, because Democrats were already winning the races anyhow., They just had to make sure the right guys won the primary elections and then they won the general elections by impressive margins.

                  It’s all in here:


                  Now one often wonders is a snitch credible. but like I said, several juries decided he was, not about that in particular but other RICO matters, and, I have heard other stories from people who were in a position to witness aspects of voting fraud in Chicago, who have corroborated his stories to my satisfaction.

                  I will tell you, I found them amazing at first., Very brazen and almost incredible. But over time I became convinced.

                  Now, I doubt it is at that level of corruption. But there are old guys still in the system who know how to get it done there and it could certainly happen again. Seems to me with the big push for mail in ballots, they are actually planning for it.

                  1. There is no voter suppression. The avenue to fraud is primarily through postal ballots.

                    1. if there isn’t then there should be. So long as it’s legal. I have no problem with jerrymandering, etc. which is lawful, with the intention of helping win elections. If it’s my side which is successful doing it.

                      I don’t need to run away from the reality that the franchise is already too broad and I advocate restricting it. I favor literacy tests and a modest user fee for voters, too. If that “suppresses” illiterates and bums voting, good. I desire that. It would improve society.

                    2. Again, we have gerrymandering because impersonal rules in the construction of electoral constituencies require some variation in constituency populations. The courts have insisted on absurd levels of equipopulousness and then dictated crustacean districts to please black politicians.

                    3. Absurd,

                      You’re still a fair minded person. I am way past being fair now. Fairness will be the death of us.
                      I would rather live with unfair advantage than die without it.
                      Of course in war, all advantages are deemed unfair by those who suffer from their use.

                  2. Mr. Kurtz, Voter fraud has always existed but the most efficient people at it in recent times have been Republicans in North Carolina. One Google search can help you if you doin’t know, Several states including Republican ones have been doing vote by mail for years without a problem. In the most recent election in Kentucky, both Louisville and Lexington, fairly urban locations with predominantly Black populations, were each limited to a single polling location during a pandemic. Suppress the vote much? The people that run elections including Republicans are pretty sure they have it down. I’m more concerned about the mechanism they use to match signatures and throw out votes than I am amount falsifying votes.

                    1. Both parties have been engaged in a long war of manipulating the outcomes of elections. As time passes, each party looks to outdo the other until we get to where we are now.

                    2. Several states including Republican ones have been doing vote by mail for years without a problem.

                      If you don’t audit your system, you won’t find a problem. Ergo, No Problem!

                      In truth, postal balloting is almost perfectly gratuitous in elections for public office for all but about 6% of the electorate in the eastern United States, and all but about 11% in the west. If we wanted to diminish conflicts between working hours and poll times, we’d simply move poll times to Friday evening, Saturday morning, and Saturday afternoon. There’s a reason the Democratic Party doesn’t want to do that.

                    3. The Republicans I know who watch polls are a bunch of old ladies who could not bring themselves to cheat at pinochle let alone commit a felony.

                      However, I am not familiar with North Carolina. Maybe it’s got a daring and clever bunch of Republicans. If so then they’re the exception.
                      In general, out here in the Rust Belt, Democrats are ten times more clever and a hundred times more daring. To say nothing of more knowledgeable about the laws in general. From volunteers to the paid professionals, they are all far more effective as party operators. Republicans, in my view, should learn from Democrats about winning, by whatever means are lawful and feasible.

                      I draw a distinction between lawful voter suppression tactics and illegal voter fraud. There are legitimate differences. I don’t know if you credit that notion. But thank you for your input into the subject.

                    4. Brennan Center proved absolutely nothing except that those that believe in their findings do not know that correlation does not imply causation.
                      I also note that when the Brennan center draws conclusions it limits the variables to only those things that lead to the answer they wish.

            1. Enigma- BLM was founded by 3 admitted “trained Marxists” who could care less about black lives other than it serves as an excellent divisive wedge issue.

              BLM was fading into oblivion, and almost out of money until Antifa started funneling money to them in return for using BLM demonstrations as a tool to riot, vanadalize, and attack the Police.

              Are you a Marxist?

              1. It’s cute how you reserve the right to declare that the people who started an organization literally called, “Black Lives Matter,” don’t really care about black lives because you say so./ How much money did Antifa send them which of course you can document? I don’t happen to be a Marxist but did take a Communist State class in high school and have a Russian tool as my President.

                1. It’s cute how you reserve the right to declare that the people who started an organization literally called, “Black Lives Matter,” don’t really care about black lives because you say so.

                  They don’t care. And we know that because of the content of what they advocate.

                2. enigma– a Russian tool? And, you think Black Lives Matter cares about black lives? You are showing a level of ignorance that is surprising. Maybe you started your fourth of July celebrations a little early? Drink some coffee and read this part very slowly: (1) After 3+ years of investigating nobody found any truth to the Russia collusion BS and there was ample proof of Clinton paying for the Steele dossier which most likely was Russian disinformation; and (2) BLM has said nothing that I can find condemning the city officials of Chicago or Baltimore for the wanton slaughter of black people in their towns. If those two simple sentences are not sufficient proof, I don’t know what could be.

        3. . I’m familiar with crime statistics in this country. A grand total of 4% of all homicides feature a non-black perpetrator and a black victim, while 9% feature a black perpetrator and a non-black victim. About 13% of all homicides cross that particular color bar, and 70% of those homicides have a black perpetrator. That’s the reality of inter-racial violence in this country.

          Ordinary people are going to expect that the use of force by police officers is going to be distributed among subpopulations according to their share of the violent criminal population. We live in a world were 52% of the homicide perpetrators are black and 66% of the robbery perpetrators are black. The Bezos crew is contending the Bureau of Justice Statistics doesn’t know how to count police killings, but even the Bezos numbers do not show a majority of those killed to be black.

          We all know the score, and no amount of attitudinizing by you is going to change that.

          1. If evidence and reality mattered, there wouldn’t have a Black Lives Matter movement and people would be EXPECTED to say things like “all lives matter.”

        4. I understood this remark but did not find it funny nor cute nor clever.
          Like many young women, she is enthralled with her own “selfies” and lets her mouth ran ahead of her brain.

      1. What? The police kill about 1000 people per year in the US. That is an insane number that puts the US on par with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Burundi, and Nigeria. If that stat alone does not concern you then I really don’t know where your humanity is.

        1. The police kill about 1000 people per year in the US.

          Actually about 350, bar in the imagination of the Bezos Birdcage Liner. Very few are dubious cases. We have a troublesome lumpenproletarian population who are violent and noncompliant with authority. It’s a wonder it isn’t more common than it is.

          1. The number of questionable killings at the hands of the police is indeed remarkably small. The left doesn’t like to talk about the statistics. They do exactly what they say they are against: condemn all police officers for the rare acts of the few. They commit the exact immoral act they accuse the rest of society of.

              1. “All killings at the hands of police must be questioned.”

                All killings at the hands of the police are questioned and racism seems to have nothing to do with any of the killings and the vast majority are in self defense or in the defense of others.

            1. Again, they are in conflict with the Bureau of Justice Statistics, which has been doing this work for decades, and it’s a reasonable wager they are so because their database is fabricated.

            2. This gives the flavor of the story: “After Michael Brown, an unarmed black man, was killed in 2014 by police in Ferguson, Mo.,” That sentence lead-in sure makes it sound like poor Michael Brown was murdered by police which, of course fits the narrative but is a lie. How is it possible to trust data compiled by an organization that is so willing to distort the truth to keep the narrative going?

        2. it troubles me how many people actually attack the police

          here’s an example of a guy who draws down on a cop and the cop gets the better of it. it doesnt concern me one bit this guy got shot by a cop


          go through James Woods’ tweets, he has numerous videos of police getting shot. yes some by black men who were pulled over for DUI. I am too busy to find one where two cops wrestled a guy down and he snatched a gun and shot them both and drove away and left them to die on side of the road. very scary.

          every time someone wrestles with a cop, they must be presumed to be trying to snatch the gun,. you do not tackle a cop and expect that he will just use the jiujitsu on you. this will never be what is expected of police so long as we have police

          and you see, this is precisely why they want to “defund the Police.” Because they want to exert pressure to change the rules and make it easier to actually kill police.

          does anybody listen to hip hop? they fantasize constantly about shooting police. go back decades to NWA it’s not hard to find

          1. Kurtz– Thanks for that video. Amazing, talented cop. Watched it several times to put together what he accomplished in fractions of seconds. Glad he killed the thug. One less to worry about.

            1. i occasionally get pulled over for speeding maybe once a year although for some reason i never get a ticket. No convictions in a long time. Just lucky I guess. Anyhow one thing i do to make sure the cops dont get spooked and shoot my out of fear is to keep my hands on the wheel and move them slowly when i get my ID. This goes a long way to making the experience safer and more easy for both citizen and cop. We should be mindful that cops are scared and get killed doing traffic stops every single year. If we are smart.

              Some people are not smart and they have a big chip on the shoulder.

    2. It doesn’t take a Harvard education to get it. Agreeing with it on the other hand is proving to be a fallout of higher education. What a waste.

  4. Woman’s kind of a head case. I’ve heard Deloitte & Touche is a fast-paced environment. Supervisors don’t have time to manage Teh Crazy. She’s a much less sympathetic character than the Hampton Inn employee fired for doing her job (which, in that case, was calling the police when she discovered unattended children in the pool and the only person in the vicinity who looked like their mother refused to answer legitimate questions put to her). Also a much less sympathetic character than the step-mother of that police officer in Atlanta. He’s facing murder charges for doing his job and his step-mother is run out of her’s because she’s his step-mother. Liberals and soulless corporate apparatchiks are adept at making the world worse.

    1. private sector job, at-will employment.

      These are terms I was familiar with back in HS.

      In fact, in HS, an acquaintance friend, was fired from his part time job at a juice bar for posting up on MySpace some falsity about his boss.

      If it was happening back in 2005, it is still happening in 2020.

      This is a lesson that Ms. CJ should have learned a Looooooong time ago before she was ever a Harvard graduate.

      Perhaps, she never had a part time job? Perhaps, this would have been her first job ever?

    2. In a healthy culture and society, there is no gleichschaltung. The autonomy of separate spheres of life is consensual. Except in very odd circumstances, it does not occur to an employer to fire someone for reasons extraneous to job performance and risk. Well, we don’t live in that world anymore. Even if we did, she might still be cut from the intern pool because employers figure crazy people are not worth the trouble.

    3. Id like JT to address the relationship between freedom from conseqences and freedom of speech. Is there a line? Where is it?

      1. Where the line should be is as follows:

        1. Public employees have a great deal of leeway with regard to any utterance extraneous to the performance of their functions at work. Any public employee should have a cognizable claim for damages if he is reprimanded or dismissed due to things done in his capacity as a private citizen. Public agencies should not have staff ideologies.

        2. Private-sector employees should have some claims if their employer is a natural or situational monopoly or if their employer has assumed obligations in their contract.

        Note, who has claims and who doesn’t in employment law is largely a function of who is a mascot of the Anointed. In a more just world, the discretion of employers is not much impaired. As is, it is impaired in a corrupt and sectarian fashion.

  5. Your comparison to the Dean being fired at U Mass is off. The Dean did not make any threat of violence. If she had they would have been justified in firing her.

      1. just pure and intentional racism.

        You’re either stunningly mendacious or stunningly stupid. Tough to say.

          1. Yes, but your argument was flagrantly silly. It’s not improved by being a day old.

            1. Her comments were racist because a sizable chunk of the population takes them to be racist (which she knew). Same standard that we use to define most racist terms and actions.

              1. ” racist because a sizable chunk of the population takes them to be racist”

                Are we know going to vote on right and wrong. If you believe in such a democracy then understand why 51% can vote the other 49% into slavery. In essence that is the biggest scar of our Constitution. In essence the 51% voted for slavery. It was wrong then and it is wrong now. You have no reasonble right to make such claims unless you wish to accept slavery.

              2. because a sizable chunk of the population takes them to be racist (which she knew).

                You mean we’re all properly subject to the whims of silly and stupid people?

  6. The videos she made AFTER being fired only serve to affirm that Deloitte did the right thing by firing her. She’s a deranged nut-job, completely obsessed with “Trump supporters”.

    1. Your point is exactly right. It’s not the support of BLM that justifies Deloitte’s firing of Janover, it’s the content of her videos, her nature (unhinged) and her lack of judgment, maybe even lack of self-control. Does a company such as Deloitte really want her representing it?

  7. “For legal reasons this is a joke.”
    Note to Ms. Janover: Dying is easy. Comedy is hard.

  8. What would be the liability to a company if she actually did harm someone? Especially after her words were made known to them?

    1. Clarks– I was wondering that, too. If she kept the job the company looks negligent if she harasses or injures another person at work. I bet someone at the company feels lucky they caught this before she came to work.

      She negates the argument this is actually a job by saying ” for legal reasons” this is a joke. No joke. Nutty, and maybe dangerous, behavior underlay the video.

    2. It’s not obvious to me that she was joking. In fact, she seemed not to be. The Molotov bearing and throwing New York lawyers weren’t joking and one never knows when one’s beliefs become actions. The anarchists called this “propaganda by deed.” Ms. Janover seems capable of making transition.

  9. Show me crying my eyes out for her. Sarcasm

    Welcome to the real world. You got your participation trophy.

  10. I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. But, I don’t see any attempt at humor whatsoever. I think the most reasonable interpretation is that she was upset and meant it at the moment. She appeared very sincere and basically bat shit crazy. Her comments after getting fired don’t exactly change that interpretation.

    I’m all for people being able to joke and say things they probably shouldn’t when it’s all in good fun. I miss that about our nation but I don’t see how this was ever a joke.

    I also don’t like the idea of someone losing their livelihood over social media posts, but with the caveat that there are limits. She threatened murder, so that’s just a tad bit extreme.

    Lastly, Deloitte does a lot of management consulting and their employees are often client facing. Those employees are always the face of the company so I can see why they wouldn’t want that crazed face as theirs.

  11. Lesson learned!? No more TikTok videos, girlfriend. M’kay?

    Unless you’re trying to make it as a social media influencer, which you are clearly not, seeing as you got a job with, had a job with, a major company, like Deloitte, let me be blunt, there is absolutely Zero reason you should be on a social media platform like TikTok.

    ::sigh:: she had to learn the hard way, unfortunately.

    1. WW33, this sets an example for all sides that good behavior face to tace has been extended to social media both past and present.. Media attention to this story might improve social discourse on social media platforms and might also teach the parents of the dangers for their children that exist with Facebook along with the rest.

  12. Threatening violence against anyone who expresses an opposing view will get you fired from any company.

    Ms. Janover obviously has serious mental and emotional issues that she needs to address with the help of a Psychiatrist.

    1. Rhodes – You beat me to it, but I was actually going to suggest, that like many right now, with CV19, and the BLM, and the unemployment, on and on and on, that she is having a complete mental and emotional breakdown, and worst of all, filming and putting it onto the Inter-net.

      Girlfriend, have your breakdown in private, like us “normie” folk. Not everyone needs to see everything.

      1. Can I also add that her openly line to getting fired was “Trump supporters took my job away from me,”

        …and NOT what it should have been, which is “I made a huge mistake, and was subsequently fired for it.”

        The thinking, is that of, well, a narcissist, which btw, is a massive problem in the US today.

        Playbook 101:

        1. Shift blame
        2. Play victim
        3. Admit no fault of one’s own actions.

      2. It appears that she is bipolar (schizophrenic). .

        Which is all the more reason why she should seek professional help.

        In other news, Harvard has really lowered its standards for admission.

        1. I dont know why you say so Rhodes. But a lot of people with schiz or bipolar are creative and capable of maintaining good grades.
          Particularly if they get sufficient psychiatric care, they can go on and live decent and productive lives.

          When they act out and violate the law, they need to be punished according to law however, and not always get let off the hook. This is often key to helping them understand the need for ongoing care in the first place.

    2. Not just any company, but the government as well. I’ve been a Federal employee for almost 20 years, and the civil service laws provide a lot of job protections. But the one thing that will get you marched out of the building by the guys with guns (Internal Affairs) is a threat or act of violence. You don’t do it, say it, or joke about it. There is zero tolerance and the employee will be immediately removed from the workplace and placed on admin leave while the termination papers are processed. This young woman needs to grow the hell up and deal with the fact that when you leave the playpen otherwise known as a campus, that employers don’t care about and don’t want to hear the crap that your socialist professors were paid to listen to. They have a business to run and if you hurt their brand you’re gone.

      1. TIN– Good point about threats of violence and the consequences at work. Threats like hers don’t get anyone laughing at the joke in airports either.

  13. There is a distinct difference between someone expressing a political opinion and someone threatening violence. I saw her original post and I didn’t take it as a joke. Perhaps I misinterpreted it, but her doubling down on her extremist views suggest that Deloitte made the right call. I think she would be a nightmare for any employer.

    1. I completely agree.
      She WAS NOT joking.
      She threatened bodily harm to caucasians.
      Totally and completely different than the words “Everyone’s life matters”.
      And no lawyer, even Turley, is going to make me think these are equivalent statements.

  14. She’s a joke, she’s a joke. She’s a joke all the way. From her crying on video …to her last crying day.

Leave a Reply