“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.



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

  1. It is too late to argue that “free speech,” could be the victim. It is already the victim. There is no sch thing anymore. The left has won and the right is actually pandering to the mob. That is why Trump got elected in the first place. The right wanted someone who would fight. We knew no mainstream Republican would stand and fight anything. What we are seeing now it just what we suspected all along. Everyone caves because the media is dominanted by activist left wing, “journalists” and editors. Our colleges are now staffed by mostly far-left idiots that do not believe the right has any right to exist and everything is a battle between the left (good) and the right (evil). Progressives believe their ideological arguments are an actual religion and anyone who has a difference of opinion is morally, spiritually, and in every other way corrupt. The right feels close to the same as the left but the right is not willing to really fight and instead, has cowered in the corner and are now pretending that if Trump goes away so will all this madness.

    We are likely to see an expanded Supreme Court because if the left doesn’t have a progressive majority it means the system is broken and they must stuff it. They demand Washington DC be made a State simply because it would give the left two more Senators. I mean the city once re-elected a crackhead after he was released from prison… Give the left 8 years and you will not have to worry about free speech any longer because they will probably burn the Constitution, and write some new totalitarian leftist garbage of the claim that the other one was racist.

    1. Trump wasn’t “elected”: he cheated his way into our White House with the help of Russians who were directed on where to spread lies via social media against Hillary Clinton. What, exactly, do you Trumpsters want your hero to “fight”? The truth, since he is a chronic, habitual liar? How about the rule of law, that says subpoenas are to be honored, absent a privilege, and not ignored, and that those who lie to the FBI in a plea deal to avoid prosecution on other charges, and are convicted, should be sentenced? How about science, that says that hydroxychloroquine is not only not effective against SARS-COVID 2 (a/k/a “COVID19), it is dangerous. (Just last night on Fox News, they were trying, once again, to validate hydroxychloroquine, even though the FDA has pulled temporary approval due to lack of efficacy and dangerousness). The only reason for pushing for a drug that is not effective and which has dangerous side-effects is because Trumpy Bear cannot be wrong. How about denying the science of climate change? Then, there’s the long list of lies about SARS-COVID 2: just one person coming in from China; 15 cases will soon be 0 cases; it will be gone by April, we’ll have a vaccine “very soon”, hydroxychloroquine is a “game changer”, it will just disappear one day… How about human rights: caging people seeking asylum, including infants and children. How about security in the form of health insurance and coverage for pre-existing conditions: Trump’s DOJ is seeking to have Obamacare struck down, just when the pandemic has gone right back to surging before things were closed. Most Americans support Obamacare, even in red states. How about the military: stealing funds earmarked for new housing for married military members and their families and for schools, in order to construct the border wall, claiming there is an ’emergency”. How about fighting to avoid responsibility for handling this pandemic?

      You, a complete Trumpster, have the audacity to claim that progressives believe that their ideological arguments are a religion? It is clear you watch Fox News, which is pure pro-Trump propaganda. You’d have to have some sort of religious fervor to ignore the arrogance, narcissism and failures of your hero.

      There is no right v. left here, or even Republican v. Democrat. Most Americans: 1. did not vote for Trump; 2. have disapproved of him, for an historic period of time and by an historic margin; and 3. want him gone. There are a sizeable number of Republicans and true conservatives who want him gone, too, but you Trumpsters tune in to Fox to hear your daily affirmation and attacks against anyone who criticizes Trump.

      1. Gee. Mueller had an army of Democrats working for him, the New York Times alone had a couple of dozen ‘journalists’ and they all missed what you found. You’re some sort of genius!

      2. “How about science, that says that hydroxychloroquine is not only not effective against SARS-COVID 2 (a/k/a “COVID19), it is dangerous.”

        July 2, 2020- “Henry Ford Health System Study: Hydroxychloroquine Lowers COVID-19 Death Rate”


        Unfortunately for you, Natacha, hydroxychloroquine does nothing for severe TDS or Russiaphobia.

        1. Is Natacha pretending to be a nurse or a lawyer in this thread?

  2. What this woman did would prevent her from getting a security clearance in government. So-called “jokes” often backfire and this one did. She showed that she harbors racial bias and a hatred for anyone who is not colored. I applaud the company’s decision to fire her. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

  3. I don’t know what’s in her soul, but what came out of her mouth is, at best, stupid, at worst, a threat to anyone who disagrees with her views. It cannot be denied that she shows incredibly poor judgment, and that alone would be grounds to fire her. Would she really cut someone who disagrees with her? If you were Deloitte would you wait to find out? Any victim of a stabbing or cutting would go after Deloitte, not her, because Deloitte has money and she doesn’t, plus the fact that they are on notice about her attitudes. If she did hurt someone, they could hardly argue that this was unforeseeable.

    This is similar to the case involving the night nurse at Riley Hospital For Children who posted something along the lines that white men should be killed as babies because they all grow up to be bad. Would you want some nurse with this attitude caring for your sick infant if you were a white person? She was fired.

    The issue here is not freedom of speech, but validly questioning the judgment and wisdom of someone who openly threatens people who might disagree with their views, or, in the case of the nurse, expressing views that show they could be a threat to vulnerable sick babies. An employer cannot take such risks.

  4. I thought her joke funny and appropriate and timely. She, brought the subtextual into the realm of the textual. It was f’ing funny.

    Like the woman at UMass, despite coming from different perspectives, the timing was not great. Free speech has *never* existed here. The more status one has the more ‘free speech’ they have. Social media is proving to be a harsh learning ground for this because Trump mutants with Russian help have dedicated to winning the social media war…

    For the past couple years I’ve noticed a pattern on twitter…, get enough likes with a politically charged post and the trolls will get on you, saying all kinds of crazy stuff. When you respond with equal energy, they’ll flag your reply to the twitter gods. It’s a good way to earn a couple day suspension and they know it. Of course it shows trump bots to be the true pussies they are, but they’re playing the short game.

    Now is this the way this is supposed to play out in the realm of free speech? Of course not. is it the reality? Absolutely. Is white privilege rigging the game in yet another way? Absolutely. And the privileged never willingly want to give up privilege. Are the privileged playing a losing game? Certainly. They’re fighting over delusional bread crumbs and can’t help but lose the contest to the side playing for love of the game.

    Untill then, watch what you post, because trump mutants are out there lurking in the weeds.

    1. dude, put the meth pipe down- the fact that you found this funny tells me you’ve been awake for like 96 hours

      1. Nah, just a dark humorist that does coverage for prodco’s who has been sober for 37 years.

    2. What hellvis says is kind of true about twitter except the antif-blm faction is very much more effective at the trolling and banning schtick than any socalled Trumpers.

      Jack Dorsey’s own political agenda is very clear and very Democrat. he is actually pro-CCP as has been proven from him banning the HK activists and letting the CCP mouthpieces have their way of things. His AI censorship editor is a lady with ties to CCP. I put up proof of this before, I won’t bother with repeating it.

      1. Not true, Kurtz. It’s a Russian bot technique 5+ years in the making. Anything BLM generated wouldn’t be nearly as organized or polished. Or would even have in interest in doing. Think about the strategy…, does BLM care about likes and views? No. It’s everything to a Russian bot system laser focused on strategically flipping the voting tallies of a handful of states.

        1. The US army had software suites for creating fake accounts en masse and manipulating them on social media such as it existed, at least 18 years ago. I had a veteran tell me that he had been involved in such operations. Now I doubted him but a few years later I found a news article confirming this. So Russians hardly invented this. Americans are the ones that invented most such things in the first place.

          Let’s be realistic about the measures which are necessary to protect our electoral system from foreign interference and not use them as an excuse to suppress one side which Silicon Valley doesnt like. Which is very much obviously the Trump side.

          Or better yet let’s crack up the social media monopolists into a hundred pieces with antitrust law.

        2. Do you dream about Bad Vlad on a nightly basis?

          You know that she did not mean to be humorous in the least.

          So that makes you a liar.

    3. And I, for one, wouldn’t be at all surprised if you’re identifying as a girl today.

  5. Not that long ago, public discourse was open to a select sub-population steeped in norms of civility. Journalists and editors erected a wall between publicity and intemperate, violence-fancying voices. Now, anybody who can type or yap into a camera can publish their unfiltered ramblings.

    As someone who was nearly fired from a professional job because of a Letter to the Editor I got published criticizing a message the Pope had been spreading, I can relate to JT’s concerns about free speech. However, rules of civility must be enforced, and there is not a sound argument why freedom of political speech must allow excursions so far into incivility so as to include “I’ma stab you” threats, which is a death threat.

    I’m glad to see Deloitte draw the line where they did.

    1. However, rules of civility must be enforced,

      See Ann Althouse on Civility Bullsh!t. In the current environment, the composition and enforcement will be completely sectarian.

      1. As someone who has taught collaborative problem-solving (design teams) in high school, I couldn’t disagree more with Althouse. When a group has to solve a complex problem, there are modes of communication that facilitate clear, creative, risk-inviting thought, and there are patterns that make people defensive and block forward progress. Rules of civility are all about maintaining a psychological environment conducive to collaborative problem-solving – they don’t presume to know the solution to a specific problem. They are not “power seeking” tactics. Ann Althouse in her piece doesn’t give any hint that’s she’s had the responsibility of leading a team through a complex challenge.

        1. As someone who has taught collaborative problem-solving (design teams) in high school,

          I think it’s injurious to your reputation to advertise this.

          The rest of your response is clueless.

      2. Why would one see Althouse on anything other than where to get your nails done in Madison?

        1. Because she’s a perspicacious observer of public life and not too emotionally invested in any of it. This isn’t mysterious.

    2. If someone is so intent on leaving a threatening-type message — or, as in this case, one that demonstrates an inability to use good grammar — why not do so anonymously. That will prevent over-the-top messaging from finding its way into the workplace, where it does not belong, and disrupt the smooth conduct of business activity. I would draw a distinction for professors in disciplines where stark ideas are normally presented — say, professors of PoliSci or Government, or Public Policy Analysis, or Sociology, or Rhetoric; you get the idea, I hope — but not for professors teaching STEM or the like. In this instance I have great difficulty in summoning up any sympathy for this young woman; especially because her job title indicates hers is basically a b*llsh*t type of position.

    3. She lacks the ability to be reflective on her own actions and the actions of society. She blames Trump supporters when in fact she should be blaming those that are violent such as BLM, Antifa etc that has left over 15 dead since the Floyd riots. She should also blame Democrat politicians that have shown little concern for law and order leading to massive destruction in many cities. Doesn’t this snotnose recognize the deaths and pain so many Americans have suffered from the violence these groups have wrought?

  6. Yes, of course she needed to be fired. Just like the dean yesterday. Companies should not keep these liabilities on their staff. She can get a job digging ditches with the now ex-dean.

    1. Yes, of course she needed to be fired. Just like the dean yesterday.

      The distinction between the two cases is obvious to anyone who is not a fraud or an idiot.

      1. Clearly there’s a big difference: one expresses a political view and the other is a joke involving violence against a political enemy. Only the latter warrants any concern even though I say that that concern needs to be addressed via discussion(an opportunity to explain/apologize) rather than a summary judgement.

        1. She was granted an internship which was withdrawn when they realized she’s the sort of histrionic numbnutz who has meltdowns on the internet. No discussion needed.

  7. So Harvard is graduating people with this level of bovine credulity now!? Weren’t her shaky command of the language and spelling a hinderance or was she graded on a racial curve? The preening narcissism and self-righteousness on display are common among the young who have as much life experience as a house cat.

    She learned a hard lesson but still must learn one more: when you have nothing new or useful to say … SHUT UP!

    1. Harvard discriminates against orientals. She was admitted in spite of that.

      1. No, she is Filipino, which is classified as Pacific Islander (along with Samoans, Guamanians, etc) and they received affirmative action in admissions. Asians (Japanese, Chinese and Koreans) do not receive AA and have a more difficult time getting in than whites. Not sure about Vietnamese, Hmong, Laotian, and Thai. I believe they also get AA and the only Asians who are burned by the admissions process are the most academically successful ones (J, C & K).

        1. I agree she is a Pinay. I think they will fall on whatever box they check. Nobody “audits” declarations of non-white racial status. If anybody has a providen incident where a white person checked a box as an other and then was corrected or scolded for it, let me know. I have never heard of this.

          I also agree that Asians are usually not getting AA preferences in univesity admissions. In fact we know they are discriminated against just as white people are.

          Pacific Islanders, not sure, I think Tin is right, they get a preference. But my point is, a person of Phillipine ancestry might or might not “check the right box”
          I guess it would depend on how the process set up their screens for race/ nationality as to whether an Asian could get a nationality preference.

          might I observe that aside from the necessary and lawful segregation of inmates in prison housing, but for which there would be even more violence in jails than we already have…… that public university admissions are the most blatant violation of Equal Protection in our system by downgrading the likely outcomes of whites and asians, as members of a racial group? There’s the systemic racism that needs to be eliminated!

  8. Good thing she didn’t tie a small noose and leave it in a location where a black person might come across it someday. Something like that could have FBI agents crawling all over the place.

  9. Deloitte didn’t terminate her because of her personal views, or exercise of free speech. They simply realized how incredibly stupid she is and decided they could do better in today’s labor market.

    1. Yes, of course she did. This is her street-cred lingo for the wokesters.

  10. Deloitte’s “product” is the expertise and judgement of their employees and they sell this product to (mostly) other large companies. Newly minted college graduates don’t have much in the way of practical expertise, they are hired for their perceived “good judgement”.

    So, in a world where any threat of violence in the workplace, airport, schools is unacceptable, this young woman uploads a video making threats aimed at white people exercising their right to free speech that she disagrees with. Explicit threats. And she uploads this video on a Chinese owned app recently banned by the government of India.

    I don’t think this was a tough call for Deloitte. And I don’t see a free speech issue, either. No one has stated she doesn’t have the right to say what she did, she does have the right. However, most would also agree that she showed poor judgment choosing to exercise her right to free speech in this manner, at this time. And, when all you have to sell is your perceived “good judgement”, the consequences were foreseeable. And her reaction AFTER she was terminated, proves that Deloitte’s assessment of her judgement is accurate.

    1. Anonytmoua – Thia ia an excellent call for Deloitte. They have a brand to protect and she is tarnishing the brand. I, for several, did not take it as a joke.

  11. Three cheers for Deloitte! Finally a company showing some backbone (but then, I don’t if it has kowtowed like many and donated to “oBLkbwcM”). The fact that she expressed her odd views is not the problem, the fact that she made threats is, and then she backed up those threats with other stupidities. But let’s not shed a tear for this fool, some media company, like Twitter or Facebook, is sure to hire her, she’s one of their types – and, she has a Harvard degree and is quite the linguist.

    1. Good point Facebook will probably hire her to weed out hate speech.

    2. “she has a Harvard degree and is quite the linguist.”


      She seems to be taking Harvard’s Advanced Ebonics curriculum.

      1. I have been called a cunning linguist myself before. But that’s beside the point

        There are social advantages for Asians to cozy up to blacks in universities. Most obviously being white is not “hip” and so the more “diverse’ the friend set, the student has certain “bragging rights.” At the same time, there is supposedly a strong “colorism” that exists among Asian groups. “bai fu mei” among Chinese for example.

        Back when I was in school several decades ago, there was not much mixing among Asians and blacks, but one saw more of it among Philippines ancestry people than some other groups.

        Of course people are “free” to make such social connections as they like. However, we are never “free” from the consequences of our choices.

        1. An Asian friend, a physician born in Vietnam, told me there is an Asian racial hierarchy with Filipinos and SE Asians being lower and then working up to Chinese and Japanese at the top.

          In Mexico the Oaxcans are at the bottom and treated badly with various tiers going up after that.

          In Africa there is in intense racism between different tribal groups.

          Funny that our media wants only to exaggerate racial differences here but is blind to it in the rest of the world, just as they prefer to moan about long past slavery in America while keeping mum about existing slavery in the Muslim world.

          1. Ha ha, among Asian americans i have heard of such a thing as well, but in the abroad national populations and first generation migrants, you can bet everybody thinks there people are the best. This is human nature! And yet we call it racism, tribalism, etc. I just call it “ethnocentrism”

            The Chinese are so ethno-centric they write their own name, Zhongguo as the two characters “Middle” plus “Kingdom”
            as in, they are the center of the universe!
            But didn’t everybody think that way in the old days?

            1. Two of our friends married, one from Korea and the other from Taiwan, and caused an uproar in both their families. Chinese +Korean = No, No

              1. I find Chinese and Koreans are pretty positive about each other. Much less so the rest.

                It’s worth observing that the “Han” ethnicity which is predominate among Chinese, is the very same word that they use for Korea– Han-guo; and the world Koreans use for themselves: Han-guk; this being the linguistic source of the old slur term “gook”

                guo just means a people or nation, in Chinese. America is called Mei-guo.

                1. Kurtz– It seems like Chinese and Koreans would be pretty positive about each other, both very smart and industrious, but I think the Chinese look down on the Koreans. It seemed to be an issue with our friend’s families. We mentioned their marriage to another friend of Japanese descent because they were all in the same profession and she immediately said, “Oh, Oh!” We laughed, “Yeah”. So she knew. They seem happy and I think their families are reconciled to the union. In America we haven’t even begun to guess the complexities of tribe and race and we aren’t doing ourselves any favors by adopting those problems.

          2. Years ago I was told that native Indians in Mexico, Oaxcans included, were not permitted to enter the hospital for childbirth. There was a lot of discrimination of the natives at least some decades ago. When I was living in Mexico City, also decades ago, for a few months I used to go to the large marketplace where the natives sold their goods. 20-35 year olds looked very old and were loaded with parasites.

            1. There is still discrimination against Oaxacans and Indios. I don’t know about hospital admissions though.

              1. It may be simply a way to survive for people living on or near the bottom rung to be able to point to someone else worse off than they. In Mexico, it is the Indios; in the Philippines, the poorest Filipino looks down on Negritos; in the south, poor white trash looked down on blacks and as Tom Lehrer would say, everybody hated the Jews. What if instead of “racism” it is merely a means of surviving?

                1. Honest– Racism is very much an overused term, but if it means discriminating against someone in pay, hiring, education, etc solely because of his race then the treatment of Oaxacans in Mexico is racist. They are paid less for the same work and treated shabbily. A Westerner in South Africa said in a class he was teaching that Pygmies were human and was practically laughed out of the room. None of the black men in the room believed it. Blacks in America haven’t experienced actual racism in a very long time. Simply not being liked is not racism.

                  1. Young– that’s kind of my point. In each of those societies, people need someone to look down on. And, in the ones I am familiar with, those who were looked down on were physically different than the others making it easy to distinguish them from “normal” Mexicans, South African blacks and Filipinos. My thought is that you could move all Negritos to South Africa, all Oaxacans to the Philippines and all pygmies to Mexico and you would have the same result. There is nothing inherently inferior in any of them and nothing inherently superior in those who look down on them. Compare that to New York lawyers. They are inherently jerks and so it does not matter where you move them.

                    1. I always wondered why hatred of Jews exists or is so intense. It’s hard to truly look down on such a brilliant and productive people. I suspect envy is the cause.

                    2. In his book on Culture…. Sowell explored why minorities can be disliked and hated. He points to numerous minorities around the world. The people that have been living in that location for a long time frequently find their new visitors doing better than them. H provides many many examples including persecution against Germans that moved to areas along the Volga River.

                  2. Blacks in America haven’t experienced actual racism in a very long time.

                    I think you mean ‘haven’t experienced actual racism that has much of an impact on them’ (at least an impact in excess of the impact the resentments of blacks have on others).

                    The disreputable Mr. Sailer has been having some fun at the expense of the Sulzberger Birdcage Liner in re their Emmett Till obsession.

                    1. Young– the hatred of Jews is well illustrated in the Magna Carta. In each of the five revisions, there are special provisions dealing with Jews and they are not nice provisions. I’m no expert but I think over centuries there were many reasons why the hatred developed. Jews were very different from others, especially the more fundamental ones, they tended to work together, live together, and socialize together; their religion rejected the divinity of Jesus; and historically they were associated with money lending which at various times was a sin. A friend of mine in Florida never was invited when fellow students who lived in Palm Beach gave parties. I never knew why until years later when I learned Jews were not allowed in Palm Beach, just like blacks (unless they were servants). Years later he told me he only felt comfortable sitting with blacks in the back of city buses. Houston had a district reserved for rich Jews because they were not welcome in River Oaks. I have always assumed that this was why so many Jews were in the forefront of the civil rights battles for blacks. You would think that knowing the horrors Jews experienced in the Holocaust and knowing that President Roosevelt had turned back a shipload of Jewish refugees during the War almost certainly condemning them to death, we would embrace them and welcome them into our communities. We didn’t until years later and apparently, there still is hatred in certain parts of New York and probably elsewhere.

                    2. honestlawyer – the hatred of Jews goes back to first a Catholic and then sadly a Christian teaching that Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus. When given a choice to free one man the Jewish crowd choose Barrabas, not Jesus.

                      Personally, theologically, this was a hatred I could not see. If the Jews did not select Barrabus, Jesus would not have fulfilled his prophecy and become The Christ. Theologically, they should be happy the Jews did what they did because they have their religion. If they had allowed Jesus to live, what would have happened? He would have been a footnote in Josephus.

                      Richard the Lionhearted took the Jews of England under his personal protection. However, they will later all be expelled from England (Richard was dead). It will be the late 19th or early 20th century before the first Jew is made a Baron (Lord) in the UK.

                    3. Honest– I think the hatred of Jews in Europe was largely because of religion. But I think the animosity was very much intensified by envy. They seemed to acquire wealth so mysteriously and, of course, thought they were chosen by God. Both would be irritants. The hatred of them is hard for me to grasp because I don’t envy other’s success and I don’t mind when others keep to themselves because I keep to myself.

                      In New York, and in general, blacks’ savage hatred of Jews is hard to understand. Nobody has done more to try to help them in this country. On the other hand they like Islam, a religion that still is involved with black slavery in Africa. Odd.

                    4. Allan– I don’t think of Sailer as disreputable. The left keeps saying we need to have an honest conversation about race. Good. They should go to Sailer and they will get an honest conversation; but they won’t like it.

                    5. The famous Jewish Communist Lev Bronstein aka Trotsky, who is adored like a god by leftist academics, wrote that antisemitism in Europe had been derived from the resentment that peasants and workers felt towards Jewish “peddlers” and moneylenders who exploited them economically. He predicted that when communism won, it would all just fade away along with exploitation itself

                      Well his predictions were entirely wrong on every account. If you want to read a Russian communist, don’t bother with Trotsky, waste of time. Stick with Lenin. “What is to be done” is another monograph of his that I like, in addition to “imperialism as a late stage of capitalism”

                    6. Kurtz– Interesting. I haven’t read either Trotsky or Lenin although I did read Solzhenitsyn’s “Lenin in Zurich” which I thought was excellent. Also liked Paul Johnson’s “Intellectuals” which portrayed Rousseau and Marx and some of the rest in very unflattering, in fact ugly, terms. I doubt I will read anything by a murderer like Lenin. Somehow they seduce people who should know better into believing they know the path to multi-colored paradise and it always seems to lead to grey Hell.

                    7. Over Jesus head when he was hanging on the cross was a sign. It read, ” Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews”.

  12. White supremacists, I’ma stabbers, these are not of the left or the right. They meet together in madness. She has definitely exhibited a threat to others. Her statement should not be covered by arguments of free speech but dealt with in the same way as yelling fire in a crowded theatre, making jokes about bombs on airplanes while riding in one, etc. In this time and climate: a blithering idiot for a President, the economy correcting downward and then crashing, Covid-19, police brutality, demonstrations negating their objective by morphing into spleen venting, etc. reaching out the this world with a response of stabbing someone who disagrees with your position, is a danger to society. She is advocating violence. She should be charged with something, inciting etc.. Left or right, not free speech. Allowing this sort of nonsense to be covered under free speech is the greatest threat to free speech.

    1. Isaac, violence, and the spoken expression of the desire for violence, is very much part of politics. Legal or not, it always was and always will be.

      Perhaps you should advance your education some. Try Plato for starters. Or Karl Marx. Or “concept of the political” by Carl Schmitt.

      1. Young and Squeeky – the Ima Stab You video followed on my YT and I had forgotten the she actually stabbed her phone. She took a threatening action.

    1. @Squeak, Good post, she’s a real sweetheart, doesn’t look like the same Oh Poor Me girl.

  13. JT: “…I honestly took the video as a poor joke.”

    JT: “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.”

    I see from the comments that almost everyone is fine/happy with her being fired(offer withdrawn)…I’m not. I’m with JT: her post is an obvious joke(“all cuts matter”). Is there bitterness and anger behind her joke? Yes. The proper response from the company should have been to bring her in and ask her if she was serious. They also could have asked her to post an apology. That’s all that should have happened in this case and the others.

    We should have much more tolerance for each other’s speech/mistakes. We all say crazy things from time to time that we do not actually mean.

    1. JT says he didn’t watch the video, so he’s just taking her at face value about it being a joke. I was ready to do the same until I watched the video. I’m all for non-PC humor, but I didn’t see anything humorous. Her comparison to a paper cut is sarcasm, not humor.

      1. JT: “I did not see the message but I honestly took the video as a poor joke.”

        He saw the video, it’s seventeen seconds long. It’s a joke. The company has good reason to ask her how she will deal with coworkers/customers who believe “all lives matter,” but she deserves the opportunity to explain herself and apologize before losing the offer of a job.

        Let’s not do what the left is doing. We should show them they way forward instead of joining them.

    2. Ivan – my understanding is that she had not actually started work yet. I would have fired here for the bad grammar. How the hell did she get out of Harvard talking like that?

      1. “How the hell did she get out of Harvard talking like that?”

        Minor in Ebonics.

      2. About 30 years ago, I was sucked into watching a self-indulgent only-on-PBS documentary on George Balanchine. Balanchine’s story was told through footage inter-cut with fragments from interviews of six ballerina’s who worked with him. The six women they interviewed were born in 1925, 1928, 1923, 1937, 1951, and 1964. The language of the first four was fairly well-constructed and grammatical. The fifth’s was disfigured by conversational junk and filler, and the last sounded like Valley Girl (her parents had given her a silly name with a non-standard spelling to boot). My mother’s remark was ‘that’s what television did’. At the time the documentary was made, one of the juvenile jabberers was pushing 40 and about 70% of the way through her professional career.

        This has been a problem for a long time.

        1. DSS – Just think about the number of 70 yo Buffys running/walking around. When I was teaching, I swore that some parents selected names just to terrorize teachers.

            1. honestlawyer – the pool is still open. enigma has until midnight to collect his non-winnings. 😉 I am glad to add more people to the pool. Right now we have from today to Sept 11.

      3. That’s a different question than whether or not she should be fired(or offer withdrawn) for making a joke. It just seems abnormal not to at least give the person an opportunity to explain and apologize. Apparently no one’s in the mood for second chances these days.

        1. Ivan – did you see her rant on white people? I think Deloitte did a search on her social media history and decided they did not want her representing them.

          1. I’ve only seen what’s in the video above. I think she’s troubled just like most of the millennials. I despise their politics, but they are still human beings. She has committed no crime, but she made a controversial joke. I’ve seen this story too many times: say the wrong thing and the world comes down on you. I have sympathy for her. I get why others don’t. We are all way too quick to judge and too slow to empathize.

            Yes, we have to stand up to the many people who’s ignorant and corrupted minds are destroying our nation, but we shouldn’t seek to destroy them in the way they seek to destroy us.

            1. Ivan – find Squeeky’s video of her. It is a short rant where she gets to use every pejorative known against whites. That alone, is enough to get her fired.

              1. I just saw it. It didn’t affect me, but it’s not a good way of keeping that dream job. I prefer a world where our politics can be spoken freely without affecting our jobs. In reality, we all think horrible thoughts and sometimes we verbalize them. She made the mistake of broadcasting her thoughts, but she did not commits a crime.

                I know I have said and thought many horrible things in my life. In the right environment it makes the people around you laugh because they know you aren’t actually serious. In the wrong environment you lose your job or maybe get arrested by an overzealous prosecutor who’ll prosecute you for terrorism(see Justin River Carter). Does anyone remember that name? I doubt it. The crazies here would probably want him burned at the stake.

                1. Ivan – I am not concerned about you. Think about if you are Deloitte. How would you respond to a potential employee?

                  1. I get it. She looks like a messy problem for the company in a number of ways. Her case is very different from the others JT has blogged about. I still prefer that she get to talk to the company before a decision is made.

        2. Deloitte is not hiring Harvard grads to train them in the basics of civility.

    3. I watched her original video, and it was obviously not a threat, but an analogy via hyperbole. I don’t agree with her, and I feel quite certain she and I would agree only on our dislike of each other’s positions on the issues informing what she said. I even will admit that emotionally her sacking and upset were satisfying to me. But after that initial sense, I am disturbed that this is what our civilization is coming to. And for those inclined to believe she must be taught a harsh lesson in order to protect our society – exactly what lesson do you think she’s going to learn? I guarantee it isn’t the one you want.

      1. “But after that initial sense, I am disturbed that this is what our civilization is coming to.”

        I had the same feelings.

        1. We don’t have time to be disturbed. We only have time to wake up, smell the coffee, and adjust and plan accordingly. And execute quickly and effectively, collective plans for our own survival, and future security and prosperity..

          1. I share your sense of urgency. We’re in a long period of crisis. The only way to come out of this whole is to communicate and stand up for our beliefs. We should not engage in the same behavior we say we despise. Cut this young human some slack is all I’m saying.

            1. Ivan is very kind. I am less kind.

              I would cut her some slack if I was in a position to, however, she is the sort of young person who is so far above me in the social order, that she would never bother looking to me for a job. Harvard people rarely end up stuck in the Rust Belt unless it’s a major metro. So maybe she should cut me some slack as a white person and quit busting my bllz.

              Trust me with that Hahvahd diploma she’s got it made. This little flap will blow over and may just land her a job all in itself with an outfit like BLM. Who knows we may hear her name again some day.

    4. Did you watch her follow up video? She meant what she said, she’s not sorry, and she’s apparently incapable of learning from her mistakes.

      Feel free to hire her. She’s looking for employment.

      1. Yes, I did. I just believe in talking to people before firing them when they haven’t committed a crime. Seem simple…treat others as you would like others to treat you. Being judgemental is easy when it’s not you that’s being judged. Seems simple…let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

        I never liked my catholic upbringing when I was young, but the older I get the more I see the ancient wisdom of it all.

    5. In order to qualify as a “joke”, there must be some element of humor. Her rant was remarkably unfunny and devoid of humor.

      If the employer had retained her, the precedent would open the floodgates to more hate speech.

      The decision to fire her sends a clear and unmistakable message.

      1. “Her rant was remarkably unfunny and devoid of humor.”

        Many people would say the same thing about George Carlin, Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, etc. Funny that. It all depends on your point of view. I hate the left, but I can still see the humor in her joke: “all cuts matter.” I didn’t take it as something that warrants anyone’s attention, but I can see why an employer would have questions.

        1. Comedians are supposed to be edgy but accountant firms need to be taken seriously.

          1. Fair enough, but that’s no reason to dog pile on a human being. I would rather the company talk to the person before responding to the howls calling for her to be fired.

  14. Maybe part of the problem is imperfect command of the English language, leaving her meaning somewhat open to interpretation. But regardless of the seriousness of what she is saying, I don’t think she should have been hired by Deloitte for that position in the first place. To that extent, I think they did the right thing by letter her go.

    1. She was admitted to Harvard and speaks English without an accent. Language barrier is not her problem.

    1. If only there was somewhere else to get stories of the day….

    2. It’s a human interest story with legal implications. Like Turley, I am very concerned about the censoring of speech. He states it perfectly in his last paragraph…

      “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.”

    3. You call anyone you don’t like “twit” and worse. Take Trump. You said his job guiding the economy was poor. In a nation beset by crazy leftist violence and a lockdown Trump has brought us the following…. (snippets)


      Record jobs gain of 4.8 million in June smashes expectations; unemployment rate falls to 11.1%
      Jeff Cox

      Nonfarm payrolls soared by 4.8 million in June and the unemployment rate fell to 11.1% as the U.S. continued its reopening from the coronavirus pandemic, the Labor Department said Thursday.

      Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been expecting a 2.9 million increase and a jobless rate of 12.4%. The report was released a day earlier than usual due to the July Fourth holiday.

      The jobs growth marked a big leap from the 2.7 million in May, which was revised up by 190,000. The June total is easily the largest single-month gain in U.S. history.

      “Today’s announcement proves that our economy is roaring back. It’s coming back extremely strong,” President Donald Trump said in a news conference about an hour after the numbers were released. He pointed specifically to a sharp drop in the unemployment for Blacks that fell from 16.8% to 15.4%. “These are historic numbers.”

      “The 4.8 million rise in non-farm payrolls in June provides further confirmation that the initial economic rebound has been far faster than we and most others anticipated,” said Michael Pearce, senior U.S. economist at Capital Economics.

  15. This is a good example in just how extreme the left has gone. It’s not just that she posted such a video, it’s that she thought it would be okay to do it. In her view, it was normal and acceptable behavior. She even took the time to add a disclaimer, thinking that would make it all okay.

    1. Kathy Griffin’s moment was far worse than this.

      Yes, it’s all a sign of the extreme culture war, but it wasn’t an actual threat. It was a dark joke aimed at like-minded people. That she didn’t think before posting is a common affliction.

      1. I expected this to actually be a joke and was surprised by what I saw. I don’t see humor in this and I don’t consider myself the type that gets easily offended. I always try to see both sides and how I can be mistaken in my initial interpretations, but I just don’t see that being the case here. Her adding the phrase about it being a joke in the “legal sense” only solidifies that, IMO.

        Moreover, if it was indeed a giant misunderstanding, I would expect her to be posting some kind of an explanation. But instead, she just whines that she was fired because she’s standing up for BLM.

        1. Her adding the phrase about it being a joke in the “legal sense” only solidifies that, IMO.

          Good point Lorenzo. It was her Susan Rice, inauguration day CYA email moment.

  16. Does anybody know what race she is??? Asian Black???

    Because if she ain’t black, then she is waaaay to personally vested in this stuff, to the point of being cray-cray.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. If I’ve heard correctly, she’s a mutt. White-filipino or some such.

      1. She has a very strong Pinay look. Very characteristic facial features and tone. Probably has a large component of Chinese ancestry as many do. The basic mix is Chinese, Polynesian, plus a small bit of Spanish blood.

    2. We have a shirt-tail that’s invested in this. She’s Korean, with a white-bread husband. She’s managed to stay married for 18 years. She’s superficially pleasant, but you take an inventory of her life and you can see she’s got some missing pieces.

      1. Someday, some poor male is going to marry this person and give her babies, and then spend the rest of his life regretting his poor choice. Because drama queens like her never change.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. You mean mademoiselle TikTok or do you mean our shirt-tail? Our shirt-tail has been married for 18 years. Her husband is rather opaque about most things, but I’ve never seen any evidence his marriage distressed him. Job related problems, yes, though he isn’t voluble about them (his mother is).

        2. I don’t think that Deloitte acted to censor her.

          Somebody smart at Deloitte saw these videos and recognized that this woman was going to be a problem at some point in the future and seized the opportunity.

          Good move.

          You are right about some man coming to regret being with her.

          Crazies like this woman can hide their craziness until they have what they want (babies, alimony, assets), then they let loose.

          Some man will regret not having heeded these warning signs.

  17. No mention of liability? What if they hire her, and later she physically attacks a coworker? I wish we stopped canceling too, but doesn’t this complicate your analysis?

    The analogy she makes is interesting. Some cuts really matter and some not so much.

    I think the disclaimer cuts *against* it being a joke. “For legal reasons”.

Comments are closed.