There is an interesting controversy brewing in California after four California university professors threatened a political candidate, Richard Lucas, for criticizing them for their roles in the “Billionaire Tax” and sent him a “cease and desist” letter. David Gamage from the University of Missouri, Brian Galle and Emmanuel Saez from UC Berkeley, and Darien Shanske from UC Davis claimed that the public criticism violated anti-doxxing laws by sharing contact information. They are clearly wrong. One of the aggrieved professors, Brian Galle, teaches at Berkeley Law School called Lucas “a clown,” but insisted that sharing public information is unlawful.
Attorney Catha Worthman sent the letter, but has reportedly refused to respond to inquiries after attorneys for the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) pushed back on her legal claims and those of her clients.
I have long been a critic of such wealth taxes, specifically California’s Billionaire Tax, as economically moronic and legally questionable. The proposal has already cost the state trillions in lost wealth as wealthy taxpayers have fled, taking their businesses and jobs with them.
As I discuss in Rage and the Republic, these wealth taxes have a terrible track record and, on the federal level, face serious constitutional challenges. In California, the drafters included a retroactive clause that can also be challenged.
One of the four professors — who Lucas referred to as “the looter dream team” — destroyed the claims of many supporters that this is just a one-time tax. Some of us have written that this is simply the first salvo. Once they succeed in targeting billionaires, the same measure will likely be used for those in lower tax brackets.
In a recent debate, Berkeley professor Emmanuel Saez admitted that he could not seriously claim this would be a one-time tax, as many in the public have asserted. He said they would have to wait to see if it passes, but it is likely to be repeated, and noted that there may also be a federal wealth tax on the way.
He said:
“I don’t think it’s going to be a one-time tax…because you can’t surprise billionaires more than once.
Even then, you know, maybe some of them were expecting something like this.
So it’s going to be a debate about this time, you know, a permanent wealth tax at a low rate that’s going to last for a number of years.”
Saez has publicly taunted the wealthy who are fleeing the state:
He noted the move on the left to create a federal wealth tax which has been pushed by Bernie Sanders and Ro Khanna.
The legislation, “Make Billionaires Pay Their Fair Share Act,” echoes the growing “eat-the-rich” mantra on the left — seeking to replicate a disastrous push in California that has led to an exodus from that state and an estimated loss of $2 trillion in taxable assets.
It is also flagrantly unconstitutional.
Under the plan, Congress would target 938 billionaires to tap them for $4.4 trillion. That money would then be redistributed as a $3,000 direct payment to every man, woman, and child in a household making $150,000 or less – $12,000 for a family of four.
Now back to the legal threat. I believe that the threatened legal action is wildly off base. Putting aside the fact that this is protected speech, the two anti-doxing statutes, Penal Code §653.2(a) and Civil Code §1708.89, contain clear scienter or intent requirements.
They must show that Lucas demonstrated an “intent to place another person in reasonable fear for their safety, or the safety of the other person’s immediate family.” Penal Code §653.2(a); Civil Code §1708.89. There is no evidence of such intent. If simply posting such identifying information is a violation, a significant range of protected speech would be proscribed.
There are ample reasons to criticize this tax and the claims made by its champions. There is a type of self-sustaining pattern on the left in support of such measures. Universities have largely purged conservatives and libertarians from departments, leaving most faculties with professors who run exclusively from the left to the far left.
These professors then added intellectual support for radical proposals like wealth taxes. The media then reports that experts have reviewed and approved the measures. It becomes an entirely closed loop from political groups to academics to media creating a uniform narrative.
The ADF wrote a strong letter pointing out the flaws in the claims of these professors under anti-doxxing laws from the lack of intent to the protection of free speech. These professors became public advocates for this ill-conceived plan and, as a result, have drawn criticism for that advocacy.
Lucas was one of those critics:
Nevertheless, the professors sent two cease and desist letters to Lucas, requesting that he remove their names and contact information from his website “California Wealth Exodus.” Lucas has remained adamant that he will not remove their contact information.
The site for figures like Galle link to his academic page, as I have done above. We routinely link to such sites for people to look at the background of figures discussed in columns. In the case of Lucas, it is also meant to allow citizens to express their views to those pushing this proposal.
In my view, the threat of legal action is fundamentally flawed and would not prevail in the courts. These professors will need to respond to their critics rather than work to silence them.
OT https://x.com/bitcoin_teddy/status/2064090591177101677?s=43
Two economists go for a hike. They find a pile of shit. One pays the other $100 to eat it. …
Interesting joke, Alan. One should note that Elon Musk didn’t accomplish sh!t with all his DOGE cuts. All he did was alienate the best and brightest. But that was the whole idea: ‘Clear out anyone with any expertise’.
“Elon Musk didn’t accomplish sh!t”
But he did. Incompetents forget that his job was to find the waste not to legislate.
Musk found no waste. He found places the Congress had sent money and the Executive branch was required to use them and acted against the law. With the present DoJ these crimes will not be investigated.
You aren’t making sense.
You have NO CLUE as to what you are talking about.
AT THE VERY LEAST do a little research before yapping about something you don’t know a thing about.
Government giving 20 MILLION dollars to a ‘company’ that exists in name only, and they cannot even FIND the owner?
The money was immediately wired to an overseas account, never to be gotten back, it’s GONE.
And Somali Day Care Centers getting 6-8-10 million dollars – and they have NO kids/clients?
Musk didn’t find that. DOGE didn’t find that.
The DoD has been unable to account for 40-60% of its budget for decades. Start there.
I’m always amused that so many of the public electorate continue to fall for the pseudo-virtuous “Robin Hood” tactics* —that are in reality meant to serve as election/vote enhancers. (*take from the rich to buoy the poor; -more accurately, take from the rich to BUY the poor)
“Approximately 60% of ILLEGAL immigrants in the U.S. earn less than the federal poverty level.”
“We estimate that 59.4 percent of ILLEGAL immigrant households use one or more welfare programs.” (is 59.4 pretty close to 60.0?)
“…the Biden-Harris Administration has released into the United States more than 5.6 million ILLEGAL aliens, with another 1.9 million ILLEGAL alien ‘gotaways’ escaping into the country…”
https://cosm.aei.org/key-data-on-federal-benefits-paid-to-illegal-immigrant-households/
I do NOT believe that the way to solve crime, slums, trashy streets, gangs, drug trade, healthcare needs/strains/drains, and Minnesota welfare fraud -is by GIVING AWAY the grease to our squeakiest wheels.
It’s one thing to share our surplus with deserving recipients. It’s yet another to enable them in order to buy their favor.
“The Roar of the Greasepaint The Smell of the Crowd.”
ooops. forgot to add: “California continues to serve as the primary destination and home for the largest population of undocumented immigrants in the United States…approximately 2.3 to 2.6 million…” https://www.theglobalstatistics.com/illegal-immigrants-in-california/
lin: just WHO do you think plants, harvests and packs the tomatoes, lettuce and other perishable vegetables and fruits that have to be picked and packed by hand? Do you think that if all of the migrants were deported that there would be enough US citizens available to fill their jobs, and even if there were, how would that affect the price of produce? If the California agriculture industry, which relies heavily on migrant labor fails, what then? There would be shortages of fresh fruits and vegetables. And just WHO do you think cleans rooms, does laundry and kitchen work in hotels and restaurants? Do you think there are enough US citizens to fill these jobs, and if so, how much more would guests and customers have to pay? WHO do you think does landscaping work, roofing and non-union construction work? If all of these people were not here, what would happen to our economy and the price we pay for groceries and hospitality, such as hotels and restaurants? Migrants vastly contribute to our economy, and many of them have US citizen spouses and children.
Gigi, What does that have to do with illegal vs. illegal entrance to the U.S. for employment?
Did you ever hear of H-2 visas to enter the United States LEGALLY and PRECISELY for “seasonal or temporary” employment? Maybe not, eh? Thanks anyway.
H-2 Visas are an employer-side method. Migrant workers would need to have every different farm apply for an H-2 visa to allow them to be in the country.
Employers must provide free housing, daily transportation to the worksite, and pay the highest of the prevailing wage, AEWR (Adverse Effect Wage Rate), or local minimum wage.
The employers won’t do that.
Have you ever heard of farm labor visas for limited seasonal workers? That’s been the norm for many decades, what exactly do you believe they contribute to the economy? It costs more to prepare their ITS W-2 forms than they make and spend. Once they get on the Social Security line they receive far far more than they ever pay in at the average wage they make. Try again…
“We estimate that 59.4 percent of ILLEGAL immigrant households use one or more welfare programs.” (is 59.4 pretty close to 60.0?)“
That’s not the whole story. You left out the fact that most of those illegals have U.S. citizen children or family members who have legitimate claim to welfare programs meant for U.S. citizens. Your own link cites this. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) article explicitly notes under Question 6, these households collect benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children, who are legal U.S. citizens under the 14th Amendment. Denying benefits to these households would mean withholding legally mandated food and healthcare from American citizen children.
In the past the “rich” were taxed at a much higher rate than today and it produced the most wealth in the nation. It didn’t cause the dire predictions that most conservatives peddle today and it still won’t if the tax rates were slightly higher than they are now. For the billionaire tax bracket.
X/George: Pleases be careful not to shoot yourself in the foot with your own enthusiasm to jump on my comments every day.
Did it escape you that ILLEGAL immigrants come here every day precisely to have their children BORN here in order to become citizens eligible for benefits? Do you think they make the trip here to sightsee at Disneyland?
Read carefully:
“About 7 million children in the United States live with immigrant parents who are NOT U.S. citizens, and 4 million of these children live with an undocumented immigrant parent. About 80 percent of these children are U.S. citizens themselves.”
https://www.nccp.org/immigration-profiles/
I think, although I may be wrong, that you are smart enough to see that I left out only information that hurts rather than helps your criticism. Think, X. Think. I know that AI is capable of that.
Lin, your response is highly disingenuous. You did not just “leave out information”—you cited a study that directly refutes your entire premise.
If you had actually used AI to read the National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP) report you linked, it would have shown you why your claims fall short of your intent. You Twisted the Study’s Core Conclusion.
The NCCP study does not argue that immigrants come here to exploit welfare. It explicitly states that these families face a “patchwork access to major public benefit programs” and concludes that broadening their eligibility improves long-term health and educational outcomes for future Americans. You are using a pro-immigrant child welfare study to support an anti-immigrant talking point.
Federal law (PRWORA) strictly bars undocumented parents from receiving federal cash assistance, Medicaid, or SNAP. Benefits are pro-rated and apply only to the U.S. citizen child. Data overwhelmingly shows that immigrants risk their lives for labor opportunities and physical safety, not to navigate complex state bureaucracies for pro-rated food vouchers.
An AI doesn’t have political bias—it just reads the text and the law. And in this case, both prove you completely wrong.
You really think they come here only to have babies, only that? Come on, even I know your’e smarter than that. Are you?
Immigrants ADD to our economic power. The don’t diminish it by using a few benefits once in a while.
George. George. George. Please quit. You’re just digging yourself in deeper.
You just admitted that “The NCCP study does not argue that immigrants come here to exploit welfare.”
Is that/Was that not the thrust of my original comment?
Did I say that was the only reason???? Let me pull an X on you; “show me where what I said was wrong or a lie.”
Your attempt to convert ‘one’ of the cited reasons for illegal immigration that I mention as the ONLY reason shows me how weak your arguments are. A tactic usually pointed out in fifth grade debate class.
p.s. I note that all three of your last comments are directed at me, even though mine were not directed toward you. Do you dream about me, X, and how you can get back at me/us, who note your, er…, flaws?
Thanks anyway.
Notice george didn’t bring up the fact. Many illegals moved to CA for (free) healthcare. Now CA is broke.
Hey, but California spent 7.5 BILLION dollars for water reservoirs SPECIFICALLY to fight fires with
just six years ago, what happened there? It all went to State health care I’m betting.
And as of today, they STILL have not touched the water reservoir above Pacific Palisades, nor
have they granted hardly ANY reconstruction permits…
Karen Bass LIED to Trump’s face about it – ‘fast tracking the permit process’, yet she WILL be reelected…
Most of the countries they moved from have free health care.
Lin, your attempt to backtrack by claiming you never said welfare was the only reason is completely dismantled by your own exact quotes on this thread. You are trying to rewrite your own words to escape the factual holes in your argument.
Here are your exact words from your previous comments that prove the exact opposite of what you are claiming now:
You claimed the direct intent was “precisely” for benefits: In your response you wrote: “Did it escape you that ILLEGAL immigrants come here every day precisely to have their children BORN here in order to become citizens eligible for benefits? Do you think they make the trip here to sightsee at Disneyland?” By using the word “precisely” and mocking any other motive as “sightseeing at Disneyland,” you explicitly framed this as the singular, driving purpose of their journey.
You claimed the entire system is a “handout” to buy votes: In your very first comment on this thread, you wrote that these programs are “pseudo-virtuous ‘Robin Hood’ tactics… meant to serve as election/vote enhancers… take from the rich to BUY the poor.” You explicitly tied the motivation of the immigrants to a calculated transaction to swap government benefits for political favor.
You got caught pulling data from a child advocacy study that directly refutes your point, and now you are desperately trying to move the goalposts.
X, I think readers are able to understand what you are saying vs what Lin is saying. TRy again, clown.
Oh, and by the way, YOU just said to LIn, “And AI doesn’t have political bias—it just reads the text and the law. And in this case, both prove you completely wrong.”
Take a look at what I just posted, some of the dozens (close to 50) articles and posts about AI’s left bias.”
You are the worst of the worst for clownship. Is your Big nose real red?
AI says, “Approximately 250,000 babies are born each year to undocumented immigrant parents in the U.S., indicating a significant number of pregnant undocumented immigrants.”
Reading comprehension is not your Forte.
Trump repeatedly and correctly states that criminals come to the US illegally.
That does not mean all illegal aliens who come here are criminals.
Maybe you should learn english. presumably it is your first language – regardless, english comprehension is not your forte
Separately- while eople come here for a mix of reasons – good and bad – and absolutely we should get rid of those who are not contributing – or WORSE still actually harmful FIRST
Just because you came here illegally for Good reasons – does not create a right for you to stay.
The left loves to rant about ‘native americans” – How well id open borders and mass migration work for them ?
You cant say that to X! He is the smartest person he knows! He comes here to correct Turley and all those others and points out how wrong they are! We need people like him to tell people like me with electric blue hair shaved on one side, septum nose ring what to think! And he does not need AI! He is too smart for that! Just ask him! He will tell you!
X – illegal immigrants come here for a variety of reasons. MOST for a better life.
MOST for the opportunity to acheie a better life on their own.
But most are not all – a portion of those coming here are criminals – every single time we have allowed significant illegal immigration we have had inrush of criminals. – Cartels send “soldiers” into the country to sell drugs and engage in other illegal activities
And that is just ONE vector for criminals.
Others – not a majority – come here specifically to leach off our system.
If you build it they will come.
The massive fraud that were are seeing recently – which is NOT confined tot he high profile states we read about, or even to blue states, and is not exclusive to illegal immigrants – though they are disproportionately represented – that fraud is just th tip of the iceberg.
HHS found recently that as much as 37% of PPACA is Fraudulent.
As Lord Acton said – Power Corrupts, Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
the more poer government has the more money it takes from us and the more of that money is ued fraudulently.
To those of you on the left who rant about big business and billionaires – just eliminate the government poer than thy rent.
Then they have to thrive convincing YOU to trade money for hat they are offering.
Immigration – even mass immigration is likely a NET economic benefit.
It is NOT however an ABSOLUTE economic benefit.
It is almost completely negative for the US working class.
Regardless all your arguments aside from being either flat out wrong or distorted, are also irrelevant.
There is no RIGHT to come to another country.
A country is litterally defined by its borders and its power to choose who comes and goes.
Most everyone in th entire world would be better off – coming to the US.
That does not mean they have the right to, or we have the obligation to allow them to.
“An AI doesn’t have political bias”
ROFL
Ask AI about Tianamen square – in english, mandarin and cantonese – you will get 3 different answers.
AI is no better than the data it is provided with.
While AI is an extremely valuable tool that will vastly improve our lives and standard of living – it is still just us in a different form.
We are biased – and so is AI.
Kierkegard correctly concluded that man can know no more about god than what he knows of himself.
AI is the same – it is limited by humans – it is not objectively better than we are – just faster at doing pattern matching and able to access far more data than we can. But that data is OUR data – with our biases.
That’s what the First Lady did. Came here, had an anchor baby and married to stay. Then brought her immigrant parents.
If it is good enough for Trump and the Republican Party, it’s good enough for everyone else. Equal protection, right?
Too bad that she was EMPLOYED at the time of her visa application and made more money before meeting TRump than you probably made in your lifetime. equal protection, right, X ? (hiding as anonymous)
That’s a problem. Without a work visa being employed is illegal. It was only later that she got a specialty work visa, the ones reserved for only the most expert workers in some field, but being naked isn’t much of a specialty.
Why would X hide as anonymous?
Governments do not produce wealth. They merely confiscate it.
WRONG.
How do Politicians become multi-multi millionaires, like Sanders, Warren, Pelosi?
How does a politician in NYC go from being BROKE in 2018 to becoming
worth 5 and 20 MILLION dollars today, depending on which report you read, in
just eight years?
They produce debt and wars
And just because you are born here SHOULD NOT make you a US citizen *IF* your parents are here illegally.
If my wife and I go to visit Russia and she pops while we are there, is the kid a Russian citizen?
Can we as parents now live there ‘legally’?
NOPE.
Trump is right – that law needs to be rewritten.
It’s not a law – it’s part of the US Constitution. A constitutional amendment would be required to change that.
It was specific written to accommodate children of slaves. It has been distorted and misapplied to bolster the Democrats voting base.
“You left out the fact that most of those illegals have U.S. citizen children or family members who have legitimate claim to welfare programs
meant for U.S. citizens. ”
Which is another reason NOT to allow illegals into the country and to deport those here – to avoid so called anchor babies.
This is also why growing numbers are opposing birthright citizenship.
Regardless, I absolutely support birth right citizenship – but do not support and can not find in the constitution any basis at all for welfare.
No citizen is “entitled” to live off the effort of others PERIOD.
The role of government is to punish those who use FORCE to get their way,
To use FORCE to compell people to live up to their agrements,
and to use FORCE to require those who ACTUALLY harm others to make them whole.
There is nothing in the constitution about charity.
Govenrment charity is theft.
“In the past the “rich” were taxed at a much higher rate than today and it produced the most wealth in the nation.”
Doubly false.
First while marinal tax rates were higher in the past, that does NOT mean that the ratio of taxes to income was actually higher.
When upper margin tax rates were higher – most income of the wealthy was not subject to income tax.
Income taxes did not exist prior to the 16th amendment – we have had them for less than half the life of the country.
Nor were they high during our greatest periods of prosperity.
Economic growth was double as high in the 19th century – with no income tax.
the 2nd great long term boom was from Reagans Tax cuts through to “the great recession”
“It didn’t cause the dire predictions that most conservatives peddle today and it still won’t if the tax rates were slightly higher than they are now. For the billionaire tax bracket.”
That depends on exactly what you do.
None other than Obama’s cheif economic advisor established that the revenue optimizing maximum income tax rate is approximately 35% – anything higher produces LESS revenue – not more. BTW the Growth optimizing max income tax rate is likely below 20% based on data from many many countries – including the US in the 19th century.
While slightly higher taxes bring about disaster ? Nope. But they also will NOT being in more revenue. There is no increase in upper margin tax rates that will bring in more revenue.
And only an idiot would think otherwise.
While we are seeing the exodus of billionaires from NY and CA and other blue states in response to high taxes,
That is NOT the only thing they can do. While there are innumerable other options – one of the more obvious and simple, is
Just make less money. Be less productive, do not work as hard.
BTW we also KNOW that has happened in the past and in other countries with high taxes.
I would further note that Europe – which those of you on the left fawn over, has had decades of absymal growth – the standard of living in Germany is the same as that of Mississippi. And Germany is one of the wealthier large countries in Europe.
Regardless Europe has been lowering top margin taxes – because they are economic disaster. Though many european countries still have higher upper margin taxes than the US – not alot higher – but they DO have far higher taxes on ordinary people.
This is not because they prefer taxing the middle class. It is because high taxes on the rich were so economically destructive they had to reduce them
From Lin’s Article:
“At the start of 2023, the net cost of illegal immigration for the United States – at the federal, state, and local levels – was at least $150.7 billion.”
…………………………….
That’s it..?? $150.7 billion..??
Congressional Republicans are going to appropriate $70 billion for ICE while Trump’s War On Iran might creep to $1 trillion when all the costs are finally added.
And meanwhile America’s population growth would be totally flat without undocumented immigrants.
Your comment: “Congressional Republicans are going to appropriate $70 billion for ICE…”
-Of course, this covers ICE for the next three+ years, n’est ce pas?
From the article I cite
“2. What is the total ANNUAL cost of illegal immigration?”
“At the start of 2023, the net cost of illegal immigration for the United States – at the federal, state, and local levels – was at least $150.7 billion (ANNUAL).”
I’m sorry, I don’t get your point.
(Trump’s war on Iran has nothing to do with this, does it? (are you comparing nuclear bomb deterrents to welfare fraud deterrents? $150.7 Billion on illegal immigration x 3.5 years equals a minimum of $527+Billion? So if we could eliminate a/o weren’t dealing with illegal immigrants, we could save and therefore have a minimum of close to $ 6/10ths Trillion of the conflict with Iran paid for?
I don’t get your point?
sorry.
p.s. rain stopped, sun is out, so I’m leaving, not ignoring your response)
Perhaps. How much do they contribute to the labor market? They are likely criminally underpaid.
Perhaps start putting corporate leadership in prison for hiring them.
This is the party that is a-okay with a Nazi tattoo, but a tattoo of an Israeli flag would be a dealbreaker. The Left’s instincts are always totalitarian.
https://x.com/TheCarolineMc/status/2063803200902168769
A tattoo of the Israeli flag would be a dealbreaker in most MAGA circles.
Balony. Most means more than half. There is a fringe anti-Israel contingent on the right, but it is not nearly more than half. The vast majority of “MAGA circles” are friendly to Israel.
What’s behind the campaign to demonize Israel inside Trumpworld?
Dubious leaks about the Jewish state spying on America signify an effort to break up a valued alliance by those whose motives are rooted in antisemitic conspiracies.
…Their obsessive hatred for the Jewish state extends to believing without a shred of proof that Jerusalem was behind the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. Like the myths about “The Israel Lobby” that fuel resentments about AIPAC, the Jews and their state are not merely the scapegoats for scandals, but are believed to be manipulating Trump and the United States to work against American interests. In this way, antisemitic shorthand about “Zio-pedos” has become the way the far-right mimics the Marxist formulations about a “white oppressor” state in which Israel and Zionists are demonized as not just wrongheaded, but perverted criminals. …
https://www.jns.org/opinion/column/jonathan-s-tobin/whats-behind-the-campaign-to-demonize-israel-inside-trumpworld?utm_campaign=Daily%20Syndicate%20Emails&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9S3Y_Tl2XOAre9AuRztx9wodvwGIqjlnX9s0PdG-gxODYYuzPONFlZL65286o0yFjyyfKAvHYS287-m_QoFcCbdhTJfg&_hsmi=137918477&utm_content=137918477&utm_source=hs_email
S. Meyer: I believe both you and J. Tobin pose credible takes. I also believe that there IS/WAS surveillance, but I don;t see where critics are allowing for the possibility that surveillance of real-time or recorded exchanges might be for other purposes, e.g., assessment of ambiguous responses in the exchanges as being equivocal/subject to interpretation, etc.
I had seen NYT’s take on it and I think NYT further harmed its reputation as a reliable, neutral source.
Israel does not benefit if Iran remains instant in its present state. So it benefits them to spy on Trump so they can undermine the negotiations. They don’t want a deal with Iran. That is why the JCPOA was such a threat to Israel. They would have lost any leverage they had if the deal was allowed to continue.
Trump is a moron and he has no idea what he is doing with Iran. He’s already ‘bored’ with it. Wow.
Israel is what brought us into this new war that Trump promised would be a presidency of “no new wars”.
Israel has to act in its own sovereign best interest. Iran has been attacking Israel for 47 years, so the threat has expanded from Israel to European capitals and, in a short time frame, the US itself.
“Israel is what brought us into this new war that Trump”
You are not alone in this belief. There are a good number of dummies on the extreme right and much of the Democrat party who agree and whose prior membership would look at this new turn of the Democrat party in horror. Democrats: the party of slavery. Democrats: the party of Jim Crow. Democrats: the party of political slavery. Democrats: the party of antisemitism.
Israel is not the only nation with a sovereign interest in. So is Iran. WE are responsible for most of the problems in the Middle East. Especially Iran.
We are responsible for replacing their democratically elected leaders for a compliant regime in order to get their oil. Iran said “no more” and over threw they Shah. We supported Saddam Hussein in order to ‘punish’ the ayatollahs for asserting their sovereign right to their oil. We then had to contend with Saddam who got greedy and attacked Kuwait. Because WE supported his dictatorship to keep Iran in check. We made a mess and we are just dealing with the blowback of decades of intervention and regime changes. Israel now wants Iran to be so weak and useless that it can then assert dominance over the region. Iran can hold its own and it shows. That’s why Israel needs our help. It can’t do it alone. And we are paying the price of that stupid decision to attack Iran.
Even republicans know how what a bad idea this was and we can’t get out of it without looking like the idiots that caused a global energy crisis.
No one denies that the US doesn’t always function correctly. It doesn’t, but it has been the best nation and has had the greatest effect of reducing starvation and keeping world peace.
Do you think Iran has done more for the world? How about Russia? Who did Europe lean on when the Nazi’s appeared.
When talking about goodness you are talking about relative goodness. The US is at the top of the goodness scale, but you are too dumb to recognize that.
no new wars”.
________________
So did O-dumber… but!
Iran is not a new war. It is an ongoing war of 47 years that all prior presidents couldn’t appropriately manage.
The war against Iran is more than 70 years old, started to defend British oil companies stealing Iranian oil.
I know Israel surveiled the US in the past: Pollard. But I don’t think in the present as it was too costly for them. But, I think we all know the US surveils Israel. That is a game all nations do, but only Israel is signalled out.
The NYT’s has never been honest, including their coverge of Nazi atrocities, Stalin atrocities and Pol Pot atrocities.
What a collection of inane comments.
Israel has undoubtedly surveilled the US in the past, but you don’t THINK that they do now because it would be too costly.
Really ???
What exactly is the basis for these “thoughts” of yours ?
Is there any evidence to support these “thoughts”, or are they simply the meandering thoughts of wishful thinking or a diseased mind?
You THINK that we all know the US surveils Israel.
Really ???
Who exactly is WE ????
Perhaps the voices in your head.
What makes you think that WE all know that the US surveils Israel?
How exactly do WE know this?
The NYT coverage of various atrocities has not been honest.
Really ???
In what way have they not been honest?
Have they denied that the atrocities did not take place?
Have they said that the atrocities were not all that bad?
Did they support the atrocities?
You are making absurd statements that are completely disconnected from reality. There is no evidence for any of these “THOUGHTS” of yours.
You are simply making stuff up.
You are demonstrating too much ignorance with many gaps to fill. If you wish to continue we can do so, but a fraudster like you generally wants to play below the radar.
Yet more completely inane, meaningless gibberish.
Just a collection of words with no discernible meaning.
What exactly does “playing below the radar” mean???
I am right here, perfectly visible to any “radar”.
If there are many gaps to fill in my ignorance, then feel free to fill them with actual facts, not your “THOUGHTS”, or the opinions of the “WE” who appear to be simply the voices in your head.
You could easily prove my “ignorance” by providing a few actual facts.
But you can’t, because your “THOUGHTS” are not based in any factual reality.
You simply hide behind completely ridiculous “THOUGHTS” that are completely untethered from reality.
You are a fraud, so why should I fill in the gaps in your knowledge.
I will wait for you to say something useful and true.
Why do you think there are gaps in my knowledge ??
I have not expressed any factual information, or any opinions about anything here today. You have absolutely no basis to question the extent of my knowledge about anything. All I have done is question your absurd opinions and thoughts wherein you make ridiculous assumptions without any factual basis. You make sweeping statements about what you THINK, and make absurd assumptions prefaced by statements such as “I think we all know”. In other words you presume to “think” that “WE” all know something and agree upon that something. Who exactly is “WE”, and how do you presume to speak for them.
The answer is that your “THOUGHTS” are nothing more than the incoherent ramblings of a sub-normal mind. You “THINK” that you know what everybody else thinks, and that everybody else agrees with you. This is the False Consensus Effect, whereby poorly functional thinkers believe that their thoughts are representative of the majority of other people.
You come her every day and ramble incoherently about what you “THINK”, but you never provide any factual basis for your assertions.
When anyone questions your absurd comments you immediately retreat into insults and take on the attitude that any attempt to defend yourself is somehow beneath your dignity.
The reality is that you fully understand that you are wrong when called out, and you have absolutely no rational response.
All I am doing is demanding that you justify your thoughts and opinions with actual facts, and since you are never able to do this you just retreat into a haughty and supercilious attitude of superiority.
You are pathetic !!!!!!
As I said here and elsewhere. You are a fraud and a coward.
A fraud is one who misrepresents the facts or the views of others. You presume to know what “WE” all know, without any justification for that belief.
That makes you the fraud.
A coward is one who does not have the courage of his convictions and subsequently refuses to defend himself.
That makes you the coward.
Plain and simple, you are an obvious fraud in more ways than one, and as far as being a coward, you won’t even provide an alias. I need say no more.
What is it with this weird fixation about an alias???
It is a fascinating fallback that you have whenever you know that you are wrong, and that you have been shown to be making absurd unfounded comments. This persistent claim that you make about an alias conferring some sort of authenticity or validation on comments is not an argument. It is quite simply an admission of defeat.
You say nothing further, and indeed you make the claim that you need say nothing further, as if this retreat is somehow a constructive argument and somehow validates your point of view.
This is highly abnormal thinking.
You say that I am an obvious fraud without any explanation or proof. In contrast, I showed that you are the obvious fraud by pointing out that you base your comments and thoughts on the mystical “WE”, who all know that you are correct. This claim that your opinion represents the opinion of everyone else is the very essence of fraud.
An alias permits others to know who the frauds are, and that is why you have avoided using one. But hidden you might think you are; however, who you are is as clear as day. You are a fraud.
You seldom say anything, and when pinned down, you run. Your opinions have been destroyed, and you dare not take a position. You are a coward.
In your previous comment you stated that you “need say nothing more”.
And yet here you are, saying something more.
This clearly identifies you as a liar, as well as a fraud and a coward.
You have a remarkably distorted view of what it means to have an alias. You seem to think that an alias confers validity to comments. However, by its very definition, an alias is something used to conceal and hide an identity. How then can an alias confer authenticity?
An alias is something used to conceal an identity for the purposes of committing fraud. This clearly re-confirms that you are in fact a fraud.
You also claim that I dare not take a position. I have taken a very clear position that your comments are based on faulty reasoning and a false belief that your opinions are representative of most people, and that you are a liar, a fraud and a coward. My position could not possibly be any more clear.
You say that I seldom say anything. I have said quite a lot here today, far more than you. I estimate that I have said at least 10 times as much as you.
You say that when I am pinned down that I run away.
Apparently it has escaped your notice that I am right here and responding to all your absurd comments.
You seem to think that simply repeating completely absurd comments and accusations somehow confers validity to those statements. You say nothing new in your repeated comments. You simply make the same accusations over and over and over again thinking that eventually this will prove that your lies are true and that you are correct.
This is highly abnormal, and indeed pathological thinking.
Either that, or you believe in the methodologies of Nazi propaganda, and that all you have to do is repeat a lie often enough until it becomes true.
You have said nothing. You are the fraud who plays with words and says nothing. An alias provides an identity, so a specific alias must be consistent or be known as a liar and a coward, as you are known to be.
“. I have taken a very clear position that your comments are based on faulty reasoning and a false belief “
You have taken a position that my position is wrong, but said nothing about your own. You are a fraud, a liar, and a coward.
“I have said quite a lot here today, far more than you.”
Do you see how your “said-quite-a-lot” is nothing more than a contrarian attack lacking knowledge? You pretend to have knowledge, but none is seen; you are a fraud.
For someone who said that they “need say no more”, you sure seem to be saying a lot more.
Obviously you cannot be taken at your word.
You cannot be relied upon to follow through on what you say.
You make a statement about your intentions then do the exact opposite.
These observations clearly and unequivocally establish that you are a LIAR, and not to be trusted. As such you are a fraud and a coward, because you do not have the courage of your own convictions.
So here I have established clear proof that you are liar, based on your own false statement that you “need say no more”.
And you continue to label me as a liar without pointing to any specific false statements that I have made. That in and of itself is yet another lie that you have told. So now you are compounding lies upon lies.
There can be no doubt that you are a liar.
There is a solution to this conundrum whereby you could disprove my accusations that you are a liar.
You simply need to “say no more” and stop responding to my comments.
However, if you continue to respond and “say more” you will simply be confirming that I am correct in my assessment of you as a liar.
The choice is yours.
“Say no more” and prove that you are not a liar.
Or continue to respond and prove that I am correct, and that you are indeed a liar.
You are a bore. There is nothing I or anyone else can do about it, so to keep it more interesting, I answered one of today’s quotes and examined an earlier quote.
“So here I have established clear proof that you are liar,”
More words, but you have nothing to say. I showed why you are a liar and a coward. You return with empty and meaningless phrases. This is part of your personality.
“I have not expressed any factual information, or any opinions about anything here today. “
Thank you for confirming my argument above. You did “not expressed any factual information, or any opinions about anything here today. “ or the day before, or in any of your postings where I am involved, except for those where you were wrong.
When you want to criticize my content, all you have to do is scan my name. The content is there and mostly correct. Your content is hidden by the proven coward you are under a generic anonymous.
If I am such a bore, why are you bothering to waste your valuable time interacting and responding to me?
And why are you wasting your time going back and re-reading and analyzing my previous comments?
This is not normal behavior.
But perhaps your time is not all that valuable. Perhaps you have unlimited time on your hands in the institution to which you are confined.
However, I digress. As I noted previously, you lied when you said that you “need say no more” about me. The fact that you continue say a LOT more about me confirms that you are a liar.
Henceforth, you will be known as Meyer the Liar.
It has a certain mellifluous ring to it, don’t you agree. The title flows off the tongue as sweet as honey.
From now on I will try to address you as Meyer the Liar in my comments, so you will know that it is me responding to your typically pointless and ignorant comments.
Does that satisfy your weirdly obsessive demand that I use an alias. It should, since you will always be able to identify my comments.
“If I am such a bore, why are you bothering to waste your valuable time interacting and responding to me?”
I study abnormal behavior. You are a goldmine.
“Perhaps you have unlimited time on your hands”
Time is limited for all. But I have reached a point where my time is free to me at my desire. I am of a curious nature, as you can see from the wide range of discussions I engage in.
“You lied when you said that you “need say no more” about me. The fact that you continue say a LOT more about me confirms that you are a liar.”
Your logical failures make your boring personality even more interesting. If I need say no more, it is not a barrier to my saying more. If I say I need no more money, that is not a barrier to earning more. Outside of your lack of logic, a more concerning feature is that you have nothing, so you resort to calling others liars to distract from your own identity
“Meyer the Liar” fits well with your grandiloquent method of interacting while trying to defend your fraudulent nature. Unlike an anonymous internet coward, I have a name, so you are not forced to manufacture one. You will attempt to do so anyway, simply because you have absolutely nothing left of substance to say.
Final Grade: Self-confessed Liar and Spurious, Inveterate Coward.
Israel exports software that back-doors cell phones and was used to track the journalist that Saudi Arabia had chopped into convenient, portable chunks. The cost to spy has never been cheaper. They don’t have to leave Israel to get all the information they want.
Just HOW does the US benefit from supplying Israel with bombs, airplanes and missile defense systems, along with the billions in foreign aid? Note that the US, under Trump, took away the money to provide food to starving kids in Africa, but we have anything Israel wants thanks to rich Jews like Miriam Edelson donating hundreds of millions to Trump’s campaign. We are now blowing through a billion a day, minimum, killed 13 American service members, and are depleting our stockpile of weapons, and for what? We had the JCPOA, which unequivocally said that Iran would not create, seek or acquire a nuclear bomb. Trump tore it up because it was an achievement of Obama, of whom Trump is insanely jealous. We would be much better off siding with the oil-producing countries than Israel that does nothing but take from us, which creates enemies because of our support. Israel conned Trump into starting the war with Iran by lying about Iran being ready to nuke us, after it couldn’t BS Biden, Obama, Clinton or Bush into starting a bombing campaign as a cover for Israel to start bombing in Lebanon so it could steal territory, all while claiming they are going after Hezbollah. It’s the LAND they want and they have no respect for human life or the suffering they cause to the Palestinian people or people of Lebanon. It’s Israel’s abuses that create Hezbolla and other anti-Israel groups. But then, again, Trump also thinks he can steal Canada, Greenland, the Panama Canal and Cuba, so he doesn’t have a problem with killing people or stealing their land. Well, the rest of us DO have a problem with this. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with Israel being a Jewish country.
Israel has committed human rights violations against the Palestinian people, stole their land, moved in Israeli settlers, bombed Gaza back to the Stone Age and refused to allow in humanitarian aid, resulting in unnecessary starvation, people dying of thirst, and people dying of malnutrition and from lack of medical supplies. And, you claim that if people are opposed to the abuses committed by Israel, then we must just be anti-Semitic. It wouldn’t matter what the religious beliefs of a country are that commits human rights violations and steals land from other countries, all of this is contrary to what America used to stand for.
As usual I stopped reading after the first sentence because you are a proven nut-case. I will deal with the first statement only and do so in brief.
“Just HOW does the US benefit from supplying Israel with bombs, airplanes and missile defense systems, along with the billions in foreign aid?”
Israel doesn’t really receive foreign aid any longer, but you can consider the exchanges however you wish.
Israel provides the US with a “giant aircraft carrier” in the middle east containing the strongest air-force and army in that area and near the strongest in the entire world. They provide intelligence and technology for our air force and missile defense in real terms. They are not paid for that and the US provides no soldiers on the ground. Compare that to Europe, South Korea and other nations you antisemitic nutcase.
“As usual I stopped reading after the first sentence…”
even though gigi shows up every day to read the first sentence and comment. hmmmm.
S. Meyer,
Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II. Israel operates under a 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that legally guarantees $3.8 billion annually in U.S. foreign military aid.
Israel is explicitly compensated through Foreign Military Financing (FMF). FMF is a program where the U.S. government gives Israel billions of taxpayer dollars to purchase advanced American military hardware (like F-35 fighter jets). The U.S. essentially funds the very technology and air power you claim is provided “for free.”
The U.S. military maintains a continuous, active ground presence in Israel. The U.S. operates a permanent, classified military base inside Israel known as Site 512, a radar surveillance station located in the Negev desert. Furthermore, the Pentagon deployed U.S. troops on the ground to operate the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system inside Israel to defend the country against ballistic missile threats.
Iran destroyed the majority of U.S. and Israeli radar installations in the region with the help of Russia. That’s why Israel and the U.S. are more careful about using what little interceptors we have against Iran’s still effective ballistic missile capability.
The only reason we have a cease fire is because we don’t want to risk expending more missiles that we can’t replace against Iran’s still significant stockpile of missiles and drones. Trump is not ‘winning’ this war. He’s stuck trying to get out of it while Iran enjoys a significant leverage against us. That’s not good.
That MOU no longer exists. Israel provides returns to the US that I mentioned earlier. Our troops in South Korea cost about $3.5 billion per year and that doesn’t include our navy, intelligence and a lot of other assets spent in that hot spot. But, antisemites will point to Israel. The cost footprint in Europe is even larger; perhaps $35-40 billion. The antisemites seem to forget about those costs as well.
Our bases in the Middle East cost around $15 Billion for regional Arab bases, plus another $5-$10 Billion in unbudgeted expenses. Israel is the best bargain in town.
“a permanent, classified military base inside Israel known as Site 512,”
Does that add up to $15Billion plus unbudgeted expenses? No. Site 512 cumulative expenditures over the years is a lot less than $100Million. Remember Svelaz Billion is one-thousand Million and the expense that you mention is over years and very small in comparison.
To summarize for the bozos:
U.S. doesn’t station carrier strike groups, permanent fighter wings, or tens of thousands of American troops inside Israel to secure it. The cost of Israel is the tiniest expenditure compared to what the US expends in Europe , Asia and the Middle East.
If you really believe the US is not helping compensate Israel financially I have some
land in Florida and a bridge in NYC for you.
You don’t think we are partially funding them based on what, the MSM reports?
We weren’t funding Iraq either, until 18 BILLION USD we sent them somehow disappeared into the ether.
And somehow a former President’s Trust fund grew by over 800 MILLION dollars at the same time…
Today the two countries are working together to create military strenght for defense and on the battle field where US troops need not be involved.
You hallucinate a lot.
Here’s what the Pentagon says about our military bases in the Middle East:–notice they don’t mention Israel:
“The U.S. maintains major bases across at least 10 Middle Eastern countries, including large hubs such as Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar (over 10,000 personnel) and Naval Support Activity Bahrain, home of the U.S. Fifth Fleet. These installations span Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Iraq, Jordan, Oman, Egypt, and Djibouti, supporting air, naval, logistics, and command operations.
Overview of U.S. Military Presence
According to Pentagon figures, between 40,000 and 50,000 U.S. troops are deployed across at least 19 installations from Egypt to Oman. Eight of these are permanent bases in Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.
Key U.S. Bases by Country
Bahrain
Naval Support Activity Bahrain (NSA Bahrain)
Headquarters of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and the Fifth Fleet.
Supports maritime security, mine-countermeasures, and drone-boat interception.
Qatar
Al Udeid Air Base
Largest U.S. base in the region; hosts CENTCOM, Air Forces Central, and SOCOM elements.
Houses ~10,000 U.S. and coalition troops annually.
Targeted by Iranian missile strikes in 2025.
Kuwait
Camp Arifjan – Major logistics and sustainment hub.
Ali Al Salem Air Base – Primary airlift hub for combat power.
Camp Buehring – Key staging and transit post.
Several Kuwaiti bases suffered damage from Iranian strikes in 2026.
Saudi Arabia
Prince Sultan Air Base (PSAB)
Hosts F‑16s, KC‑135s, and AWACS aircraft; used as a dispersal field.
Eskan Village
Houses U.S. trainers and intelligence personnel.
United Arab Emirates
Al Dhafra Air Base
Hosts the 380th Air Expeditionary Wing, including F‑35As and RQ‑170 drones.
Confirmed damage from Iranian missile strikes.
Jebel Ali Port
Major logistics hub; targeted during Iranian attacks.
Iraq
Ain al-Asad Air Base – Used for training and coalition missions; targeted by Iran.
Erbil Air Base – Key site in the Kurdistan Region.
Jordan
Muwaffaq Salti Air Base (Azraq) – Supports U.S. and coalition air operations.
Oman
Duqm Port & Airfield Access Sites (Thumrait, Masirah)
Used for logistics and contingency support; Duqm was targeted by Iran.
Egypt & Djibouti
Egypt hosts U.S. access sites along the Mediterranean.
Camp Lemonnier (Djibouti) supports operations in the broader region.
Bases Targeted in Recent Conflicts
Iranian retaliatory strikes in 2026 hit numerous U.S. bases, including:
Al Dhafra (UAE)
Al Udeid (Qatar)
Ali Al Salem, Camp Buehring, Camp Arifjan (Kuwait)
Fifth Fleet HQ in Bahrain”
You Trump fans simply cannot handle the truth.
We pay a lot of money for those bases, but the most powerful base Israel doesn’t charge. We spend a fortune on S. Korea and Europe, yet we don’t need troops on Israeli soil. Israel protects Americas flanks.
Here is the American traitor Jonathan Pollard, gloating over the time Israel threatened US with a nuke during Nixon’s term
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1682620969442675
So? He spied and went to jail. Why are you listening to him? He is a private citizen.
Meyer are you defending the murder of American sailors by Israel in the USS Liberty incident?
Defending? No. I grieve for the sailors lost and injured. I’m an American. Do I know what happened? No. No one can be sure because there are too many stories and no definitive proof. But we know the US and Israel want the story buried.
One must ask themself, what was a spy ship doing close to the scene of battle between Egypt and Israel? Was this spy ship transmitting Israeli troop movements to the Egyptian high command? The targeted area was the electronic intelligence hold, and that is where the vast majority of Americans were killed. This transmission of data while Israeli troops were being killed and Israel was under attack from the troops of multiple countries attacking Israel from multiple sides was an existential threat to Israel’s existence. I do not believe Israel wanted to sink the boat and kill but to shut down the intelligence being transmitted. Israeli fighter pilots have tremendous skills and could have sunk the ship if that was their intention.
Here are some bullet points from a source.
“The Target Zone: The Israeli motor torpedo boat launched a weapon that blasted a 40-foot hole into the starboard side of the vessel. This detonated directly inside the lower-deck spaces occupied by the NSA’s Communication Technician (CT) teams.
The Intelligence Loss: This compartment was filled with advanced intercept equipment, crypto-processing gear, and recording arrays. The blast instantly incinerated the equipment and flooded the room, killing 25 NSA specialists and linguists instantly—accounting for the vast majority of the 34 total American fatalities.
The Antenna Destruction: Before the torpedo strike, Israeli fighter jets systematically strafed the deck, successfully knocking out the ship’s massive, distinctive forest of transmission antennas and the unique satellite dish used to relay encrypted data back to Washington.”
For proponents of this very strong theory, the pinpoint destruction of intelligence compartments and communication is major evidence demonstrating the attackers knew what the ship was doing and where to strike to instantly blind the spying operation.
Many evangelicals believe that Israel is key to the start of Armageddon when the Chosen people are taken up to Heaven and everyone else will suffer in Hell on Earth.
Not me buddy. Zionist entity’s gotta go
Even Israel bans dual citizens from holding office. It’s about time we did the same. In fact, receiving any federal money via any pathway should require US and US only citizenship.
Meanwhile, the topic, it amazes me that anyone thinks exit taxes and wealth taxes are going to fix inequity or budget problems. One results because people are not all the same, the other because politicians and their beneficiaries have no respect for taxpayers or their money.
You could not be more wrong.
I support Israel and their right to be their own state.
I have Jewish friends who I would gladly defend against those violent pro-Hamas protestors.
The irony of a woman saying she does not support genocide while supporting a guy with a Nazi tattoo he had for 17 years seems to have gone over her head.
Good observation. She’s saying she’s fine with a Nazi tatoo because she’s against the very thing the Nazis did. Makes no sense at all. And then she repeats fictitious left-wing talking points about Israel doing it. Typical Dem voter, I suppose.
Can they move in with you? The Israeli Jews/Zionsts are mainly European colonizers who have been driving the Arabs off land the Arabs held for centuries while waving a scroll that they wrote claiming the land for themselves from 30 or more centuries ago.
You are full of misinformation. I quote, “Israeli Jews/Zionists are mainly European colonizers.” Zionism emerged over the entire diaspora, and the vast majority of Israeli Jews identify as Zionists, of which more than half are Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews.
Even your definition of colonizer is wrong. A colonizer is defined as those sent by a mother country to settle. What country sent them?
“Driving the Arabs off” is wrongly said. Jews are the indigenous people of Israel, existing there continuously long before Mohammed was born. The 1948 exodus was a complex event where many left following calls by Arab leaders like the Grand Mufti Al-Husseini, while a similar number of Jews were simultaneously forced from Arab lands under the threat of death. Much of the land was purchased by the Jews, and most of the Arab-held lands were owned by absentee landlords who may never have set foot there.
The scroll you talk about is the Torah, but you should look at the archaeological data. Start with the City of David, since that has proven the existence of King David. It’s time for you to actually review what you think, because most of what you think is wrong.
Trump welcomed Nazis into the Republican Party; good people on both sides. Never told the Nazis to not vote for him.
And how many votes would that get him? 500? 1,000 MAYBE?
More like maybe 50.
But that’s not also part of THIS discussion.
So few votes that Trump could not say “I hate Nazis and will prosecute any I can find.”
He never did, but you are too stupid to notice. The Democrats have put up Platner to run for the Senate and he is a neo Nazi. If you get any dumber you will self destruct.
Professor Turley’s argument that taxing billionaires is a “first salvo” to tax lower brackets is a slippery slope fallacy. Targeting the ultra-wealthy requires highly specific asset-valuation mechanisms that simply cannot be applied to everyday wage earners. Furthermore, claiming California lost “$2 trillion in assets” from this proposed tax is a mathematical impossibility; it wildly miscalculates the actual movable net worth of the state’s billionaires, who still heavily rely on California’s massive tech infrastructure.
History proves that taxing extreme wealth is both viable and constitutionally sound.
There is historical Precedent. During the 1950s and early 1960s, the U.S. maintained a top marginal income tax rate of 91% and a corporate tax rate over 50%. Far from destroying the economy, this era saw the greatest middle-class expansion, infrastructure boom, and GDP growth in American history.
There’s also Constitutional Realiy. The 16th Amendment explicitly grants Congress the broad power to lay and collect taxes on incomes “from whatever source derived.” Legal scholars have long argued that accumulated wealth and unrealized capital gains fall well within this definition to prevent dangerous levels of plutocracy.
Billionaires do not generate wealth in a vacuum; they rely on public infrastructure, educated workforces, and legal systems funded by the public. Asking them to pay a marginal tax on their extreme wealth isn’t “looting”—it is a constitutionally grounded, historically proven method to ensure a stable and fair economy.
What these billionaires do is benefit from the wealth creating population of talented engineers, managers, salespeople, etc. and the infrastructure that California offers. The earn billions in profit. But when to comes time to pay their fair share its’ “peace out, I’m headed to Florida because I will go broke if I have to pay a little more in taxes than I usually do”. They love the infrastructure and talent that California provides but do not want it contribute to it as much as everyone else does. The majority of these billionaires can afford these higher taxes. They can afford the higher taxes. It’s as simple as that. The “billionaires” of the 1950’s weren’t ‘suffering’ from high taxes. It produced the most producers era in our nation and produced the best middle class we ever had.
OK, so why not expand the charitable donation limit from 50% –> 80% of taxable income and property tax?
This approach could lead to an explosion of privately-owned service companies that take over human development functions from govt., and through competition for clients and philanthropic givers, achieves high levels of innovation and excellence. The big problem with govt. programs is there’s no competition and very low accountability.
Why not raise the Giveback Expectation on the uber-wealthy, but let them choose how best to give back? What’s wrong with giving them an alternative to funding incompetent govt. bureaucracies?…so long as they’re giving back?
pbinca: Actually, I like your proposition (that is why I like reading this blog-it should make us appreciate other thought processes other than our own). You are making me think outside of my general sphere, good for you.
(But I do not think your proposal can be meritorious without concomitant enhanced auditing/tracking of 501(c) and general NGO applications/filings)
“other thought processes outside our own.”
Pbinca, under a voluntary system, donors choose what to fund based on personal interest, not societal need. Studies consistently show that the vast majority of ultra-wealthy philanthropic giving goes to elite universities, major art museums, and high-profile hospital wings—not to low-income food banks, homelessness prevention, or rural infrastructure. This approach would strip funding from vulnerable communities and concentrate it in wealthy cultural hubs.
Government programs, for all their bureaucratic flaws, are strictly bound by constitutional protections, anti-discrimination laws, and public oversight. Citizens can vote out politicians who fail them. In contrast, private charities and private service companies are completely unaccountable to the public. A private charity can legally deny services based on religious beliefs, political affiliation, or race, leaving citizens with zero legal recourse.
Allowing the wealthy to write off up to 80% of their taxable income and property taxes creates an enormous loophole for tax evasion. Wealthy individuals would simply route their tax liabilities into their own private family foundations or Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs). They would legally wipe out their public tax obligations while retaining total, permanent control over how that money is invested and spent—frequently paying salaries to their own family members to run these foundations.
The idea that an “explosion of privately owned service companies” can efficiently replace government functions is fundamentally flawed.
Philanthropy is inherently unstable and highly cyclical; during economic recessions—exactly when human development functions are needed most—private donations dry up completely. Private charities lack the massive scale, legal authority, and borrowing capacity required to manage nationwide safety nets like Social Security, disaster relief, Medicaid, or national infrastructure. Fragmenting these services into thousands of competing private entities would create massive administrative waste and an uncoordinated, chaotic system and fraud.
OK george/Mr Stalin
Pbinca, under a voluntary system, donors choose what to fund based on personal interest, not societal need.
So typical of most libs like yourself.
Only big government can say who should be punished and who can win.
Libs and Dems only fund what will give them a majority kickback, such as a nice fat PAC contribution,
which they will siphon from.
And it’s also Conservatives, but they are nowhere near as blatant and uncaring about exposing themselves.
X/George: please, please, pretty please with whipped cream and a cherry on top, –STAY AWAY from AI and Google– OR at least use it more wisely, KNOWING full well the SELECTIVE information and perspectives they provide (as rated by independent analyses/outside sources).
Thanking you in advance, lin
They? You’re not saying it’s inaccurate or wrong. So why stop. I do double check more often when even I spot something that is inconsistent or off.
Do YOU check if your sources are accurate? Or do you just post because you did a cursory ‘read’ of the source? You’ve already been to be wrong on occasion.
“Google News 73% Left Bias Exposed: AllSides 2026 Study | Image by SvetaZi/Shutterstock”
https://dallasexpress.com/national/curious-why-your-google-news-feed-feels-so-one-sided-study-reveals-73-left-bias/
https://acekfund.org/2024/08/15/study-reveals-ai-algorithms-have-left-leaning-bias/
Thanks anyway.
Lin, nope.
The AllSides study audited human-curated and algorithmic feeds that index headlines from external legacy media organizations. It measures the political bias of traditional mainstream journalists, not the platform itself.
The PLoS ONE study evaluated Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT and Gemini. These are generative tools that write original text based on broad internet training data.
It still does not prove they are wrong. But thanks for trying.
X just doesn’t seem able to understand SELECTIVE SOURCING.
He just can’s see through his need to be right, even though he is always wrong when he tries to argue.
He has very low comprehension skills when it comes to context.
Here, georgie/X/svelas, here’s some more for you
“Google News Bias and Credibility”
“Overall, we rate Google News as strongly Left-Center biased, with most stories coming from Left-Center sources.”
Get it X??? “WITH MOST SOURCES COMING FROM LEFT-CENTER SOURCES.”
“They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appealing to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes”
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/google-news/
see “STUDY: Google Fuels Harris-Media Honeymoon, Favors Leftist Media Nearly 10 Times More.”
“Business exclusive
It’s not just Apple News — left-wing bias rampant on Google News, Yahoo and Bing: bombshell study” NYPost
“Just 1% of Google News articles in non-customizable sections of Google News come from outlets that rank as right-leaning, according to a bombshell study by AllSides, a nonpartisan group that classifies news outlets according to their political leanings. ” The DeBrief
ALSO
“Many studies indicate that large language models (LLMs) tend to exhibit a left-leaning political bias, even when trained on factual data. This bias is perceived across various politically sensitive topics, with models like OpenAI’s showing particularly strong left-leaning tendencies compared to others.”
“LLMs are Left-Leaning Liberals: The Hidden Political Bias of Large Language Models”
https://www.scl.org/llms-are-left-leaning-liberals-the-hidden-political-bias-of-large-language-models/
“Many studies indicate that large language models (LLMs) tend to exhibit a left-leaning political bias, even when trained on factual data. This bias is perceived across various models, with some showing significantly stronger left-leaning tendencies than others.” Massachusetts Inst of Technology
“On the Inevitability of Left-Leaning Political Bias in Aligned Language Models” Hagendorf, Stuttgart U.
“Amazing, they all lean left” – analysing the political temperaments of current LLMs”
“LLMs show an average score of -30 on a political spectrum, indicating a left-leaning bias.” from Psychology Today
“Large Language Models Show Left-Leaning Bias, New Study Reveals.” ScienceBlog
” a new study has revealed that many large language models (LLMs) exhibit a consistent left-leaning political bias.”
“Political Bias in AI: Research Reveals Large Language Models Are Consistently Left-Leaning, Raising Ethical Questions”
Tim McMillan·October 2, 2024
want me to keep going/,X? Plenty more.
Oh,but can’t you see, ^^^^ ALL of them are wrong, and X is the only one right!
X ranks supreme!! Go Georgie, go!
You seem to equate wealth tax with income tax. Two dfferent things.
A tax is a tax and Congress CAN levy a tax on anything it chooses. For example if Congress chose to tax ammunition or guns at 40% per transaction it would be absolutely constitutional. It would not violate the 2nd amendment since it is not a prohibition on owning or bearing arms.
It could create a tax on EV’s only because it would help offset the lack of gas tax they don’t pay.
They can define a wealth tax and what it specifically is targeted and they would still be within the law.
“For example if Congress chose to tax ammunition or guns at 40% per transaction it would be absolutely constitutional. “
Wrong: It has to pass the smell test of intention.
S. Meyer that’s not a thing. Congress can pass any tax it wants. If it chose to tax ammunition and guns at even 50% they could. Intention would be the intent to tax guns and ammo at 50%. If they passed the law it would be legal. It still wouldn’t violate the 2nd amendment since there’s nothing in the constitution about having the right to afford to buy a gun or ammo. You can have one if you can afford one. Right? Nothing says you can’t buy one. If you can’t buy a weapon you can’t claim a right to have one because you can’t afford it. No?
Your surface-level thinking leaves you unarmed. Congress’s power to tax and the 2nd Amendment intersect. That is what the Supreme Court is for. If Congress decided to do what you suggest and the intent was to invalidate 2nd Amendment rights, the present Court would add another nail in the anti-gun coffin.
Except for one BIG problem – we have new SCOTUS members that are not interpreting the laws as they were written,
they are interpreting them as they themselves personally THINK they should be interpreted.
They are interpreting the Constitution as written. We had a court that created legislation out of thin air and look at what is happening to parts of it.
The Constitution has an amendment process. Try using it.
Please dems. Do it…
And watch what happens.
No it doesn’t. Congress (and Senate) pass bills ALL THE TIME that they KNOW their constituants are dead-set against,
and they don’t care because they know people will forget by election time.
Only, what, TWO Demorats voted to ban transgender athletes competing with and against females?
Does that sound accurate to you?
I bet the majority of their constituents wanted it banned, but noooooo…
“No it doesn’t. Congress (and Senate) pass bills ALL THE TIME that they KNOW their constituants are dead-set against,”
I can only presume you do not understand the Constitution and the intersection of different rights.
The critical part of the high rates was exclusions for wages and investments into the company. They could either pay high taxes or pay high wages and build better factories. Once the rates came down there was no motive for either tax avoidance and the extra cash went into investments in foreign factories and cheap overseas workers. Recall Bell Laboratories making breakthroughs? Not anymore. There’s no financial advantage to it; hence the move of researchers to universities and begging the Feds for grants to pay for the results that industry can snatch up for free.
Washington State went from top five in the nation for business to bottom five, all due to liberal tax policies. Seattle and other major west coast cities, all deep blue, are turing into hell-holes, with their downtowns becoming boarded-up former business establishments, and consisting of homeless encampments, drug use, and violence. Other blue states like CA, IL, and NY, are hemmoraging taxpayers and experiencing the same social ills. People with enough means to move, are flowing out and a huge number of them are going to red states like TX, TN, and FL, for more favorable living conditions, including cost of living, economic freedom, and freedom from crime. Seattle’s mayor just flippantly said “bye” to job-creators and millionaires, as if her city didn’t need them. Justice Louis Brandeis once famously said that states are laboratories of democracy. An experiment is underway with the results clear for all to see if they have eyes. But Dem voters apparently don’t have eyes, otherwise they wouldn’t keep voting D, and thereby voting for their own destruction. Mayor Bass burned down LA and deprived it of water. LA has become a hellscape of drugs, needles, human feces, crime, and homeless encampments. And yet the Dem voters prefer her over Pratt, who would be dedicated to fixing the systemic problems in that city. It boggles the mind how ignorant and cult-like Dem voters really are in these deep-blue cities and states.
Washington dropped slightly due to rising operational costs, it remains an economic powerhouse. The 2025 CNBC Top States for Business Rankings placed Washington at No. 14 in the nation, scoring near the top for its workforce (#5) and technology/innovation (#4). A CNBC Economic Analysis also ranked Washington among the top five strongest state economies prepared for economic headwinds. It is nowhere near the bottom five.
According to the Association of Washington Business (AWB), the employer climate is increasingly pessimistic. Recent economic reports—such as the 2026 Competitiveness Redbook—suggest the state’s economic health and 10-year business failure rates rank poorly due to overwhelming tax and regulatory burdens, with a significant number of employers considering expansion or relocation outside the state.
Nearly one-quarter (24%) of Washington employers are considering relocating out of state due to a growing tax burden, economic pessimism, and a controversial high-earners income tax. The Association of Washington Business reports that over 50% of surveyed business leaders are also looking to move their personal residences out of state
Total impartial opinion there Of course the Association of Washington Business is going to portray their status as terrible in order to get concessions. Business has complained for the last 200 years that government actions would drive them out of business in a year. For 200 years.
Hearing that someone with 30 Billion dollars might see their wealth ultimately reduced to 29.5 Billion dollars and render them virtual paupers is common. I swoon from their plight.
Washnigton State is ranked 46th out of 50. It used to be number 5, so it want from top 5 to bottom 5.
http://washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/latest-survey-from-chief-executive-ranks-washington-the-46th-worst-state-to-do-business-in
That must be why Boeing moved, and Microsoft is shifting away little-by-little?
Time to raise MORE taxes, right Gavin.
_______________________
At the end of 2023, Gov. Gavin Newsom framed it as a matter of principle when under his administration, California became the first state in the nation to pay for undocumented immigrants to use Medicaid.
“In California, we believe everyone deserves access to quality, affordable health care coverage – regardless of income or immigration status,” Newsom said in a statement to ABC News at the time.
“In California, we believe everyone deserves access to quality, affordable health care coverage – regardless of income or immigration status,” Newsom said in a statement to ABC News at the time. People flocked to the system, with about 1.5 million undocumented Californians using the state’s Medi-Cal healthcare by November 2025. But now Newsom and fellow Democrats in Sacramento are walking back on their promise to provide healthcare access to all.
The cuts are being driven by multiple factors. The program is far more expensive for California taxpayers than it was originally expected to be,
We told you so. You wonder why so many illegals go to CA. Here ya go!
STFU you moron
Poor crybaby. Mommy take away your Binky.
Typical lib response.
The truth hurts…
Core Democrat beliefs are based on falsehoods perpetuated by their leaders and the media and swallowed whole by their lemmings-like voters. Just two examples. First the need for a “billionaire tax”. There does not seem to be any debate that the top 1% of earners in the US pay approximately 40% to 50% of all federal taxes while the bottom 50% (those the Democrats pretend to care about) pay approximately 3%. Unless the Democrats are arguing that the bottom 50% should pay less than 3% or the top 1% should pay more than half of all taxes, this core belief rings very hollow. Then there is the need for reparations. In New York, a leading proponent of reparations, a few nights ago in New York at the Tony Awards, seemingly half of the award winners were black. In professional sports, the ratio is even greater. And, in society at large, there are huge numbers of blacks who are successful lawyers, doctors, business people and others who have seized legally mandated equal opportunities and made the most of them. The logical conclusion is that this core belief also is based on a myth. The truths are that billionaires pay taxes and black citizens can be and are successful if they, like the rest of us, work hard and are motivated. But, none of this matters. Democrats will continue to vote as they are told because lemmings do not think, they just vote for whomever has the “D”.
The top 1% control about 1,000,000 times more wealth than the lowest 50%, but pay only a tiny amount in comparison.
Once upon a Time I use to say “thank god for Georgia and Alabama” – because whenever the supreme court would allow further infringement on a right – GA and AL would take it to far and the court would backtrack.
Today it is CA and NY and VA that I am thankful for.
It will take time to get rid of Stupid left wing nut laws.
Some of these will be be shot down by SCOTUS as unconstitutional.
Others will just fail catastrohically.
I am sorry for the residents of these states that they are afflicted by abysmal government passing stupid laws.
But the people of these states voted these idiots into power.
If you look at Lucas’s site, the so-called doxx information, is their professional, public, contact information i.e .edu. Not a personal email address.
Once again Mr. Upstate points out the facts that crush these fascist’s argument.
Exactly the one point that truly matters.
I was curious to what doxxing information Lucas had up on his web site.
If you read the College Fix article linked above, Ryan Riedmueller, a legal fellow at Vanderbilt Law School’s First Amendment clinic, said,
“In California, a party moving for relief under the Anti-SLAPP statute must first show they are engaged in protected activity,” he said. “Mr. Lucas’s speech at issue here involves debate on California tax policy, and as a candidate for public office, this sort of speech falls squarely within the First Amendment’s core protections for political speech.”
Not only is Lucas’ speech public and legal, but neither does it categorize as doxxing, according to Ryan Riedmueller’s analysis. He explained to The Fix the two issues with the doxxing claim against Mr. Lucas.
He said it is “unclear” that Lucas is acting with “malicious intent.”
“Second, the information he shared about the six individuals appears to be public,” he said, which would undermine claims of doxxing.
“Given those problems, it might be a difficult claim to prove in court.”
https://www.thecollegefix.com/four-professors-threaten-candidate-for-criticizing-their-billionaire-tax-proposal/
Oh… contact info, the place to send death threats etc., you mean? You SF.
It’s the contact info the professors themselves publicize. Perhaps you didn’t understand that.
LOL Oldman wins again.
If they did not want to receive criticism, then they should not of put up their own professional contact information on a web site viewable by the public.
How hard is that to understand?
Upstate – our leftist trolls are getting dumber by the day.
I think that is even more true moving forward in time, because their limited understanding of things is reinforced by biased media, podcasters going for clicks rather than thoughtful discussion, and the fact that when they actually search, the AI engines initially provide the same. Conservative people have to search to prove their case, improving their thought processes and coming closer to the real answers.
S. Meyer,
I think you are on to something although not sure if I would say they are getting dumber. More like lazier. They need others to tell them what to think. The Swiss Business School found those who use AI tools often had lower critical thinking skills. They also found only 55% of Gen Z could identify fake AI content.
That’s not doxing if it’s just manually repeating contact info the individual has agreed to show to the public.
However, if bots are used to swarm the target’s email address, then that would be a militant act intending to harm the target in their communication capacity, and it should be grounds for legal consequences.
Those who can, do. Those who can’t, teach. Those who can’t teach… teach teachers. Prior conversations as to why the towers of academia sre overcrowded with self-satisfied, self-aggrandizing ultra liberal louts are supported by their brain dead allegations
Those who cannot spell or complete a sentence are typically commenting here in support of Turley.
Get a life. Or don’t. Who cares?
THAT is your main takeaway from Turley’s point, and Trapper John’s spot-on reply?
Proof you are a simple gaslighting liberal demorat, because you don’t have anything else to argue about.
The professors seem to want the influence of political actors and the immunity of private citizens. Those are two different roles. If you help write a major tax proposal that affects millions of people, citizens have every right to know who you are, read your work, and criticize your ideas. The answer to bad criticism is better argument, not cease-and-desist letters. The courtroom is a poor substitute for persuasion.
Good point, an idiot like you, and the above idiots, comes here and threatens and insults others while hiding behind a anon meme.
Point out where OLLY threatened or insulted anyone.
Great analysis, Olly!
Thought it was unusual that a prof at the University of Missouri would choose to be included in the letter about policy concerning California.
Looked him up. He’s got two degrees from Stanford and his JD from Yale. He spent nine years at UC Berkeley before coming to Indiana (seven years) and now Mizzou since 2024.
There is already a wealth tax – it’s just called property tax, a tax on the wealth that is held as property. It mainly burdens the middle and lower class as a larger percentage of their wealth and income than it does the 1%.
The property tax is obsolescent, dating back to when one’s property was one’s source of income: farm or ranch, store, boarding house, saloon, stables, blacksmith’s shop, or doctor’s office.
And property was easy to measure, in terms of acres of land, or square fdet of building.
But land is seldom a source of income any more. Moreover, we now can measure income directly, and have for over a century.
Property tax makes sense to fund local government. Police and fire protection services are tied to local property and other services like parks, planning, and public health are related to the amount of local property. If people own multiple properties or properties in multiple locales they pay proportionally more.
Priced Out: Relocation Amidst California’s Affordability Crisis
https://capolicylab.org/priced-out-relocation-amidst-californias-affordability-crisis/
Executive Summary
Growing costs of living are squeezing Californians’ pocketbooks and causing some households to consider relocating. Using unique data that anonymously tracks the same households over time from 2016 to 2025, this report examines how many Californians are moving, who is leaving the state, where they are going, and what happens to their finances after they move.
The findings suggest that affordability plays a major role in Californians’ relocation decisions. Californians who leave move to much more affordable areas and see large increases in homeownership, on average. At the same time, the data show how more people continue to leave the state than choose to move here, a gap that is reshaping California’s population.
Key findings
Californians are leaving the state for more affordable communities and improving their financial position. On average, movers relocate to neighborhoods where monthly housing costs are $672 less. After seven years, they are 48% (or 11 percentage-points) more likely to own a home.
People moving out of California increasingly come from higher-income neighborhoods and appear financially weaker than their neighbors. The share of exits from higher-income neighborhoods rose 19% over the last decade. Those who leave have $5,500 more in student debt, on average, and credit scores that were 17 points lower than their neighbors.
Proximity drives relocation popularity, with Nevada claiming the top spot. Nearby states receive the most Californians per capita. Nevada is the standout, receiving a net 81 Californians per 10,000 residents annually, followed by Idaho, Oregon, and Arizona. Contrary to most headlines, Texas and Florida rank only 11th and 20th, respectively.
There is still a gap between entrances to California and exits, though it has narrowed since the pandemic. While exits have moderated from their pandemic peak, there are now fewer people moving into the state, a trend that continues to drag on California’s population growth.
Ah ha! The old Streisand Effect again.
The CA anti-doxing law Prof. Turley is referring to went into effect at the beginning of 2025:
The recently enacted AB 1979 (The Doxing Recourse Victims Act)…. allows victims to seek damages and restitution by suing the doxer(s).
I don’t care what side of an issue is driving an activist, the publishing of personal details in order to intimidate, harass, and silence an opponent takes public speech over the line into deranged militancy. I’m personally glad to live in a state that draws a red line in this way, even if the state is being seriously mismanaged in other ways.
I wonder why JT did not say more about this legal innovation. As a free speech champion, what does he make of it?
Is doxing an abuse of free speech deserving of being dragged into civil court? Or, is it “speech I don’t like, but will defend to the death your right to say”???
the publishing of personal details in order to intimidate, harass, and silence an opponent takes public speech etc.. That has to be proven – it can’t. Is that why you post as anonymous, afraid to stand by your words?
Juries in court settings almost always go beyond the provable facts to ascertain the motives (mens rea) of the accused. That is not only accepted legally, it is the genius of our legal system to give this common sense judgment over to a panel of 12 average Americans. The intent of the doxer to intimidate is so obvious, it easily meets the preponderance of the evidence standard in civil court.
pbinca – “Mens Rea” means “guilty mind” it is NOT about motive or intent – though these can be used to prove “mens Rea”
It is about knowing that what you did was WRONG. Why you did it is mostly irrelevant. What is relevant is that you KNEW it was wrong.
I would further note – that while you are correct that Juries incorrectly go way beyond what they are allowed to – which is to determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, The fact that they do is not genius – it is a FLAW. Common sense has no place in court – Courts are about conformance tot he law and violations of our rights.
You rant about what is obvious – as if everyone shares your values – when even YOU do not share your values
LEft wing nuts rant about being harrassed as a result of public information – but it is Charlie Kirk that was assassinated
It is Brian Thompson that was murdered, it is Conservative Supreme court justices that are harrassed or subject to violence.
It is Rand Paul that was assaulted, it was the Republican Baseball team that was gunned down, it is ICE agents whose families are harrassed in school and at home.
You claim there is an obvious intent to intimidate – What is the Intent of BLM riots ? No Kings nonsense ? The attacks on ICE
If you beleive that public intimidation is illegal – why isnt the entire left in prison right now ?
As always you play stupid word games – without actually thinking about how what you push will work.
Can Trump sue anyone that calls him Hitler, Nazi, Fascist in CA ? That is clearly “intimidation”.
Obviously Trump is a public figure – but So are these professors. That is what happens when you seek to change the law – you become a public figure.
Regardless, the standard for this type of speech was established long ago – Brandenburg Vs. Ohio.
“The Brandenburg test is a legal standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) to determine when speech advocating illegal action can be restricted. It states that speech can only be prohibited if it is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”
This law fails that test.
@ John Say,
Under California Penal Code § 653.2 (electronic harassment), the law explicitly carries a specific intent requirement. The prosecution must prove the specific intent to place another person in reasonable fear. It is not an abstract query about whether the person “knew it was morally wrong”; it is an objective look at the intent behind the action.
Also, Brandenburg applies to incitement—publicly advocating for a cause or generalized violence (e.g., a speech at a political rally). Doxxing laws are evaluated under the “True Threats” doctrine, which is entirely separate from Brandenburg.
Under Supreme Court precedent (including Counterman v. Colorado), speech that a reasonable person would perceive as a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence is a “true threat.” True threats receive zero First Amendment protection. Sharing targeted personal contact details to prompt harassment does not require an “imminent riot” standard to be illegal.
Furthermore, being a public figure or speaking publicly changes the standard for defamation civil suits (requiring “actual malice”). It does not strip an individual of their protection under criminal law. A public figure has the exact same right to be protected from targeted electronic cyber-harassment and safety threats as any private citizen.
Just thought I’d clarify a few things you got wrong.
You tell him X!
(ppsst! It is ok. I know it is you X! Your secret is safe with me!)
FWIW, I would remind you that the judge in the George Floyd case informed the jurors that he would be releasing their names and addresses publicly. Normally this would be considered jury intimidation, but, you know..
That’s an outrageous act of judicial power. That was one of the most corrupt prosecutions ever brought into Court. That Judge was anything but neutral.
I have little knowledge of the CA antidoxing law – though I am hard pressed to think of how a law against doxing would be constitutitonal.
“I don’t care what side of an issue is driving an activist, the publishing of personal details in order to intimidate, harass, and silence an opponent takes public speech over the line into deranged militancy. ”
Is perfectly legitimate and what left wing nuts do all the time.
You protested in front of Supreme Court Justices homes. You call people you do not like Fascists, and Nazi’s and Hitler,
You assassinate health care company CEO’s and speakers whose ideas you do not like.
You demand that ICE agents unmask an you threaten their families if they do.
The FACT is when you join the public debate – you have made your personal details relevant.
You do not get to lobb grenades into public discourse shielded from the public.
Participate, Don’t. But if you join the parade you can not complain because others took pictures.
You continue to enjoy the govenments protection from actual crimes – that is ALL.
If you do not trust government to protect you from those who would do you violence – then you should not be shilling for them to confisated other peoples wealth.
Turley did address this “legal innovation” – restrictions on free speech are unconstitutional.
But this case egregiously points that out – These professors did not just join the public debate they CREATED it.
They made themselves public figures.
You can not parade naked down the streets and then demand privacy.
Ironic that CA has enacted a law establishing recourse to those who are doxxed yet the public officials of that bluest of blue states would take away the facial masks worn by federal agents to protect them from real doxxing that threatens themselves and their families. These agents like the professors are public employees. The difference is that the professors are publicly advocating for public policy while the latter are engaged in law enforcement in support of laws passed by Congress. They are under the command and supervision of superiors. The professors are not threatened in any way by those who wish to debate them. The is ample evidence of the physical threats to ICE agents enforcing the law.
pbinca – we have spent milenia actually working these things out.
Contra your claim – this is not innovation – it is regression.
While Our founders framed free speech as a near absolute right, even they unconstitutionally infringed on it.
We have sent another 250 years getting rid of lunacy such as this nonsense.
You may restrict “intimidating speech” that advocates for immediate violence AND is likely to produce immediate violence.
Notice there is no mining for your intent – you must explicitly advocate for violence AND you must demand it NOW.
We have arrived here after we have found laws like your antidoxing law to have failed by chilling legitimate and important speech.
The Dems are sizing up a pretty fair to do list when next they win next year.
1. Impeach Trump and everybody he knows.
2. Tax the living crap out of billionaires, and then everybody else.
3. Reinstate their NGO gravy train and USAID.
4. Give China every advantage they don’t already steal. (Thanks Bernie)
5. Reopen those borders.
6. Back to wind turbines and solar farms.
I watch all the cable channels. I haven’t heard one Democrat talk about reopening the border Biden-style. They seem to be OK with cutting off the uncontrolled flow of new illegals. They just lacked the political guts themselves to do it. But now that it’s proven beyond a doubt that CBP has the capability, I don’t think a Dem Congress or President could get away with the lame excuses Biden/Harris/Mayorkas hid behind.
This is the time for Trump to be pushing Congress to pass Merit-based Immigration Reform, in exchange for regularization of status of the DACAs. Let’s lock in some permanent changes, so that a Dem Congress and President cannot ever return to what Biden did as a way of childishly trolling their opposition..
The last reasonable chance for immigration reform died when Obama chose DACA by executive order over political compromise int he senate.
It is likely to be a long long time before we see immigration reform, and any that we do so will likely be that sought by the right.
There are lot of changes to immigration law that would be improvements over what we have – but neither democrats nor republicans are behind any actually good reforms.
Republicans have the laws they can live with, and Democrats have the laws they can ignore.
And both parties think they have a politial issue that appeals to their base.
I’m pretty sure the Hitler loving dem from Maine wants open boarders.
Perhaps they wouldn’t now. But we know what they approved of just a scant two years ago, so why risk giving them power back?
Better add mail in ballots for all federal elections so the democrats can lock in place all six items above in perpetuity
To give $3,000 to every household man, woman and child making less than $150,000. This is laughable, $4.4 Trillion stolen from the producers to give to the less productive people of the free market.
$4.4 Trillion is about two years of interest due on our National debt these ftards have saddled us with.
This is just more typical dead end Fascist Democrat logic on display once again.
These Professors must think they live in the EU and criticism is misinformation. I think the victim of this legal threatening should send his own cease and desist order.
All sorts of new legal standards-public information is doxing-criticism of voodoo economics as practiced by the left is misinformation or doxxing or both.
Personally I think the wealth tax in California is a great idea. It gives us a marker on the voters there. I think any voter or businessman who is thinking of leaving because of the tax shows a certain amount of sanity and fiscal understanding and would be welcome in many other states. Those that stay are obviously too poor to leave or think the tax is a good idea and I think most other states would like to see those people stay in California.
Maybe the mass exodus will leave California irrelevant and we can just make it a big national park and emphasize the mountains, the redwoods and the beaches. The only problem would be the remaining wildlife and I don’t mean the animals.
I would like to see progressives in their primitive state as long as there is large reinforced wall between me and them.
Mass exodus you? Where did you get that stupid idea?
The narrative of a recent “California mass exodus” is largely disproven by recent data, as the state saw its population increase by 232,570 (0.6%) from July 2023 to July 2024, marking the second consecutive year of growth. While net domestic migration remains negative—with more residents leaving than arriving—the overall population rebound was driven by increased international immigration and a smaller domestic outflow returning to near pre-pandemic levels.
Yeah, funny how Magagots’ believe everything Fox News spews. A simple Wiki search would have left any reader with questions about that assertion.
“Between the year 2000 and 2024, California’s population peaked in year 2020 at 39.52 million.”
Regardless, the tax base is collapsing.
That claim is incorrect. While California’s population did hit a pandemic-era peak of 39.52 million in 2020, it did not remain a permanent high point or plateau.
After a brief, pandemic-related exodus in 2021 and 2022, the state’s population rebounded and grew for three consecutive years. Driven by a massive resurgence in legal international migration, data from the California Department of Finance and the U.S. Census Bureau confirm that by 2024–2025, California’s population stabilized back at 39.5 million residents.
https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/E-6/
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/CA/PST045224
The tax base is not collapsing. It’s actually pretty healthy.
According to the California Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) May 2026 Report, state tax revenues from the “Big Three” sources (income, corporate, and sales taxes) have recently experienced a massive $25 billion upgrade over initial expectations.
This financial boom is heavily driven by a booming stock market, strong corporate earnings, and unprecedented investment in artificial intelligence, which directly feeds into California’s progressive income tax base.
Official state data from the California Revised 2026-27 Budget Summary projects the state’s multi-year general fund revenue forecast to be $16.8 billion higher than previously anticipated, largely driven by capital gains realizations.
It’s still happening.
In December, the state agency declared that as of last July, California’s population was 39.529 million, a gain of 19,200 since 2024. Although arithmetically insignificant, the tiny gain was hailed by officialdom and media as proof that California is no longer losing people.
Last month, the Census Bureau released its latest estimates, fixing California’s population at 39.355 million, a decline of 9,465 souls from the previous year. It implies that California’s slide, which began in the COVID-18 pandemic, is still happening, with a net loss of 200,394 residents since the 2020 census.
Keep taxing away and more will leave.
It will keep happening when they can no longer afford to live there
California has the highest poverty rate in the nation (tied with Louisiana at 17.7%). Nearly 7 million Californians lack the resources to meet basic living needs. The crisis is driven by skyrocketing housing costs, expiration of pandemic-era financial aid, and a massive divide between top earners and low-income residents
And way too many residents..
Who don’t pay into the system
DustOff,
Additional evidence of the exodus,
Which US States Gained The Most Residents In 2025
CA was number 47 at -25.1%.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-which-u-s-states-gained-the-most-residents-in-2025/
California says it lost $2 billion in state income taxes from earners leaving
“Foregone revenue increased more (three-fold) than net domestic outmigration of people (two-fold) because, prior to the pandemic, outmigration was concentrated among lower-income households,” continued the LAO. “Since then, more middle- and higher-income households have moved to other states, meaning the effect on state revenue has been greater because these tax filers tend to make larger income tax payments.”
Note the source of that report is the California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office, using IRS data.
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/california-says-it-lost-2-billion-state-income-taxes-earners-leaving
U-Haul Growth States of 2024: South Carolina Tops List for First Time
“California experienced the greatest net loss of do-it-yourself movers in U-Haul equipment and ranks 50th for the fifth consecutive year.”
https://www.uhaul.com/Articles/About/U-Haul-Growth-States-Of-2024-South-Carolina-Tops-List-for-First-Time-33083/
California loses one taxpayer per minute, Florida gains
“The states losing taxpayers most frequently are California, New York and Illinois. California loses a taxpayer every 1 minute and 44 seconds; New York loses a taxpayer every 2 minutes and 23 seconds; and Illinois loses a taxpayer every 6 minutes and 4 seconds.”
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/california-loses-one-taxpayer-minute-florida-gains
Your cherry-picked examples don’t really support your argument.
Show us where.. Noticed you failed to do just that
Yes, CA is rapidly becoming a banana republic – increasingly large portions of the population are people from banana republics.
I would also ask how you think the CA population fared in 2025 – when ilegal immigration was reduced to near zero ?
Regardless, who do you think pays more taxes ? 232K illegal immigrants or Elon Musk ?
This is an argument only a left wing nut would make.
“Yes, we are riving out all the successful productive tax payers, but we are gaining larger numbers of non-productive people who pay no taxes”
Thwe man on the video SOUNDS like he LIVES in the EU!
Much like Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun
Conservatives want to clear cut the big redwoods and sell the sand from the beaches to China construction for pennies a ton. They look at national parks as private profit opportunities.
I would like to see conservatives create something new, anything, but they cannot. They see what progressives invent and then copy or steal it.
Make sure to keep those strawman arguments well away from open flames.
All It Takes Is a New President: Take a Look at DC’s Columbus Circle Then and Now
https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2026/05/28/all-it-takes-is-a-new-president-take-a-look-at-dcs-columbus-circle-then-and-now-n2202796
Stunning new before-and-after renderings reveal what’s in store for NYC’s Penn Station
https://nypost.com/2026/06/08/us-news/stunning-new-before-and-after-renderings-reveal-whats-in-store-for-nycs-penn-station/
Yawn…
Thanks to both Oregon & WA state. They have major forest fires, year after year because they fail to clean up the forest or have little firefighting equipment .
Look what happen in LA. No water supply… Talk about stupid.
Come On Man! You gotta get out and take some deep breaths of that good Cali AIR (pollution) to clear your mind of those logical thoughts! Application of the LAW in the Land of Californicators is in the EYE of the Whacky Beholder! And this bunch of NUT CASES is a Class Action for Whack Jobs!
Legal action against critics? It should not be allowed!
Only if one can afford it?
It’s California – they actually DID just recently pass a law against this very thing, in a broad sense.