Res Ipsa yesterday passed the 57,000,000 mark in views on the blog. We have used these moments to give thanks for our many regular readers around the world and give you an idea of the current profile of readers on the blog and our readership around the world. As always, I want to offer special thanks for Darren Smith, who has continued to help manage the blog and help out folks who encounter posting problems. I also want to thank Kristin Oren who has been proofing posts on a daily basis to remove my embarrassing typos and errors. Finally, I would like to thank our regular readers who alert me to typos or any violations of the civility or copyright policies on the blog.
So here is our current profile:
As of this morning, we have over 20,487 posts and roughly 1,200,000 comments. We are at roughly 250,000 Twitter followers. We have 6,177 people who signed up for alerts by emails.
In the last month, our ten biggest international sources for readers came from:
1. United States
2. Canada
3. United Kingdom
4. Australia
5. Germany
6. Netherlands
7. India
8. France
9. Mexico
10. New Zealand
The top five posts in terms of readership in the month were:
- “Preserve the Narrative”: The Public Rejects the “Insurrection” Claim in New Polling
- The Eight Degrees of Ignorance and Stupidity (Smith)
- “Inappropriate Political Influence”: Chief Justice John Roberts Responds to Threats Against the Court
- Media Vapors: How Special Counsel John Durham Has Triggered a Media Meltdown
- The Crimson Tie: Why Judge Jackson May Have An Ethical Problem To Address
- No, Justice Thomas Did Not Commit an Impeachable Offense
- Destroying a Democracy to Save it: Democrats Call for the Disqualification of Dozens of Republican Members
- Finish MP Criminally Charged After Quoting Bible in Opposition to LGBT Event
- Who Really is Ketanji Brown Jackson?
So that’s the update. I cannot thank our regulars enough for their support of the blog. This is an expanding vibrant community and it is a great pleasure to see our community expanding around the world.
Congrats JT. Much deserved!
Thanks for letting us play in your sandbox, JT!
He needs to rake it once in awhile.
OLLY – LOL
Congratulations Professor Turley and team! Thank you and please keep up the good work!
I appreciate the time Professor Turley puts into these columns. He is a prolific writer in addition to all his other duties.
But the professor’s hard work is largely wasted when one, creepy loser is posting more than half the comments each day under a range of puppet names.
Among these puppet names are ‘Mistress Addams’ and ‘Margot Ballhere’. Only a sociopathic, anti-feminist could think of these monikers. The message is, “All women are sluts”. In anti-abortion circles, that view might resonate.
But you have to wonder if Turley’s wife or female students ever read these comments. And the fact that these stupid, insulting names appear each day suggests that few women ever come here. In fact, one has to wonder ‘how many people’, male or female, ever look at these comment threads.
The concept of a forum like this should be stimulating discussions regarding the topic of Turley’s column. And it used to be that way. The conservatives and liberals who came here each day loved to hate each other. But everyone had fun!
However in the past 2 years these stupid puppets have come to dominate the forum to such an extent they actually choke off real discussions. Nothing kills a debate faster than some creepy loser fielding a puppet brigade to parrot the same talking points.
Currently it feels like this forum is under occupation by a hostile force. And judging from the number of Pro-Putin and QAnon comments, one has to seriously wonder ‘who’ the Blog Stooge really is. Has Professor Turley simply allowed the most repugnant of sociopaths to completely take over??
No matter how many sock puppets you utilize, no matter how many writing voices you adopt, and no matter how many times you play the role of Ms. Anita Mann, Drag Queen Extraordinaire, your lying will not resuscitate your dismal reputation here.
Anonymous says:
“Has Professor Turley simply allowed the most repugnant of sociopaths to completely take over??”
Though Turley could not have wished it, unlike him, I would not describe this blog as “family” as he does!
That is because you are a pariah.
Professor: I think it’s safe to say that how you select those things about which you’re going to write each day reminds me a lot of a line from the movie ‘Wall Street,’ when Michael Douglas (Gordon Gekko) says to Charlie Sheen (Bud Fox) ‘Buddy boy, I see 100 deals a day…..and I only choose one.’ It must be challenging for you to decide what to put into your daily commentary. Thank you for what you do.
Congratulations and thank you so much for making our days so much more interesting.
Congratulations JT (and Darren).
Professor,
Reading your blog posts everyday is like flying into San Francisco. Reading your comments section is like being in San Francisco.
Let freedom ring!
Quite enjoyable getting my coffee and reading this column each day. Fun, in fact. Thanks for the wonderful columns, some of which I agree with and the vibrant discussion, for the most part. Of course there are those who try to spoil our enjoyment but their name will remain unspoken.
Congratulations. I’ve always admired your legal mind.
Your travel posts are excellent, too. I’ll lead the defense on that.
Congratulations, Professor! It is well-deserved. 😊
I’ll second that!
Congratulations (and many thanks for creating this forum) to Professor Turley, Darren, and Kristin!
Turley says:
“This is an expanding vibrant community and it is a great pleasure to see our community expanding around the world.”
If ever we needed proof that Turley does not read his blog, his characterization of his Trumpist followers as a “vibrant community” is more than enough! What I would not give to watch Turley’s face react with “great pleasure” reading out loud to his friends and family the general commentary on his blog! The truth is that he would be mortified and embarrassed by the majority of the posts.
No doubt Hitler would have had far more Twitter followers and blog hits than Turley, but I hardly think that his followers would be something to be proud of. Isn’t the quality of the free speech more important than the quantity?
Silberman-you really should recuse yourself. Your biases are tiresome and absolutely predictable. In fact You are so predictable that I think your are an algorithm, set to trigger whenever this blog publishes something. Maybe if I hit the delete key frequently enough, you will disappear. It’s certainly worth a try. Of course the other possibility is that of projection and as a theory it might predict your activities ever more closely. There is therapy for that, last I heard.
jeffsilberman is a great example of some of the “trolls and juvenile posters” Turley refers to in his civility rules. Don’t feed the trolls. Ignore them.
Major/Meyer,
You are correct. I would prefer you ignore my comments. I don’t want you to read them.
Sargent Major was correct when he said: “jeffsilberman is a great example of some of the “trolls and juvenile posters” Turley refers to in his civility rules. Don’t feed the trolls. Ignore them.”
Therefore if you wish to attach that name to me go ahead. You aren’t too bright and you demonstrate that fact all the time.
GEB says:
“You are so predictable that I think your are an algorithm, set to trigger whenever this blog publishes something.”
I was hoping that I would get some credit for not mentioning either “Trump” or “Fox News!”
“Isn’t the quality of the free speech more important than the quantity?”
On a blog that is promoting and encouraging free speech for everyone and all points of view, I would say quantity is more important. And I find it especially interesting that your question is so consistent with today’s liberal views on free speech, which are revealed when they are so often trying to stop speech they don’t agree with. They are saying quality matters more and that quality is determined by whether the views being expressed align with theirs. Instead of listening to more points of view, they aim to limit points of view to just theirs. So they shout down or suppress points of view they don’t agree with. Very sad and misguided in my view.
Carpslaw says:
“Instead of listening to more points of view, they aim to limit points of view to just theirs. So they shout down or suppress points of view they don’t agree with.”
You mean like Trumpists shouting down points of view with which they don’t agree by calling them “fake news”?
Sorry – but calling something “fake news” is not shutting down free speech. It’s critiquing it; expressing an opinion. Students attending events where conservative speakers are scheduled to talk and yelling, chanting and screaming so the speakers can’t be heard is shutting down free speech. Newspapers, traditional media, and social media outlets not reporting legitimate news stories because they are worried the stories might harm their candidate they are rooting for are suppressing free speech!
Carpslaw says:
“Students attending events where conservative speakers are scheduled to talk and yelling, chanting and screaming so the speakers can’t be heard is shutting down free speech.”
True, as well as physically storming a Congress to shutdown the speech of members of the House of Representatives.
Carpslaw says:
“Newspapers, traditional media, and social media outlets not reporting legitimate news stories because they are worried the stories might harm their candidate they are rooting for are suppressing free speech!”
Not true. Ignoring lies and Bullsh*t conspiracy theories is free speech.
Carpslaw says:
“calling something “fake news” is not shutting down free speech. It’s critiquing it; expressing an opinion.”
I did not say it was. I was simply responding to your statement:
“Instead of listening to more points of view, they aim to limit points of view to just theirs. So they shout down or suppress points of view they don’t agree with.”
Calling information “fake” IS LIMITING POINTS OF VIEW TO JUST THOSE DEEMED NOT FAKE.
“Ignoring lies and Bullsh*t conspiracy theories is free speech.”
If Hunter Biden’s laptop was Bullsh*t, why are New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and others who previously ignored the story now reporting on it? And why is the justice department still moving ahead with their investigation into Hunter Biden?
I was referring to Bill Barr calling all the election fraud conspiracies “bullsh*t” which statement Turley has NOT repudiated.
With regard to Hunter’s laptop, I agreed with Turley’s criticism that the MSM ignored it. Likewise, Fox News ignores narratives that don’t appeal to its Trumpist audience, e.g., Judge Carter’s recent finding that Trump more than likely violated the law. Turley ignored that breaking news too. When Turley does not hold his employer to the same standard he holds the MSM, I call out his hypocrisy.
I hope DOJ is investigating Hunter and if Joe is implicated, impeach him! I’ll accept a jury’s guilty verdict against Hunter. The difference between you and me is that you WON’T accept a jury’s guilty verdict against Trump. Wanna bet?
“Fox News ignores narratives that don’t appeal to its Trumpist audience, e.g., Judge Carter’s recent finding that Trump more than likely violated the law.”
Not a good example. Fox News did cover this. They gave a right side slant by pointing out that it is highly irregular (if not illegal) for a judge to give an opinion on an active investigation. (A aspect you likely didn’t hear on the liberal networks.)
“The difference between you and me is that you WON’T accept a jury’s guilty verdict against Trump. Wanna bet?”
Wow! How presumptuous. To the best of my knowledge we have never met. And I don’t recall ever voicing an opinion on this blog expressing any skepticism about our judicial system. Apparently, you are lumping me into some stereotype you developed for people who have a different opinion than you and support conservative principles. That said, it’s always been funny to me that liberals who used to persistently warn us not to stereotype people, especially minorities, today are insistent that we put everyone into their preconceived stereotypes e.g. if your white you are this, if you are black you are this, if you support Trump you are this. Putting everyone in particular demographic groups into neat little boxes you’ve define for your own convenience is not only wrong, it is insulting and greatly underestimates the capacity of human beings to be individuals.
Very well articulated.
Carpslaw says:
“Not a good example. Fox News did cover this. They gave a right side slant by pointing out that it is highly irregular (if not illegal) for a judge to give an opinion on an active investigation. (A aspect you likely didn’t hear on the liberal networks.)”
I monitor Carlson, Hannity and Ingraham nightly, the prime time hosts which are the network’s most influential opinion makers did NOT mention it one iota. Nor did Turley breath a word of it.
You say:
“And I don’t recall ever voicing an opinion on this blog expressing any skepticism about our judicial system.”
Don’t beat around the bush- will you or won’t you commit yourself now to accept a final unappealable civil or criminal verdict of Trump? We know that Turley will and Trump NEVER will. Whose side will you be on?
I respect our laws and judicial system. So I will accept whatever outcome it produces as final. That doesn’t mean I won’t have an opinion on whether the verdict is right. Our justice system is a good one, but it is not perfect. How many innocent people have erroneously been found guilty and ended up spending time in prison? Too many.
So will you commit to accept a final unappealable civil or criminal verdict of Trump?
I’ll accept Trump’s acquittal without any second-guessing of the jury’s verdict. Your faith in the judicial system is an exception on this blog. Except for you, no one who supports Trump has been willing to commit to accepting his guilty verdict. Rather, they reserve the right to claim that the prosecution of Trump would be a “witch-hunt.” After all, if Trumpists can still embrace the Big Lie, they will certainly swallow Trump’s inevitable claim that his conviction was rigged by the “Deep State.”
It’s re-assuring that you don’t share such irrational beliefs.
“I also find it disgusting that Trump is asking Putin for dirt on Biden.”
I note all the people’s quotes criticizing Trump’s comments saying Trump asked Putin for dirt on Biden, but that is inaccurate (quote is below). Trump was interviewed and was responding to an interviewer. He was not talking to Putin. I am not necessarily happy with the statement that can be misused in the way it has been, but the response has been blown out of proportion. In reality, Trump’s reply was accurate. Hunter Biden was on the take. Joe Biden was using his influence and is corrupt. Putin likely knows enough, so we presently have a compromised president who we cannot trust to deal with Russia and China, our biggest enemies.
Trump was talking about Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, then the wife of Moscow’s mayor. The question of why she gave Hunter’s company $3.5 million came up. Trump responds.
“She gave him $3.5 million so now I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it, I think we should know that answer.” __Trump
We should know that answer, but the same people denying the truth about Hunter’s laptop want to divert everyone’s attention to something else.
I understand that a person might not like Trump. However, considering everything that has been said by Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, the news media, etc., focusing on this statement as provided is merely bending to the desires of the left that wish us to be distracted from the truth of the Biden’s corruption. Moreover, the facts being pushed aren’t valid and haven’t been since Trump walked down the escalator after announcing his bid for the Presidency.
A short video of Trump’s comments is here. It is followed with news clips, so one will have to reinsert the address and start again if it is missed.
“https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-calls-putin-release-info-hunter-bidens-dealings-oligarchs#digital-diary”
SM,
It’s a very sad reality that you, me, or anyone else on this blog can convince the demoralized Leftists of a different truth. As Bezmenov said:
As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore,” said Bezmenov. “A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures; even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him [a] concentration camp, he will refuse to believe it, until he [receives] a kick in his fan-bottom. When a military boot crashes his balls then he will understand. But not before that. That’s the [tragedy] of the situation of demoralization.
The Four Stages of Ideological Subversion
Stage 1: Demoralization – completed over multiple generations
Stage 2: Destabilization – essentially completed
Stage 3: Crisis – no doubt that we are at this stage
Stage 4: Normalization – the midterms will determine if we begin to unwind this or complete it.
Meyer says I said:
“I also find it disgusting that Trump is asking Putin for dirt on Biden.”
I didn’t say it.
Swing and a miss.
Jeff Silberman writes, “I didn’t say it. Swing and a miss.”
WordPress sometimes places things in the wrong place. I responded to Paul’s statement earlier that morning. Paul wrote, “I also find it disgusting that Trump is asking Putin for dirt on Biden.”. I explained why that wasn’t accurate and provided a short video and Trump’s actual quote.
If Jeff had paid attention to anything, he would have noted the quote above and recognized that the response was to Paul. Jeff is too self-absorbed to acknowledge much of anything.
Paul,
I hope you will defend yourself against Meyer. I would do it for you, but that is not my place.
Jeff writes: “Paul, I hope you will defend yourself against Meyer.”
Jeff, you certainly can’t. But why should Paul defend himself? The media and people like you took things out of context. He didn’t do anything wrong. Though I don’t entirely agree with him, especially about Trump, he seems to be a levelheaded guy discussing things with an uninformed supercilious person.
You probably didn’t read what I wrote carefully the first time, so I will repeat it below.
“I also find it disgusting that Trump is asking Putin for dirt on Biden.”
I note all the people’s quotes criticizing Trump’s comments saying Trump asked Putin for dirt on Biden, but that is inaccurate (quote is below). Trump was interviewed and was responding to an interviewer. He was not talking to Putin. I am not necessarily happy with the statement that can be misused in the way it has been, but the response has been blown out of proportion. In reality, Trump’s reply was accurate. Hunter Biden was on the take. Joe Biden was using his influence and is corrupt. Putin likely knows enough, so we presently have a compromised president who we cannot trust to deal with Russia and China, our biggest enemies.
Trump was talking about Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, then the wife of Moscow’s mayor. The question of why she gave Hunter’s company $3.5 million came up. Trump responds.
“She gave him $3.5 million so now I would think Putin would know the answer to that. I think he should release it, I think we should know that answer.” __Trump
We should know that answer, but the same people denying the truth about Hunter’s laptop want to divert everyone’s attention to something else.
I understand that a person might not like Trump. However, considering everything that has been said by Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, the news media, etc., focusing on this statement as provided is merely bending to the desires of the left that wish us to be distracted from the truth of the Biden’s corruption. Moreover, the facts being pushed aren’t valid and haven’t been since Trump walked down the escalator after announcing his bid for the Presidency.
A short video of Trump’s comments is here. It is followed with news clips, so one will have to reinsert the address and start again if it is missed.
“https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-calls-putin-release-info-hunter-bidens-dealings-oligarchs#digital-diary”
Jeff, C’mon man. Really showing your liberal skin here. We both agreed that someone purporting that Mein Kampf was a great book was totally acceptable. Nobody but the Leftists on this blog have ever hinted at calling for violence. That is where the line is drawn for free speech in my book. As long as you brought up Hitler , he might have more hits than Turley. So what?? That is the essence of free speech. Allowing for speech you don’t agree with. Or possibly find repulsive.
You don’t seem to hold back when addressing those with whom you disagree. That repartee is one of the reasons the blog has reached a new level.
I didn’t post anything when that P.O.S from U.C.L.A . was rooting for the death of Thomas. But he certainly had the right to say the quiet part out loud. I did find it ironic given his job title.
On a day that Turley is celebrating a new high, I must thank you for no, Turley, Turley, Turley, Fox, Fox, Fox, Fox, Trump, Trump ,Trump ,Trump, Racist , Racist, Racist, Racist, Racist diatribe.
Paul says:
“Nobody but the Leftists on this blog have ever hinted at calling for violence.”
Leftists may hint at it, but Trumpists are actively arming themselves to do it when the time comes.
The Trumpists and Q-Anon lies as well as the hatred against the establishment expressed by most here is not a source of pride but an embarrassment. I dare Turley to read aloud the comments and be asked if he agrees with them.
I never call people racists or anti-Semites unless they self-identify. I limit my criticism to lies and hatred directed at Liberals/Leftists/Democrats and NeverTrumpers.
“ I dare Turley to read aloud the comments and be asked if he agrees with them”
We dare you to find a woman in San Francisco and have a rip roaring time with her in bed, without clothing, even touching and, gasp, kissing. Dont worry: we will allow you to hit the bars in the Castro to hookup with your regulars of 40 years ago, when you were virile, hung, dominant and attractive. Even eunuchs, with micro diqs, subs and ugly as frack need to be shown mercy once a year. Sadly you have used up that one day already
Sir,
You think I will meet more women if I change my name to Tango?
Jeff, I must have missed those who shout out ” I am a racist!” or ” I Hate Jews”. What you really mean is you deem them as racists or Anti Semites. Subjective.
And how about giving me some credit? In your reply to GEB @ 3:45 , you ask for credit for not mentioning Fox or Trump.
I explicitly congratulated you on those omissions.
Paul,
Do you recall where I have called someone a racist or an anti-Semite? I may infer it and raise the question, but I can’t recall the last time where I have called someone a racist or an anti-Semite. Unlike many, I don’t call those who boycott Israel for political reasons, Jew-haters. I don’t call Trumpists wanting to close the southern border, racists. I can understand that there are different motivations for wanting it so.
Thanks for noticing that I did not mention Trump or Fox.
Jeff, I was merely responding to your comment of ” I never call people racist or anti Semite unless they self identify”. Maybe we need to define ” self identify”
And as you have admitted I am not a Trumpist but I want the southern border ” managed” according to laws on the books. Something that is certainly not happening now. And with title 42 being lifted watch out.
Dinner offer holds.
Paul,
I don’t self-identify as a Marxist, but I am called a “Marxist” or an “American Marxist.” Some people do identify themselves. Klansmen and Neo-Nazis do. And there are those in Antifa who are proud to be Marxists. When in doubt, it’s best to give the benefit of the doubt unless an individual’s comments make it unmistakable that he is prejudiced. For example, if someone continues to lie that the election was stolen on account of proven massive fraud, is there any doubt he is a Trumpist?
Jeff, I was referring to those who post on this blog. I don’t recall anyone identifying themselves as Klansmen or Neo -Nazi here, do you?
And yes those who say that the election was stolen because of massive fraud do fit your definition of a Trumpist. A word by the way that always has a red line under it when I post indicating a misspell.
I am glad that you have stated once again that you will accept any ruling involving Hunter. And I will accept any ruling involving Trump. I never want to see an innocent man convicted but if any verdict prohibits Trump from running I am all for that. He can’t win. And although as I have stated before Biden won’t run and Kamala is unelectable, I still don’t want Trump to be the nominee. As you know I am a betting man. Which in essence is predicting outcomes. I predict , Hunter will be indicted, found guilty then pardoned. The reason will be he was under the influence of narcotics. This will hopefully stop any further investigations into who is the ” Big Guy”. This will also hopefully preempt any further investigations when the Republicans will surely take back the House in November. The fact that WaPo, the NYT and cnn are all now confirming the laptops’ authenticity is just too convenient. I don’t believe in coincidences.
Unfortunately, again just by coincidence, this is about a year and a half too late.
And I find it disgusting that A**holes like Brennan are still saying the contents of the laptop are Russian disinformation. I also find it disgusting that Trump is asking Putin for dirt on Biden.
Paul,
I certainly hope that Joe does not pardon Hunter if it comes to that. There ought to be a Constitutional Amendment prohibiting self-pardons and family, friends and employers.
I wasn’t claiming any Klansman or Neo-Nazis here have self-identified here. They haven’t! I will call out an anti-Semitic or racist statement, but that is different than calling the person a racist or anti-Semite, e.g., lovable but idiotIc Archie Bunker.
I suspect you will think I am being evasive, but I can’t judge whether WAPO or NYT acted in bad faith in doubting the authenticity of the laptop. I need more evidence of what they knew and when they knew it. It’s just as likely that Fox News overplayed the laptop story to discredit Joe Biden. After all, Fox News is being sued for promoting Trump’s Big Lie in bad faith, that is, knowingly, or indifferently to the truth. My mind is open to being persuaded that the MSM was deceptive, but Fox News is hardly in a position to point fingers.
In the end, all the facts will eventually be known about the merits of the Meuller investigation, the Durham investigation, the Big Lie and 1/6, Trump’s NY and Georgia investigations and the Hunter/Joe Biden investigation. We just have to be patient and accept the verdicts whatever they may be but not prematurely call any investigations “witch-hunts” as do Trumpists.
Jeff, I hope your entire last paragraph is true. However I doubt it. Outside of that I totally agree with everything you just said.
And I don’t think that you are being evasive.
Thank you again for the respectful discourse. It is possible for two people that have different political perspectives to converse in a proper manner. I am sure you loath some on ” my side” as I do some on ” Your side”.
I also have had good conversation with one of the ” Anonymous’s” . But this will not surprise you. Some on ” your side” are totally unhinged. Starts with an
” N”.
Be well.
I am sure there is more to come.
Paul,
Who is N? Natacha?
“The truth is that [Turley] would be mortified and embarrassed by the majority of the posts.”
Leaving aside your presumptuousness, why not focus on the minority — on the positive, and say something praiseworthy about that fact?
JT’s post is celebratory. Do you often feel a need to rain on someone’s parade? Or is it just on this blog?
Sam asks:
“JT’s post is celebratory. Do you often feel a need to rain on someone’s parade? Or is it just on this blog?”
I stand by my comment that the last thing Turley would want to do is to lead a parade with the lying Trumpists and Q-Anon cultists who largely populate this blog. Turley defends the free speech of those with whom he vehemently disagrees.
There are two no’s in Finnish
Deaths from smoking tobacco exceed 490,000 this year. Suicide is easier with a gun.
Second hand smoke killed 45,000 people in America in 2021. People killed other people. It’s not only suicide.
Quite smoking you dumb itShays.
Learn piglatin.
Congratulations