The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Senate Passes Anti-Lynching Bill (With Jussie's Help)
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From The Root:

Senators Scott, Harris, Booker

Senate Passes Bill That Makes Lynching a Federal Crime

Monique Judge
Friday 10:16am

On Thursday, the U.S. Senate passed a bill that would make lynching a federal crime.

The bill, which was introduced in June by Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), had previously passed in the Senate in December, but did not pass in the GOP-majority House before the end of the 115th Congress. The Hill reports that the bill passed Thursday with a voice vote.

While discussing the bill, Booker cited the recent reported attack in Chicago against actor Jussie Smollett of Empire fame and said that “lynching is not a relic of the past.”

iSteve commenter lbound1 explains:

Lynching is definitely the # 1 crime threat facing our nation. So very good news. I’m hoping Congress passes a new horse thieving and cattle rustling bill as well. We need relief on that front and badly. Also a bill against Irish draft riots might be useful.

And like how we need a federal law against selling liquor to reservation Indians.

Oh, wait, that actually still is a problem.

 
Hide 146 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anon7 says:

    If only we knew about instances in which illegal immigrants performed unlawful acts. That way, we could draw attention to these acts, and get Congress to quickly pass laws to protect us.

  2. “Jussie’s Law”.

    Along with the anti-white aspect of it (picture the race of those 3 senators), this is just another way to Federalize more crime. Power has been flowing from local/State governments to the Feral beast for over a century, starting most importantly with Amendment XVI.

    I can’t say for sure there is a written plan, but this is sure part of it.

    • Agree: bomag, ben tillman
    • Replies: @JimB
  3. anon[266] • Disclaimer says:

    Strange that Booker was able to comment back then. Now, for some reason, he’s decided that we all need to be cautious and wait for more evidence to emerge.

    https://www.wptv.com/news/national/cory-booker-says-he-wont-comment-further-on-smollett-case-until-more-information-comes-out

    Cory Booker says he won’t comment further on Smollett case until more information comes out

    • Replies: @M. Hartley
  4. Hail says: • Website

    On Thursday, the U.S. Senate passed a bill that would make lynching a federal crime.

    Thursday

    For the record, that is Thursday, Feb. 14, 2019.

    (Also known as the Valentine’s Day Massacre of 2019, in which President Kushner dealt a body blow to the American nation with the open-borders spending bill.)

    To be precise, it appears the bill passed in the 12 noon hour of Thursday Feb. 14.

    When exactly did the Jussie Smollet hoax begin to formally unravel? I believe the critical period was the afternoon and evening hours of Friday Feb. 15. The spread between the passage of the bill and the full unraveling of the Smollett hoax is thus: <36 hours.

    Poor media. Defeated again, their forces largely slunk away under cover of night. Despite the hopeless situation, a few media-commentator-class diehards would not retreat in good order, and have held out to the bitter end fighting rear-guard actions on Saturday Feb. 16 and Sunday Feb. 17.

    By late Sunday and into Monday, they all by now realize that they've lost yet another battle. It's hard, alas, to be a #HateHoaxer or a #HateHoax sympathizer.

  5. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:

    Covington correctly observed that the federales are often much less capable at solving local crimes than the local cops, and they create a lot of ill will by barging in and harassing the citizenry. Think anyone from Skidmore is ever going to talk to the FBI about anything?

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  6. Will it now be illegal to transport rope over state lines?

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    , @Pontius
  7. Lagertha says:

    Youtube is censoring any posts I make, here. This has been going on for 2 months.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
  8. Lagertha says:

    Youtube is censoring any posts I make, here. This has been going on for 2 months, btw. They are small dicked incels and loser women… who could/would never fuck them if it was the end of the world…so, they are pitiful…and I don’t care – they are garbage. Just wanting y’all to know, I had some rocking funny stuff to show….but Narrative police got in the way.

  9. Ibound1 says:

    Lynching is definitely the # 1 crime threat facing our nation. So very good news. I’m hoping Congress passes a new horse thieving and cattle rustling bill as well. We need relief on that front and badly. Also a bill against Irish draft riots might be useful.

  10. Hate hoaxes have been normalized by decades of motion pictures doing casting reversals so as to “raise awareness” or “shock sensibilities”.

  11. Is Self-Lynching a thing?

    Could Jussie be prosecuted under this law?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @Anon1
  12. If Jussie really is the Gay Tupac as he claims, does that mean that Tupac may actually still be alive?

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    , @anonymous
  13. Alfa158 says:
    @Hail

    When did it begin to unravel? For myself it began to unravel the moment I saw the ludicrous opening story. For some people it took longer, for others it will never unravel, and for still others, they don’t want it to unravel, and will engrave into history that it was all true.

    • Agree: AndrewR, MBlanc46
  14. Is lynching another job Americans won’t do? Jussie had to bring in some Nigerians, presumably on H-2B visas.

  15. High tech lynching is still legal and encouraged.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
  16. conatus says:

    “According to the Tuskegee Institute, 4,743 people were lynched between 1882 and 1968 in the United States, including 3,446 African Americans and 1,297 whites.”

    Most people think lynching was a Blacks only affair but if you consider the 1300 Whites, the numbers kind of make sense considering that Blacks commit murder at 7 times the rate of Whites. So actually the lynchers were being generous in only lynching roughly three times the amount of Blacks.

    • Replies: @Neuday
  17. trelane says:

    We need more people like these leading us toward the extinction of our kind.

  18. BenKenobi says:

    [email protected] is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know.

    I feel Kamala’s inadvertant echoing of The Manchurian Candidate is incredibly weird.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Ganderson
  19. Rocks Off says:

    If we stop and think about it, this anti-lynching law could be good for the whites. On the one hand, as the Smollett case shows, it’s not like whites are running around lynching anyone anymore. But as whites quickly move towards minority status, it is very likely that whites will soon be the targets of lynching, if in fact they haven’t already started to be targeted. Of course whites were never immune to lynching back in the day but given the modern tendency in Africa and Latin America towards lynching, it certainly doesn’t hurt to have this law on the books. The big question is of course that even on the books, would Kamala Harris’ administration apply this law if whites were to start getting lynched in larger numbers under her presidency?

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  20. @Clifford Brown

    Is Self-Lynching a thing?

    Robin Williams. Kate Spade. Half of Badfinger.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Clyde
  21. and for still others, they don’t want it to unravel, and will engrave into history that it was all true.

    An historical precedent for that strategy would be Mathew Sheppard.

    He had already been beatified as America’s official Gay Martyr when it was learned that he was actually killed by his co-gay prostitute/sex partner in connection with a sordid drug deal gone wrong.

    Even the gay community acknowledges these facts. But everyone nevertheless just agreed to go on pretending that he was lynched by homophobic yahoos. It may be factually wrong, but it’s morally right that it should have happened that way.

    • Agree: Clyde
    • Replies: @Autochthon
  22. Hail says: • Website
    @Alfa158

    I refer to its ‘formal’ unraveling in the Megaphone Media, of course.

    I believe the Media’s defensive line was breached by the evening of Friday Feb. 15, and confusion reigned in the ranks a while before the bugle sounded the retreat. CNN finally admitted the cause was hopeless by late Saturday or early Sunday at the latest; only a handful of pro-Smollett skirmishers remained, sniping away at us, the victors holding the field.

    That said, I agree with the entirety of your comment:

    it began to unravel the moment I saw the ludicrous opening story

    The iSteve commentariat did very well, and the timestamps are all these to prove it. My impression is that initial opinion split about like this:

    — ~50% of iSteve commenters called it as a straight-up hoax [Correct]

    — ~35-40% leaned towards something “really happening” but not at all what was alleged, e.g., a cover-story for gay- and/or drug-related something-something [Incorrect]

    — <15% believed the story was inflated but may have reflected a real event something like what was alleged. [Definitely Incorrect]. See, e.g., Anon[210] on Jan. 30:

    Maybe Smollett slipped and fell, and a passerby across the street yelled, “Can’t walk on ice? What a faggot!” and the story grew from there

    (See also the Jan. 30 @Steve_Sailer Twitter poll on what really happened to Jussie Smollett, keeping in mind the Twitter voters and the actual iSteve commentariat are overlapping but not identical groups.)

    ____________________

    Here is iSteve’s first thread on the Smollett Hoax, Jan. 30, 2019.

    Steve Sailer himself was much less confident that it was a hoax:

    You know, it could have happened. […]

    Seriously, this one is so absurd-sounding … that I’m wondering if it might not be true. Perhaps this will be the one where everybody sensible finally begins to use the term “hate hoax” and then, voila, two white fraternity boys from Lake Forest in MAGA caps are arrested and confess that Smollett’s tale is the exact truth. […]

    Remember, fools rush in …

    • Replies: @M. Hartley
  23. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Uh gee, what am I going to do? Me and my friends were planning our weekly lynching this Friday, but we’re gonna have to find something else. We bought the lynch kit and everything, but it’s all going to waste.

  24. Dr. X says:

    Ummmm… this would be the REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED Senate… right????

  25. Remember the previous president’s Lynching of America?

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  26. @anon

    “I’ve said all I have to say about that, the rest is just y’all being racist.”

  27. Mr. Anon says:
    @BenKenobi

    I feel Kamala’s inadvertant echoing of The Manchurian Candidate is incredibly weird.

    I can just see Willie Brown saying to Harris: “Here, Kamala, why don’t you play a nice relaxing game of solitaire………………”

    • Replies: @Clyde
  28. Mr. Anon says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Robin Williams. Kate Spade. Half of Badfinger.

    David Carradine too, although his was a lynching with a “happy ending”.

  29. Anon1 says:
    @Clifford Brown

    After a night of heavy drinking, I was sexually assaulted by myself. I can’t remember if I provided consent. Do I have a case?

  30. @Alfa158

    As had been observed here once or twice, we should all be prepared for the possibility that one day, one of these escapades will turn out to be grounded in truth. It has to happen eventually.

    So we should keep this in mind so that we don’t look like fools, because the Establishment is building up a lot of pressure. And the Establishment doesn’t like to be kept waiting forever.

    It’s just so hard to go out and create a hate crime and blame it on your enemies. I mean, one that sticks. It’s damned frustrating, that’s what it is.

  31. @Hail

    Has Paleo Liberal admitted anything yet?

    • Replies: @Hail
  32. Wilkey says:

    Lynching is definitely the # 1 crime threat facing our nation. So very good news. I’m hoping Congress passes a new horse thieving and cattle rustling bill as well. We need relief on that front and badly. Also a bill against Irish draft riots might be useful.

    Your modern Democratic Party: pass laws against the non-problem of lynching, repeal laws against mass invasion of our country.

    Would it be too much to ask for Republicans to ask for a compromise here: we get laws against illegal immigration, and Democrats can have laws against lynching. Democrats are then put on the spot of either voting against anti-lynching laws (which they think we so desperately need) in order to fight for open borders.

    *Everytime* Democrats demand a law for some pressing problem that isn’t really a problem, Republicans should support it in exchange for immigration enforcement. It’s just one more way to show the world how full of shit the Democrats are.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
  33. Clyde says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    M Hutchence from INXS

    Does this Bill define how thick the lynching rope must be? Because a plastic clothesline from Ace Hardware is a joke.

  34. Clyde says:
    @Mr. Anon

    There is a new twitter hashtag #horizontalharris It needs more action https://twitter.com/hashtag/HorizontalHarris

  35. @Wilkey

    Would it be too much to ask for Republicans to ask for a compromise here: we get laws against illegal immigration, and Democrats can have laws against lynching.

    That would be sort of rational and even-handed, which at this point is the same as saying it’ll happen in an alternate universe. And BTW, Republicans aren’t really any help here. They’re mainly trying to prove to Democrats that they’re not racist, in between starting new wars for Israel, cutting taxes on multi-millionaires, and bringing in more desperately needed “workers” on “visas” etc. On the whole, are they marginally, a tiny bit better than Democrats? Probably. But what a low bar to pass.

    Neither party could have presided over the destruction of the United States of America by itself. Together they’ve proven to be an unstoppable juggernaut bent on ruination, and eventual slavery for the masses. The infighting is mostly for show.

    • Agree: Autochthon, densa
    • Replies: @Wilkey
  36. JimB says:

    Isn’t this an own goal for social justice warriors given that only black mobs seem to engage in lynching these days, usually in response to traffic accidents involving white motorists in black neighborhoods.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
  37. @JimB

    It’s not considered lynching when 1) black guys do it and/or 2) whites are the victim.

    If this is not explicit in the text, we have jurisprudence to help.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  38. Rocks Off says:

    OT: Jewish philosopher Alain Finkielkraut was verbally attacked in Paris during Saturday’s gilets jaunes protests. It hasn’t been covered much in the Anglo-Saxon press, and the rare stories just call it an antisemitic attack and give no context except to say that swastikas were recently found in Paris.

    The incident was caught on video from several angles and the main “aggressor” has been identified, he is an Islamist known to the police. What’s interesting is that the verbal attack comes from an islamo-gauchiste (Islamo Leftist). Some of the insults shouted included:

    (Note: translations of swear words are next to impossible so I’ve stayed close to the literal meaning of the words)

    Barre-toi (Get out of here)
    Sale sioniste de merde (Dirty, shitty zionist)
    Sale merde. (Dirty shit)
    Nique ta mère (Fuck your mother)
    Palestine (Palestine)
    Homophobe de merde (Shitty homophobe)
    T’es un raciste, casse-toi! (You are a racist, get out of here)
    Dégage fasciste. (Clear out of here fascist)
    La France, elle est à nous. (France belongs to us)
    Sale enculé. (Dirty bugger (enculé literally means someone who takes it in the ass but it is not meant literally here)
    Espèce de raciste. (You racist)
    Espèce de haineux (You hater)
    T’es un haineux et tu vas mourir (You are full of hate, you are going to die)
    Tu vas aller en enfer. (You’re going to hell)
    Dieu, il va te punir. (God will punish you)
    Le peuple va te punir (The people will punish you)
    Nous sommes le peuple (We are the people)
    Grosse merde (Big piece of shit)
    Tu te reconnaîtras (You’ll recognize yourself)
    Espèce de sioniste. (You zionist)
    Il est venu exprès pour nous provoquer (He came here on purpose to provoke us)
    Taisez-vous! (Shut up)
    Facho! (Fascist)
    Rentre chez toi… (Go home)
    Rentre chez toi en Israël. (Go home to Israel)
    Antisémite. (Antisemite)
    La France est à nous (France is ours)
    Rentre à Tel-Aviv. (Go back to Tel Aviv)
    Nous sommes le peuple français. (We are the French people)
    Ici c’est la rue! (Here it’s the street)

    The English language media is seriously downplaying the leftist nature of this verbal assault. Since in France everyone can listen to the tapes, France Inter has had to intervene by claiming the verbal attack is an example of projection of the hater’s hate at Finkielkraut.

    Many from the pro-zionist bourgeois political class have claimed that Finkielkraut was also called a “sale juif (dirty jew)”. Experts have listened to the tapes and cannot hear this clearly being said. Finkielkraut himself denies anyone shouted “sale juif”.

    So there is a debate about whether this outburst was actually antisemitic. Is being anti-zionist the same things are being antisemitic? The leftwing paper Liberation has been the most balanced about this since it was likely their supporters who were behind it. Finkielkraut himself is trying to blame followers of the former pick-up artist turned left-right ideologue Alain Soral, who actually really is an antisemite. In any case this will be a delicate case for the Anglo-Saxon media to report on when it becomes clear that a confirmed Islamist was the main shouter.

    For the alt-right it raises some other issues on Muslim immigration. No doubt there are some downsides with it, but are there some positive externalities as well do having an aggressive Islamic minority? Does Muslim immigration help redpill indigenous proles on the issue of zionist influence? If so, at what price? Michel Houellebecq examined some of these questions in Submission.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-6713941/Frances-yellow-vests-mark-3-months-amid-racist-tensions.html

    • Replies: @Autochthon
    , @Jack D
  39. Anon[997] • Disclaimer says:

    I want to memorialize my thoughts here before reading the text of the law.

    1. What the hell is lynching? How is it defined? How is it different from murder? How is it different from a federal civil rights violation associated with murder?

    2. Is lynching defined as getting murdered while black?

    3. Is lynching defined as being hanged until dead? With a rope? While black?

    4. Are non-noose instrumentalities acceptable in a lynching?

    5. Is this one of those overreaching federal laws that is so broad that it encompasses anything that a federal prosecutor wants (like most “antiterrorism” laws passed after 9/11)?

    It would truly take a brave man to stand up in Congress and say, “No, of course lynching is terrible, but we do not need this law cluttering up the books. Current laws cover things just fine.”

    [Now proceeding to track down the text of the bill …]

    Found this historical oddity:

    Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyer_Anti-Lynching_Bill

    It was intended to establish lynching as a federal crime. The Dyer Anti-Lynching Bill was re-introduced in subsequent sessions of Congress and passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on January 26, 1922, but its passage was halted in the Senate by a filibuster by Southern Democrats, who formed a powerful block that exceeded their percentage of the population by having disenfranchised blacks in the South.

    Those pesky Democrats!

    Here is Wikipedia

    Justice for Victims of Lynching Act
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_for_Victims_of_Lynching_Act

    Justice for Victims of Lynching Act of 2018 is a … bill that would classify lynching – defined as bodily injury on the basis of perceived race, color, religion or, nationality – a federal hate crime in the United States. The bill is largely symbolic, aiming to recognize and apologize for historical governmental failures to prevent lynching in the US. The act was first introduced in the US Senate in June 2018 by the body’s three Black members: Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Tim Scott.

    Here is the law:

    https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/3178/text/es

    Most of the Bill is a big list of CONGRESS-FINDS!! stuff:

    — Lynching was the new slavery

    — Lynching is really, really bad stuff

    — We must apologize the the lynchees and their families

    — Charlottesville happened [Wow! Charlottesville is in there; in a slightly different universe Jussie could have been written into the law.]

    — And so on, in that vein

    The meat of the law is a minor amendment to the Title 18 Chapter 13 Civil Rights body of law.

    To this law it adds or clarifies as follows:

    — Two or more perps. A single guy cannot be a lyncher. That means Emmett Till was not lynched.

    — Victim is targeted because of: actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability (so gender and gender identity make an appearance in a hate crime law, neither of which is defined in the law, but I didn’t check Title 18)

    — Interstate commerce requirement, but covers almost anything: internet use, crossing state lines, use of a gun that has crossed state lines, use of a phone or the mails (prosecutors have no trouble coming up with a federal nexus in practice)

    — Bodily injury: no need to murder, and noose not required

    — Up to 10 years in prison, up to life if kidnapping involved (here again, kidnapping is very vaguely defined and can mean obstructing someone’s movement)

    — Generally requires that the state where it happened has passed on prosecution, so unless we have a time machine to travel back to the South of George Wallace, this law may never be used, although there is an elastic clause as is usual for the feds

    • Replies: @Jack D
    , @Walsh2
    , @Aardvark
  40. Jefferson says:

    So before this anti-lynching bill was passed you could legally lynch a Black person and not go to prison?

    • Agree: The Anti-Gnostic
  41. Oh crap, lynching’s now a FEDERAL crime.

    I KNEW I shouldn’t have procrastinated!
    >:-(

  42. AndrewR says:
    @Anonymous

    True, but the feds are often more willing to solve crimes than the local cops, hence the loss of local law enforcement sovereignty since the mid 20th century.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
  43. @Clifford Brown

    Tupac, Elvis, Jim Morrison, Osama bin Laden, and Bigfoot have formed a supergroup. Their first project, “Necessary Lies” should drop in August. Their first song, a cover of “Alive And Kicking” is being released March 2. I am an associate producer on the album.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
  44. Wasn’t an Anti-Lynching bill passed sometime in the 50s?

  45. AndrewR says:
    @Mr McKenna

    Mari Matsuda, supposedly the first “Asian-American woman” to receive tenure at a US law school) explicitly called for hate crime/speech legislation to not apply when the victims are white.

    Even worse, former US attorney General Eric Holder said basically the same thing in a congressional hearing.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
  46. Anon[997] • Disclaimer says:

    So before this anti-lynching bill was passed you could legally lynch a Black person and not go to prison?

    This is a mostly symbolic law that would only kick in if a state refused to prosecute.

    But in general a lot of federal laws are just ways to make a single act illegal in many ways, to allow overcharging by prosecutors. Then during the plea bargain you see that you’re liable for 500 years in prison and you take the plea bargain. Your attorney will say, “This is crazy, I think you’re innocent … but juries these days … who knows … they’re unpredictable …”

    In fact, juries are confronted with 20 charges and if they return innocent on 18 of them, they think they have done you a favor. It’s related to the psychology of why companies will offer a cheapo option and a high priced option: They know you will be steered into the middle option. Nobody takes the cheapo option in such a case. It would be like buying the base car with no option pack whatsoever.

    At the state level 80-90 percent of cases end in pleas; at the federal level I think it’s 95 percent. This disproportionately affects blacks, so there is actually some talk of reforms that might really happen, knock on wood.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  47. Jefferson says:

    Next the Senate will pass a law that says it’s illegal for White people to make Blacks work for no pay.

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
  48. TheBoom says:

    There needs to be a resolution strongly condemning Putin for fanning the flames of the war between the cattle and sheep ranchers. Livestock diversity is our strength

  49. Logan says:

    The last actual lynching, depending on how you define the term, was 50 or 60 years ago.

  50. Half-Tamil half-Jamaican giving the Black Power salute … I don’t think even Barack Hussein Obama had the stones to let himself be photographed doing that. You go, girl !

  51. Realist says:

    Yes, lynching is America’s number one problem.

  52. @Ibound1

    I’m hoping Congress passes a new horse thieving and cattle rustling bill as well.

    You intended this to be sarcasm, but it just goes to show the the very urban-centric illusions of most of the commentariat here. In rural areas of the country, and indeed throughout much of the world, cattle rustling is indeed an actual and current problem.

  53. @Hail

    As your post makes abundantly clear, losing battles but winning the war.

    I’m wondering if this bill exists in textual form, or is it purely rhetorical?

  54. @Lagertha

    Youtube LLC are censoring things you write on the unz.com domain? Umm… how? Absent crimimal activity on their part (federal crimes, no less!) that is not actually possible. Can you please elaborate? Are you using some kind of software offered by Youtube LLC to manage all your online accounts and activity? (If you are, you really ought to stop.) Am I misunderstanding your comment?

    • Replies: @Lagertha
  55. @Hypnotoad666

    In the end, wasn’t he not even so much a homosexual in the sense of deciding after reflection that he was attracted to men and craved so-called “anal sex” with them, etc. so much as he was strung out on meth, mollies, and similar drugs and compilsively having sex with anything with a pulse to both a) obtain funds more drugs and b) feed the crazed, oversexed urges such drugs create in addicts? Such indiscriminate sexual proclivities become de facto homosexual because women just don’t get up to the requisite promiscuity in any significant numbers, and they certainly need not and will not
    pay for sex with a meth-head.

    My point is, not only was Shepherd not really an innocent victim, he wasn’t even really a “gay man” as that term is generally understood in modern parlance. Sex-fiend meth-heads like him are more akin to the so-called “situational” homosexuals one finds in prisons….

    • Agree: bomag
  56. Flip says:

    I am trying to find where in the Constitution this is allowed to the Federal Government. Grover Cleveland, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

    “I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds… I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution.”
    ~ Grover Cleveland
    (1837-1908) 22nd & 24th US President
    In 1887 when vetoing an appropriation to help drought-stricken counties in Texas

    • Replies: @Anon
  57. @Rocks Off

    Jewish philosopher Alain Finkielkraut was verbally attacked insulted in Paris….

    Go bastardise the language and oppose free speech someplace else, please. Stupid shit like the idea of a “verbal attack” (i.e., words someone did not want to hear) is a huge part of the problem.

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
    , @Rocks Off
  58. @Anon1

    No, Anon1, you’re remembering it wrong. It was your friend who told you to go assault yourself, wasn’t it?

    ;-}

  59. @Clyde

    Clyde, once in a while, that Cheap China-made Crap can be a godsend … least when you don’t have Clint Eastwood around with his rifle.

    • Replies: @Clyde
  60. @Redneck farmer

    If you’re covering “Alive & Kicking” you really should get Michael Hutchence involved; he’s much more experienced with that sort of music, and, for that matter, more experienced with asphyxia by hanging, which goes well with the theme of lynching. Besides, he’ll give a huge boost to the hateful hate by being a white, southern man – way more southern than even Elvis Presley!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  61. Trevor H. says:
    @Jefferson

    Next the Senate will pass a law that says it’s illegal for White people to make Blacks work for no pay.

    Delete all after “work”.

    If you want to get really clever, delete the phrase “for white people” as well.

  62. @Ibound1

    May I suggest the time is right for a federal law against alien abductions?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  63. Trevor H. says:
    @Autochthon

    Saying something a Jewish person doesn’t like is currently construed as an attack. Congress is now working on the relevant federal hate-crimes statute.

    Watch what you say.

  64. Anon[210] • Disclaimer says:
    @Flip

    It’s the interstate commerce clause, which has been expanded beyond recognition. That horse is well out of the barn. This lynching law only applies in certain circumstances, mostly if the state completely ignores the crime and there is an “interstate” connection (such as using the phone or internet).

  65. Clyde says:

    Anyone know if this anti lynching bill contains hate speech provisions?
    FWI from Washington Post

    The NAACP says lynching emerged in the late 19th century as a “popular way of resolving some of the anger that whites had in relation to free blacks.” About 3,450 black people were lynched in the United States between 1882 and 1968, accounting for 73 percent of the total number of people lynched.

    Only five states had no lynchings during that period, according to the NAACP.

    The Senate bill defines someone guilty of lynching as “willfully, acting as part of any collection of people, assembled for the purpose and with the intention of . . . [causing] death to any person.” The crime could be punished by a sentence of up to life in prison.

    Me…This bill looks like a Booker-Kamala publicity stunt. And the lynching verbiage describes the six black yoofs who killed the Nashville musician two weeks ago.

  66. Jack D says:
    @Rocks Off

    One man’s positive is another man’s negative. I keep joking that the alt-right should get together with the Islamists because they both hate Jews. But the truth is that they hate each other too.

    Actually, they are not as compatible as you may think. Many Western alt-righters are PRO Zionist – they want the Jews to leave their country and move to Israel. They also admire how Israel controls its own borders. It’s the Left that is anti-Zionist nowadays.

  67. The Feds already prosecute “civil rights” violations when verdicts go against their wishes. Different jurisdictions get their bite at the apple. Isn’t that the same thing?

    That said, don’t you think chances are the first potential prosecution under this law will be third world types (take your pick) who go after some unfortunate straight white teenage boy. I say “potential” because we all know it will never get to trial. At least for that. They were triggered or something.

  68. @Reg Cæsar

    I remember the Executive Order that declared AG Loretta Lynch could only be photographed from the shoulders up.

  69. Jack D says:
    @Anon

    This sounds more like an anti-hate crime law than an actual anti-lynching law. Like all vague Federal laws, it has the potential to be abused by the Feds for political purposes. It also sounds like a way to turn a minor assault into a Federal felony with a sentence of 10 years with no parole if you are someone that the Feds don’t like.

    I’m not sure I understand the distinction between Section 250 (a) (i) and 250 (a) (ii) – they seem to overlap in part (religion or national origin) but crimes under (i) require no “special circumstances” but crimes under (ii) do. What was the logic?

    • Agree: ACommenter, Ibound1
    • Replies: @Jack D
  70. Walsh2 says:
    @Anon

    Thanks for reading/condensing, I figured it would be too broad and poorly written. Of course from the drafters standpoint I presume those are features not bugs. What it appears to allow is the feds to prosecute minor assaults that states leave alone, i.e two white guys head to Vegas for drunken weekend, get in bar fight with black guys(race not factor in onset of fight, just drunk guys fighting-local police know this) black guys say white guys used racial slur and voila, instant hate crime and violation of the anti-lynching bill. They can basically use it whenever a hate crime needs to be ginned up. When they get back in power they will most definitely use it.

    It also appears to set the stage for some type of reparations through law suit. I’m sure the “symbolic aim” as set forth in Wiki was a talking point fed to the writer. The symbolic aim – “recognize and apologize for historical government failures to prevent lynching” opens the door to a lot of retro active grievance suits against the government. I suspect that if the language doesn’t appear in the bill it most certainly appears in the legislative history which judges look to when interpreting a vague statute.

  71. anonymous[354] • Disclaimer says:
    @Clifford Brown

    Tupac Kaput

  72. ic1000 says:

    In an earlier thread, “eah” posted a link to the Twitter account of one Caleb Hull. Hull tweeted about a 2017 attack, “In the same city as Jussie’s ‘attack,’ a mentally disabled teen was kidnapped, tied up for 5 hours, and scalped/beaten by 4 people on livestream. They screamed ‘fuck Donald Trump’ and ‘fuck white people’ as they beat him. Nowhere near the same amount of coverage as Jussie, though.”

    Hull’s next tweet was, “Or where was the media coverage of this, which also happened in Chicago?,” referring to a November 2016 beatdown and attempted homicide, “Bystanders yell anti-Trump taunts as man beaten after car crash”.

    This leads to the Intersectional Theory of Hate Hoaxes.

    Each media outlet has a trademark balance of stories. For instance, the 22-minute NBC Nightly News packs in coverage of “The US Economy,” “International,” “News You Can Use,” “Bad Trump,” and “Hollywood/Culture.” Each broadcast ends with “Inspiring America,” featuring (say) cellphone video of a disabled gay veteran fighting teen bullying in a national park.

    Eyewitness News at 11, the Wall Street Journal, and Entertainment Tonight operate by the same guidelines, just with different mixes of categories. “Street Crime” is a staple of local news — if you shoot somebody or kidnap a child, you get your moment of TV fame. Likewise, “Outsize Quarterly Earnings” for the WSJ and “Celebrity Baby Bump” for ET.

    “White People Attacking Non-Whites” is the intersectional category. Every US media outlet needs more coverage, because each story generates ad revenue (eyeballs, counter sales, clicks). Keeping these stories above the fold make the world a better place — the reason people major in journalism in the first place.

    The depressing spectacle of human misconduct means there’s plenty of fodder for News At 11. But the supply of clear-cut and exciting whites-assaulting-nonwhites stories is too limited to meet the demand. Further, Prestige Media reporters and editors lack the instincts that cause local newshounds to mutter, “this smells fishy.” So shaky reports keep getting catapulted into the spotlight, all along the media spectrum.

    Intersectional theory predicts that as any “Whites Behaving Badly” incident morphs into a Hate Hoax, media attention will plummet. The necessary mix of stories hasn’t changed, merely the identifier for this particular story. “Our Mistakes” is the least intersectional of bins. Since this category doesn’t bring in revenue and doesn’t heal the world, why dwell on it? Better to start fresh.

    As Sailer cautioned in his first post on The Saga of Jussie’s Lynching, the legacy press will eventually hit genuine paydirt. It’s a big country.

    • Replies: @Jack D
  73. Ganderson says:
    @BenKenobi

    I just wish she would pass the time by playing a little solitaire…

  74. Rocks Off says:
    @Autochthon

    The incident happened in Paris where there is no freedom of speech. As a result of this incident there is a judicial procedure underway and the men who insulted Finkielkraut will likely be arrested, tried, and imprisoned. Michel Houellebecq stood trial in France many years ago for calling Islam “the stupidest religion”. I am a firm believer in the wisdom of freedom of speech policies.

    • Replies: @Autochthon
  75. Jack D says:
    @ic1000

    Since this law is written in a racially neutral way (i.e. it don’t just say that it applies to white people assaulting blacks), the one ray of sunshine here is that it may end up being used in cases of minority attacks on white people such as those that you describe above, which would be sweet irony. However, given the amount of prosecutorial discretion baked into the law and given the predilections of the Permanent Government, I doubt that it will get used that way very often.

  76. Anon[852] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    In the end, he was hanged by a Trope.

  77. Anon[852] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Empire or Campire?

  78. Wilkey says:
    @Mr McKenna

    Oh, no real disagreement there. I was mostly just pointing out how each party could get what they want, assuming many Republicans in Congress actually want border security.

    Compromise and negotiation is about giving someone else something they want (and that you’d maybe rather not give them, but can tolerate) in exchange for some for your side. But the Democrats have this way of phrasing everything they want in the form of a moral absolute that must get an up-or-down vote on its own.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  79. JimB says:

    When a BLM activist was recently charged with lynching in California, the state promptly dropped it from the state criminal code.

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-lynching-law-governor-jerry-brown/

    • Replies: @Jack D
  80. @Rocks Off

    It doesn’t matter two shits where the insult occurred, it was an insult all the same, not an attack in any but a metaphorical sense of that term.

    I’m pretty sure it’s illegal to fart and cough in France, much as it is in the F.U.S.A. – where, by the by, there is also no freedom of speech, which, contrary to what most commenters here believe, is not a question of whether some yellow piece of paper declares people may speak freely, but, rather, requires as its foundation that people may in fact speak freely – be all that as it may, it’s nothing to do with bastardisng the English language. Using hackneyed phrases like “verbally attacked” contributes to the clever manipulation of minds and perceptions, and, ultimately, of the very things one can and cannot conceive of and one’s understanding of objective reality in precisely those ways the enemy has mastered to his benefit.

    Stop facilitating evil.

    Don’t call men women. Don’t call aliens “immigrants,” nevermind “Americans.” Don’t call sodomites playing at house “married.” Don’t call them “gay.” Don’t call wars of imperial aggression “defence” (no American in Afghanistan is defending you from anything; certainly none in Japan, Italy, or Poland is not). Don’t refer to the courts as administering “justice” – they do no such thing. Stop all this mendacity, and you will do much to benefit yourself and those around you.

    And please, for the love of humanity, don’t call anything purchased from Taco Bell “food.”

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  81. @Ibound1

    Well, I for one am relived to learn that at long last the gaping hole in our laws has been closed where murder was unprosecutable if you did it by noose. The omission of noose murder from all of our criminal statute books was a stain on our values of us not being not who we are and stuff.

    Now I await our brave legislators closing the new loophole (which strangely they just opened) where murder by intentional exposure to HIV is merely a misdemeanor and poisoning the blood supply by donating HIV blood is totally cool in California.

  82. @Wilkey

    “Compromise and negotiation is about giving someone else something they want (and that you’d maybe rather not give them, but can tolerate) in exchange for some for your side. But the Democrats have this way of phrasing everything they want in the form of a moral absolute that must get an up-or-down vote on its own.”

    It’s a fair point, and assuming that 1) Repubs actually do want to do something for the country, and 2) Dems are not entirely fanatic psychos [yes, I am aware those two preconditions are high hurdles], compromises should be possible.

    As I recall, there was some discussion at SlateStarCodex (Scott Alexander) that campaign finance reform had rendered this kind of old-fashioned compromise much less practical than in the past. Under the new laws, horse trading is illegal “pork-barrel politics”, so politicians face legal obstacles to hashing out old fashioned compromises. Instead, the incentive now is to gin up all-or-nothing ideological campaigns. If you win, take no prisoners and have no mercy. If you lose, remain intransigent on all fronts, do everything you can to trip up the winners. This is the new system the Good Government people (GooGoos) have devised for us.

  83. @Alfa158

    A commemorative coin will be released next year in recogition of that “horrific” yet significantly historic day in America.

  84. Jack D says:
    @Jack D

    The bill seems to largely mirror word for word the existing Obama era Federal hate crimes law (the “Matthew Shepard Law”) which has been on the books for a decade:

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/249

    which also has the bifurcated and overlapping subsection (i) vs subsection (ii) structure that offenses against some groups require a link to interstate commerce and other don’t.

    The main difference is that the existing law requires the use of “fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device” and the new bill requires only that “2 or more persons willfully cause bodily injury to any other person”. A dangerous weapon is pretty much anything other than using your bare hands. Ironically, this would probably include using a rope, so lynching (in the sense of hanging someone) is probably already covered by the current statute.

    After further reading and morning coffee, I now understand the structure of these two laws – the category (i) crimes fall under direct Federal jurisdiction by virtue of the 13th Amendment and the category (ii) crimes gain Federal jurisdiction thru the Commerce Clause. The 13th Amendment gives the Congress the right to make further laws for the prevention of racial discrimination but this doesn’t give the Feds the right to make laws against gay discrimination. But if you pick up the phone to call your co-conspirator to plan to beat up a tranny (even if it’s a local call) then you’ve used an instrument of interstate commerce and the Feds can get you on that basis.

  85. @Anon1

    Christine Hoff Summers says that she was debating a feminist about the whole date rape idea and the feminist claimed it was possible for two people to rape each other within the same act.

    I think it logically follows from that, that one person could sexually assault himself.

  86. The response to TMZ’s initial report was so swift and consistent from dozens of media and Dem figures. Maybe the conspiracy goes deeper than just Mr. Smollett and those goofy looking Nigerian bodybuilders. Maybe it doesn’t.

    I think, though it sounds less specific, “Hoax Crime” might expedite the Thingification of Hate Hoaxes.

  87. Jack D says:
    @JimB

    BTW, this now repealed law from 1933 (when America was still sane) made a lot more sense as an “anti-lynching” law than the current bill. The essence of lynching was not racial (since many lynchings were done against white people), it was the use of vigilante justice. Typically a mob would surround the jail, remove the prisoner and hang him or otherwise punish him. Under the old California law, the crime of “lynching” was not based on discrimination, it was based on kidnapping someone who was already in police custody. But in modern America, it’s all about IDENTITY. The categories protected in the law are like a roll call of CoF interest groups: race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.

  88. CCZ says:

    Why We Have Hate Crime Hoaxes….in the years after BHO ???

    “If I had a son, he would look like….Jussie”??

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    , @Clyde
  89. Neuday says:
    @conatus

    Only the slow ones got lynched.

  90. Jack D says:

    While on rare occasions there are real conspiracies, usually positing conspiracies just makes you sound nuts – ” This whole thing was planned in advance by the Elders of Zion, who then gave secret marching order to Kamala Harris, Jussie Smollett, the NY Times and NBC News.” The thing is, you don’t need to posit actual conspiracies. People with firm ideological agendas (Left or Right) will behave in predictable ways even in the absence of marching orders:

    Jussie Smollett – “I see that my friend Kamala Harris is trying to get an anti-lynching bill thru Congress – a nationally publicized lynching incident may be just the thing that is needed to get it over the top. Maybe they’ll even name it the Jussie Smollett Law – it worked for Matthew Shepard!”

    Kamala Harris (and every other Democrat politician) – ” I see that my friend Jussie has been the victim of a horrific racist attack – I condemn all such attacks without qualification. This is why we need my anti-lynching bill”.

    NYTimes – ” I see that the Chicago police are reporting a possible hate crime by Trumpists that will make Trump look bad. Should we print this – hell yes!”

    You can have the same result as a conspiracy without actually needing to conspire.

    • Agree: Johann Ricke, dfordoom
  91. @Rocks Off

    If we stop and think about it, this anti-lynching law could be good for the whites.

    But as whites quickly move towards minority status, it is very likely that whites will soon be the targets of lynching, if in fact they haven’t already started to be targeted.

    Rocks, this is an important point.

    The key fact here is that whites are already–and have been for a long time–the victims of way more (orders of magnitude more) racially motivated violence than they commit. There are tens of thousands of rapes of white women by black men every year–with lots of racial intent behind them. There are hundreds of thousands of assaults of whites–beatings, knockout game, muggings, to punches and pushes–motivated by racial animosity. If whites, are even involved in cross-racial violence it’s usually involving drugs or just the usual friction of life–ex. reacting to typical black behavior like noise at 2 a.m.

    But these “hate crime” and “anti-lynching” things are setup precisely to only harass whites. They always rely on “precieved” this or “motivated by” that. And somehow … miraculously … blacks are *never* motivated by racial animus. For example the prosecutor in the Knoxville Horror case just could not find any racial animus in the carjacking, Christopher Newsome’s rape torture and murder or Channon Christian being repeatedly raped in every orifice, tortured, bleach poured down her throat and over her body while she was alive, and stuffed into and suffocating in plastic bags. Nope. No race angle there!

    That’s the scam: Whites committ hate crimes. Blacks don’t hate, they just make “unfortunate choices”.

    And again–as with immigration and everything else–not a single Republican stands up for their base.

    The simple and obvious thing to do here: Stand on the Senate or House floor and just say “cross racial crimes inflame racial tensions and do damage to our national life” and amend these “hate crime” bills so that the *every* cross-racial\ethnic\religious crime gets whatever enhanced “hate” penalty is being assessed.

    Even if you can’t pass it right away, you’ve called out this minoritarian\Democrat “hate” fraud for what it is–an attack on whites. Republicans can then call that out every election cycle and campaign on it. And then actually pass it when in power. That would result in a whole lot of–mostly black–criminals doing racial assaults, going to prison and hence being off the street for much longer times. Result: much safer streets particularly for white people, but actually for everyone.

  92. ic1000 says:

    O/T

    I generally ignore Twitter, but Steve’s current feed is pretty darn funny. Many re-tweets of politicians’ Instant Classic tweets of the #IStandWithJussie (or whatever) variety. Plus an exchange with the Gray Lady’s poster boy for Gray Journalism, Sopan Deb.

    Here’s his feed: Steve_Sailer.

    • Replies: @Hail
  93. Jussie’s Hate Hoax didn’t make much difference to this bill, since it originally passed the Senate by voice vote (i.e., none of the Senators were seriously opposed to it) in December of last year.

  94. Anything involving a MAGA hat in the headline is immediately suspect in my mind. Even the one about being held at gunpoint in Wal-Mart.

  95. As Tim Pool reports, the Washington Post so so so wants this fake noose to be real noose;

  96. Hail says: • Website
    @ic1000

    Twitter

    In Twitter news,

    It appears Twitter has banned Audacious Epigone, effective yesterday. AE joins Jared Taylor and many, many others in Twitter-heaven.

    They so readily hand out bans that it pains me how much good content is being created only to be so easily lost. This includes a fair portion of the content of the late-2010s-era iSteve blog and its comments. Important tweets need to be screenshotted and hosted locally, i.e., screenshots of Steve Sailer tweets or tweets used in blog posts/articles hosted at Unz.com, if possible.

  97. JimB says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Recall that the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act was rammed through in the early months of the Obama administration before it was discovered that Shepherd was killed by homosexual junkies, not homophobic cowboys. This is the way leftists operate. Never let a fleeting false narrative go to waste.

  98. The real world is always more complicated than many people’s preconceptions.

    Quick now, what famous American politician did the most to stop lynchings, fighting the KKK when it was a very dangerous thing to do?

    Answer below, so you have a minute to guess.

    Scroll down

    Scroll down some more

    Keep on scrolling

    .

    .

    .

    Answer:

    Storm Thurmond

  99. Jack D says:
    @AnotherDad

    You have to understand that this law (and the 2009 Hate Crime act on which it is closely patterned) was NEVER meant to be used except on rare (politically motivated, high profile) occasions – they were meant to be largely symbolic. The Federal government does not have the resources to prosecute every single racially motivated crime let alone every cross-racial crime so there is a requirement in the law that it can only be used if the US Attorney General makes a special certification that the offender is somehow going to escape adequate punishment under local law. So if it is your garden variety cross-racial (i.e. black on white since the other kind is virtually non-existent) rape and they are going to prosecute the rape under state law (as they normally would) it wouldn’t apply anyway.

    And if it were otherwise, our whole system of justice would fall apart because, even in this age of enormous Federal resources the Federal government is not set up to prosecute, try and imprison every trans-racial offender (while we have a very well developed system of punishment under state law).

    In general, I am opposed to laws that require “mind reading” or which vary the punishment based on your motivations. If rape someone, that’s a heinous crime in any event and your motives and reasons for doing so really don’t make any difference to the victim or to society. If there’s a minor assault, it’s a minor assault and you shouldn’t have to do 10 years in the Federal lockup instead of state law probation because you shouted “take that, cracker!” when you were punching the guy .

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  100. Aardvark says:
    @Anon

    So if what can be defined as “lynching” is now a federal crime, does it carry with it Perjury implications if someone files a false lynching case? If the Feds want to claim jurisdiction here, assuming the State did not prosecute for some reason, then it seems that Smollett would have committed perjury by filing a false report.

  101. Jefferson says:

    Left Wing conspiracy theorists in the comments section of Social Justice Warrior sites like The Root, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Huffington Post for example believe the racist anti-Black Chicago police department are hiding the surveillance footage of Jussie Smollett experiencing a Mississippi Burning type Jim Crow lynching by MAGA Country.

    And they say only Right Wing people engage in conspiracy theories, what a bunch of contradicting hypocrites The Left are.

  102. ic1000 says:

    > … so there is a requirement in the law that it can only be used if the US Attorney General makes a special certification that the offender is somehow going to escape adequate punishment under local law.

    Isn’t that what used to be known as “Double Jeopardy”?

    Edit: I guess not. Unless “escape adequate punishment” includes “‘escape’ via acquittal.”

  103. @International Jew

    IJ, Too funny, but I just took my tow rope out of the trunk. Can’t be too careful.

    • Replies: @Kylie
    , @Clyde
  104. @AndrewR

    Andrew, Add to my list of reparations…Blacks are allowed to hate whites any time or all the time. Like I care.

  105. @CCZ

    CCZ, well they both have beards but Barack’s beard has a name…Michelle.

    • Replies: @Jefferson
  106. The Jessie was politically connected with other gay black actors

  107. J.Ross says: • Website

    I derive no joy from the satirizing of unnecessary laws brought by consequence-free rulers. This is already tyranny and in the practical future will be used to entrap innocent people (and later, expanded upon). It’s like a man noticing that he is required to wear a star and contenting hinself with snarking that he guesses his nose isn’t so distinctive. There’s a lot to say about the Stasis and hopefully somebody says it in time.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  108. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Jack D

    I predict that resources will miraculously be found in the event of a white defendant.

  109. Pontius says:
    @International Jew

    STRIKING THE FIRST BLOW IN DISMANTLING ROPE CULTURE!!!!!

  110. Anonymous[133] • Disclaimer says:

    Where were the Nigerian brothers born? This story confuses me:

    https://pagesix.com/2019/02/18/why-jussie-smollett-may-have-staged-his-attack/

    “Meanwhile, Olabinjo and Abimbola Osundairo, the brothers who are believed to have been paid by the actor to carry out the alleged assault, made their first public statement since being outed in the Smollett saga.

    “We are not racist. We are not homophobic, and we are not anti-Trump. We were born and raised in Chicago and are American citizens,” they said in a joint statement.

    The Nigerian-born bodybuilding siblings…”

    • Replies: @Kibernetika
  111. @AnotherDad

    AnotherDad said: re: Stand on the Senate or House floor and just say “cross racial crimes inflame racial tensions and do damage to our national life” and amend these “hate crime” bills so that the *every* cross-racial\ethnic\religious crime gets whatever enhanced “hate” penalty is being assessed.

    That would be a start. Here’s another idea: Make reporting a hate hoax a Federal crime with a prison sentence. SPLC already counts hoaxes, like the Israeli kid phoning in synagogue threats, in its hate crime stats because, hey, hoaxes upset people. I read that in the paper, really, so it must be true.

  112. I just went to Google News (Monday late afternoon) and the top story is “Jussie Smollett Case: Clues Into Potential Motive Behind The Attack,” story dated 28 minutes ago.

    Isn’t someone going to help that poor, attacked man? I can only imagine the evilness of the motive behind it. I shall be regularly consulting Google News for updates on this horrific incident. It is a mystery, wrapped in a scandal, inside an enigma, coated in rich, smooth white privilege.

  113. Kylie says:
    @Buffalo Joe

    Yeah, easier to take the tow rope out of your trunk than to go around in black face pretending to be Nigerian.

  114. KenH says:

    The takeaway is that black “conservative” Republican Tim Scott crossed party lines to join with radical part black leftists Kamala and Cory Booker to advance a black racial interest. It’s all about race and Scott couldn’t stop flapping his liver lips about white nationalism after Charlottesville.

    I haven’t read the law but I’m wondering if “lynching” will be so broadly defined that hanging a noose on a tree will be considered lynching and the person(s) who hung the noose subject to prison time in a federal pen and fines.

    • Agree: Clyde
  115. @Clyde

    M Hutchence from INXS

    I thought that was the autoerotic thing. So, not self-lynching but self-rape.

    Does this Bill define how thick the lynching rope must be?

    They may be going by the “rule of thumb”.

    https://www.stuffmomnevertoldyou.com/blogs/where-does-rule-of-thumb-come-from-not-legalized-wife-beating.htm

    BTW, did you know that Jackson Browne is also a Clyde? But my favorite Clyde was always Crashcup, with his proto-Penn-and-Teller act:

    • Replies: @Clyde
  116. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Autochthon

    Besides, he’ll give a huge boost to the hateful hate by being a white, southern man

    I guess Michael Hutchence was a southern man, if you define Sydney, Australia as being part of the South.

  117. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Another Canadian

    May I suggest the time is right for a federal law against alien abductions?

    That’s just an attempt to stir up hate against space aliens. In fact only a small minority of space aliens commit abductions.

  118. @Anonymous

    The brothers Osundairo are likely naturalized US citizens, or on the Dreamer spectrum. Card-carrying immigrants, inshallah, though said cards may have been purchased for $50 at the corner convenience store.

    Not sure if anyone’s commented on this yet, but consider: Immigrants can now command $3500 cash to commit crimes against Americans(?). If true, this is more evidence to argue that immigrant labor undercuts native-born wages. The few times that I’ve been robbed or otherwise victimized, it only cost me my wallet or vehicles. Next time I should tip? And how much?

    Strange (Jussie) Fruit indeed!

  119. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Autochthon

    Stop facilitating evil.

    Don’t call men women. Don’t call aliens “immigrants,” nevermind “Americans.” Don’t call sodomites playing at house “married.” Don’t call them “gay.” Don’t call wars of imperial aggression “defence” (no American in Afghanistan is defending you from anything; certainly none in Japan, Italy, or Poland is not). Don’t refer to the courts as administering “justice” – they do no such thing. Stop all this mendacity, and you will do much to benefit yourself and those around you.

    Yes, I agree wholeheartedly.

    Control the language and you control how people think. If you let your enemies mandate the words you use then you’re a cuck.

  120. NYCTexan says:
    @Hail

    You really think they lost the battle? I’m not so sure. Let’s see… Anti-lynching bill with strong sexual persuasion protections passes due to this hoax, which had everyone is Washington frozen in fear just long enough… We all agree the timing is really too coincidental, but I’m sure this low IQ, clearly delusional individual planned this whole fiasco with a couple of Nigerian nuckleheads all by their lonesome. No one, not Kamala, not Booker, not the much more shrewd team of two producers behind his show Empire, could have possibly put Smollett up to this, or suggested to him he would be glorified as a great pop icon by dealing a blow to all his evil haters.

    Let’s see if after he is charged, he does any serious time in prison, jail, or even a psych ward, or if he’s let off with just a slap on the wrist and tacit endorsement of his actions, lest the deplorables win. But maybe the pundit class push hard for a draconian sentence, and poor Jussie is sacrificed for the greater good, having outlived his usefulness. OD’s in his cell/room and becomes a martyr for the cause, never having the sense to be anything else. He is but a pitiful pawn. Jussie Smollett perhaps, is done for. But who really is winning?

  121. @AndrewR

    Why’d Steve Paddock light up a country music concert?

    • Replies: @AndrewR
  122. TheBoom says:

    “Was Kamala Harris part of the Jussie Smollett hoax?”

    Tariq Rasheed has his own conspiracy story and it provides an exciting plot twist. Jussie has a personal connection with Kamala Harris and has campaigned with her. Kamala was the one who immediately introduced the anti lunching legislation. Tariq implies this was all a set-up.

    I could see her just capitalizing on it to build cred with blacks but his perspective is more fun.

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/02/was_kamala_harris_part_of_the_jussie_stollett_hoax.html

  123. Jefferson says:
    @Buffalo Joe

    Strange how so many Black Homosexual Social Justice Warriors love to claim that growing up they have only experienced bullying Homophobia coming from White people. Did they all attend Orthodox Jewish schools or Catholic schools made up of Italians and Polish for example?

    And than you find out they lied and went to an all Black innercity school and their anti-Gay bullies were all Obama’s sons who picked on them.

  124. Clyde says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Yes I see that Jackson Brown is in the tres exclusive Clyde club. He was very good before and during live! Running on Empty. Joan Baez does a v good version of Fountain of Sorrow. Same as she does Dylan better as in Love is Just a Four Letter Word. Complete with (as mentioned before) electric sitar played by one of Nashville’s best.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Jim Don Bob
  125. Clyde says:
    @Buffalo Joe

    I have a woven tow rope in my trunk. I use it to rip out trees and plants I want to go out.

  126. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    The simple and obvious thing to do here: Stand on the Senate or House floor and just say “cross racial crimes inflame racial tensions and do damage to our national life” and amend these “hate crime” bills so that the *every* cross-racial\ethnic\religious crime gets whatever enhanced “hate” penalty is being assessed.

    Even if you can’t pass it right away, you’ve called out this minoritarian\Democrat “hate” fraud for what it is–an attack on whites. Republicans can then call that out every election cycle and campaign on it. And then actually pass it when in power. That would result in a whole lot of–mostly black–criminals doing racial assaults, going to prison and hence being off the street for much longer times. Result: much safer streets particularly for white people, but actually for everyone.

    Simple, obvious, but wrong. The left and the prosecutors it controls-effectively all of them-just will not prosecute nonwhites for offenses against whites. Because reasons. They will always find them.

    White people need to make being anti-white expensive. There has to be a cost to doing it. It can be financial or otherwise. It’s going to take a lot more whites being radicalized-radicalized in the pro-white direction. Until there is an economic setback or large numbers of suburban comfortable whites are discomforted otherwise, it won’t happen.

    But those things will come to pass and when they do, the anti-Whites will be in big trouble. They know it, but they can’t stop themselves: it’s the frog and the scorpion and they are the scorpion.

  127. AndrewR says:
    @Jack Hanson

    Hopefully one day we’ll find out.

  128. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Clyde

    Jackson Browne is more of a woman than Joan Baez, no offense to Joan.

  129. @Clyde

    I am not a huge Joan Baez fan, but this is beautiful:

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Clyde
  130. Hail says: • Website
    @M. Hartley

    Paleo Liberal on the Jussie Smollett Hate Hoax, excerpts:

    (Recall that the ‘incident’ “took place” Jan. 29, 2 AM CST; national media spotlight from Jan. 30 into early Feb.; Internet pushback in early Feb.; issue began to fade but skepticism was substantial by mid Feb.; pro-Smollett ABC interview in which he lied on camera, recorded circa evening of Feb. 12 and aired morning of Feb. 14; confirmed hoax by late in day Feb. 15):

    (Approximate posting times are for North America)

    Paleo Liberal, evening, Jan. 30:

    None of us know what happened […] We were not there.

    I don’t like people getting attacked when they are wandering around a city.

    25 years ago I convinced [a man] to change out of a dress before getting on a commuter train after some gay event, since I didn’t want him to be attacked.

    Paleo Liberal, midday, Jan. 31:

    This could be a celeb stalker case.

    Celebrity stalkers have done some absolutely unbelievable stuff.

    Paleo Liberal, evening, Jan. 31:

    Here is what we know:

    The guy was injured somehow.

    There were two people seen in the area by surveillance cameras.

    In other words, whether you believe him or not, it is possible.

    And finally, Feb. 18 (above, this thread):

    The real world is always more complicated than many people’s preconceptions.

    In fairness to PL, Steve Sailer himself initially leaned towards maybe believing it.

  131. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jim Don Bob

    Joan Baez is the best living female folk singer out there, unless you consider Emmylou Harris a folk singer, and even then it’s a close shot either way. Despite her politics, musically I’ve always respected her. In her younger days she was a hell of a woman, which is why I felt bad about my remark about Jackson Browne.

    Browne is a total girly-man, a pretty boy with good songwriting skills and a decent singer, but he has nothing but air in his balls.

  132. Clyde says:
    @Jim Don Bob

    Great guitar work. Very nice! I put it into my MP3 player. Though I like her original electric version better done when she had long hair. If you look at Dylan-Baez photos you can see she is darker than him. BD looks positively Ashkenazi-Aryan next to her. Perhaps there was some racism involved when they broke up. Or some perceived racism. But this was 50+ years ago.

  133. Clyde says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    So I maneuvered over to that Peak Stupidity blog and your latest about Dead Heads. John Kasich was one when he was a libertarian big noise in Congress 25 years ago. The Dead had to kick him off the Washington DC stage. He was high or something and he got up there. K was friends or more than, with Anne Coulter.

    Ship of Fools – book review – Part 3

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  134. Rapparee says:

    For what it’s worth, a relative of a murder victim once told me it was widely rumored that his kinswoman’s killer’s ostensible “suicide” was actually a lynching staged by members of the local police department. (Presumably- if true- the officers lacked confidence that some liberal, Democrat-appointed judge would impose an adequate penalty). Of course, the perp was white, as was pretty much the entire town, so that isn’t the kind of lynching these politicians care about.

    • Replies: @Trevor H.
  135. Quite likely, I’m late to the game and this has already been pointed out, but maybe it merits retelling: especially in the south and interior west, where large (50+) herds are kept on ranges that can not be constantly surveilled, “cattle rustling” and livestock theft in general is still a big problem, somewhere between large predators and infectious disease on a livestock owner’s list of major concerns. These crimes can take the form of outright dead-of-night theft, or purchasing of animals with counterfeit checks and then absconding with and/or immediately selling them. Heists are more often than not well-orchestrated, multi-man, high-tech operations, not usually a case of yokels trying to prank each other. NYT appears to have covered this in a few articles in 2001 and 2009, before coastal misunderstanding (and seeming hatred) of ruralites reached the astounding current fever pitch.

  136. @Clyde

    I can’t speak for all Dead Heads, Clyde, but without Jerry, well, even with Jerry, we could not be held responsible for our most whacked out members. The people on acid are one thing, but John Kasich is another phenomena entirely. John Kasich, you are Dead to us!

    BTW, I had no idea Ann Coulter did that much drugs … I mean enough to explain her friendship with John Kasich.

    Thanks for reading, Clyde!

  137. @J.Ross

    Funny you mention the Stasi, Mr. Ross. I not only met someone who’s girlfriend had her Dad murdered by the Stasi for not becoming a spy, but last week Peak Stupidity asked
    The New Stasi – same as the Old Stasi?
    .

    The new Stasi has technology that the old Stasi could only have imagined in their wet dreams, yet the new Stasi is composed of clueless lazy retards, so we’re good for now.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
  138. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    But in general a lot of federal laws are just ways to make a single act illegal in many ways, to allow overcharging by prosecutors. Then during the plea bargain you see that you’re liable for 500 years in prison and you take the plea bargain. Your attorney will say, “This is crazy, I think you’re innocent … but juries these days … who knows … they’re unpredictable …”

    In fact, juries are confronted with 20 charges and if they return innocent on 18 of them, they think they have done you a favor. It’s related to the psychology of why companies will offer a cheapo option and a high priced option: They know you will be steered into the middle option. Nobody takes the cheapo option in such a case. It would be like buying the base car with no option pack whatsoever.

    Anyone who thinks that juries are better at determining whether or not someone did or did not commit a particular crime than a judge is a fool. Juries are composed of people who know nothing of the law, of courtroom procedure, and generally have no idea of how criminals typically behave. Generally anyone who does is specifically excluded from the jury.

    The real purpose of a jury is to nullify laws they find outrageous or inapplicable to a particular case. Tell that to either side when being questioned for jury duty and you will be excused forever from jury duty.

    In Johnson County, KS, anyone who ever registered as a Libertarian or has publicly supported organizations like the FIJA is on a secret list and will not be sent a notice for jury duty, ever. I know ten people who were or are registered Libty and not one ever gets a jury notice although all their neighbors do.

    https://fija.org/what-we-do/overview.html

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Trevor H.
  139. Lagertha says:
    @Autochthon

    yeah….my screw up. No worries.

  140. Anon[129] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    Plea bargains are in theory approved by judges, but they are structured by prosecutors. Judges only ask questions in extreme cases. What we need are more jury trials with less overcharging. There have been several serious proposals on how to address the problem of prosecutorial overcharging, including one by the Instapundit blog law professor.

    A crazy jury finding you guilty of reasonable charges is usually no different in jail time than a plea bargain offered on overcharged charges. And the jury trial at least offers the possibility of an acquittal.

  141. J.Ross says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I don’t know; before they dropped off the bleeding edge in the nineties, both Germanies were communications electronic leaders in their spheres, and Westerners didn’t see Ostis as anything to sneeze at. Crucially, they actually made their stuff. The modern ones use as directed what Apple and FaceZuck giveth.

  142. Trevor H. says:
    @Rapparee

    Cops can do whatever they want to white guys, and they know it. One of our society’s best-kept secrets. You sure won’t hear about it from the MSM, who are forever busy retailing the exact opposite of this truth.

  143. Trevor H. says:
    @Anonymous

    The main purpose of juries nowadays is to determine whether the defendant or the plaintiff has more Diversity Points.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution