#also him trying to prove to nate his own competence..... just fuck!

[zimszim]

the frame-up job is such a good episode in general but from sterling's pov. its stunning. he's watching his old partner who he has an intellectual hard-on for and his new hot thief girlfriend who is also insanely intelligent flirt w each other and generally be super hot in front of him ......... rough night for ppl w a thing for competence

[leverage-ot3]

notable moments from The Gimme a K Street Job

leverage 5.05

lemme just start by addressing the episode synopsis: “to take down a competitive cheerleading company which profits by putting teenage girls at risk, the team must tackle their most corrupt foe yet: congress”

y’all they went SO HARD for 2012 and I stan them SO HARD for that

- - - - -

Parker (into video camera on phone): Do you hate me? You hate me. Is that why you’re making me—

[Leverage Headquarters]

Parker (on display): —do this?

Nate: No, Par-Parker, these girls... they need a coach, and you’re the best gymnast I know.

Hardison: Besides, it puts you on the inside at Pep H.Q. In D.C. They’re running cheer camp for the next week up until championship.

Parker: But they’re teenage girls. What do I know about teenage girls?

Nate: You were a teenage girl?

Parker: Only sort of

parker I guarantee you’ll be in your element soon enough

but, in the meantime, parker complaining to nate like an offended child to a parent is everything

- - - - -

Sophie: Look, did you know about this? Girls being dropped from 20 feet. It’s unbelievable.

Parker: I know, right? 20 feet? Psh! Walk it off.

Sophie: Parker, you do know that normal people don’t just “walk off” a 20-foot fall, right?

Parker: So... all those times I pushed Hardison off a building and he was all “aah!”... he wasn’t just being funny?

(Hardison shakes his head)

Eliot: I thought it was funny, Parker.

Hardison: No way in hell was it funny.

Eliot: You’re always upside down, man.

Hardison: I fell off a building. I was upside...

Eliot: Like a Himalayan tree frog.

Hardison: You calling me a frog? You calling me a damn frog? Say it again. Say it to my face

I’d die for this chaotic ot3

eliot “I thought it was funny” spencer made sure to both reassure parker and fuck with hardison in the saME B R E A T H

- - - - -

Nate: Ah, there’s the crux of the problem right there. Technically, legally, cheerleading is not a sport. It’s an activity.

Sophie: What’s the difference?

Eliot: A sport has legally mandated safety standards.

Nate: Yes, and a for-profit company cannot run a sport, which is why pep wants to keep Competitive cheer from becoming a sport.

I don’t know why I was expecting someone to bash cheerleading the show had never ever let me down and I should have known better

- - - - -

Sophie: Ah, I love government. Shady deals, back-room meetings... It is grifter paradise.

Eliot: This is wrong. We work outside the law, not smack-dab in the middle of it.

Nate: Relax, Eliot. Elected officials are the easiest marks in the world. Between their ego, the greed, and the politics... More hooks than a bait shop

another fucked up government episode let’s go

- - - - -

Eliot: Right. Assuming it passes.

Hardison: Assuming what? It’s a bill to keep high-school girls out of wheelchairs. Who’s gonna vote against it?

[Congressional Meeting]

LeGrange: Ladies and gentlemen, this bill is a staggering... I say a staggering overreach of government power.

Eliot: You were saying

eliot is smug and loves proving hardison wrong on principle

- - - - -

LeGrange: Now, I was a quarterback in high school, so I think I know a thing or two about cheerleaders. And one thing I know is that they do not want big government getting all up in their business.

(Barron and Snyder enter the room)

LeGrange: Cheerleaders are strong, independent young women. They don’t need a bunch of white-haired old men from Washington telling them what to do. They don’t need a nanny state dictating their every move

this whole thing was so gross wtf

- - - - -

(Hardison uses his phone to create feedback on the sound system. A technician struggles to fix it while Hardison hands Eliot his phone)

Hardison: Just press this button.

LeGrange: I said, who knows what...

(Eliot presses button and the feedback gets worse)

they lowkey grinned at each other when they did it ,,,

they’re a chaotic duo that thrives on fucking with people and I stan them so hard for it

two words: assholery boyfriends

- - - - -

Nate: No, not... not marks. Elected officials. We do this right, we’ll have them eating out of our hand by dinner.

(hours later, Hardison enters looking exhausted. The others are seated around looking tired as well)

Eliot: “Eating out of our hand by dinner,” huh?

Hardison (sits down): Anybody else feel like we’ve been chewed up and spit out

and that’s government, people

- - - - -

Sophie: I like stealing things that are real. Cash... of course. Land... sure. Art... yes, please. Corn subsidies? Not so much.

let sophie steal expensive art from rich snobs pls it’s what she deserves

- - - - -

Girl: Um, coach?

Parker: Right! Okay, who’s up for some basic gymnastics drills?

(Parker presses a button and LASER light lines shine between orange cones. A girl in the back raises her hand)

Parker: Yes. You. What are you called?

Madison: Madison. Can I be excused? I don’t feel well.

Parker: But... We have... laser grid, Madison. Laser grid. Huh?

(on phone call)

Parker: They’re so jaded

I hope they still learned how to dodge lasers at the end

also ,,, THEIR PERFORMANCE WAS SO GOOD AT THE END PARKER TAUGHT THEM SO WELL

- - - - -

LeGrange: No, no. Listen carefully, son. Now, people don’t donate to me to buy my vote. People donate to me because they already know how I’m gonna vote. People donate to me because of my integrity. Now, if your people are interested in me, I’m happy to have your money. But if you think you can buy a vote off of J.J. LeGrange, well, you got another think coming.

[Empty Office]

Sophie: You mean...

Eliot: Yeah, I mean the guy’s got integrity. Elected official or not, you can’t con an honest man

congressman: *is honorable*

eliot:

sophie:

hardison:

nate:

*team collectively embodies the surprised pikachu meme*

- - - - -

Nate: Okay, so what’s your next play?

Eliot: Well, you’re supposed to be the mastermind. He doesn’t want power. He doesn’t want money. Maybe he really is an honest man.

Nate: Everyone has a hook, Eliot. Everyone has a weakness you can exploit.

Eliot: Do you?

Nate: No. You?

Eliot: No. Look, maybe this doesn’t fit into your world view, Nate, but there are some people out there that just want to serve. Trust me. I served with them.

Nate: Okay. Well, if all they want to do is serve, you can exploit that, too.

they totally have hooks and it’s the team but smh act like y’all are untouchable whatever

- - - - -

(Parker turns on a light in Ashley’s face)

Ashley: Madison talked to me in confidence.

Parker: A big word for a little girl.

Nate: Where’s Madison?

(Parker leans down into Ashley’s face, growling)

she literally G R O W L E D LMFAO

- - - - -

Parker: Madison? Madis... (sees Madison) Madison, hey, what are you doing down here? (helps Madison up) Everybody’s freaking out. Come on, we got to get you to the competition.

Madison (jerks away): I don’t want to compete.

Parker: What? Why not?

Madison: I don’t want to mess up again.

Parker: What are you talking about? When do you mess up? You’re great.

Madison: Seriously?

Parker: Oh. You were Marcy’s spotter.

Madison: I don’t know what went wrong. We’d done it a hundred times. Everything was going perfectly. (sits down) I just don’t want anyone else to get hurt.

(Nate clears his voice. Parker sits beside Madison)

Parker: Look... I’m not afraid of heights or falling or... Anything I probably should be. But do you know what I am afraid of? Letting down the people I care about. Look, you don’t have to compete if you don’t want to compete. But I think your friends are gonna feel a lot safer knowing that you’re there, instead of having no one there.

(Madison nods)

Parker: Right? Did, uh, that work? Because I kind of got to get all the way up to the roof, so... (leaves the area)

parker NEVER would have been able to be vulnerable and understanding like that in the earlier seasons and we are SO PROUD of her and her character growth

+

“But do you know what I am afraid of? Letting down the people I care about.”

SHE LOVES HER FAMILY SO MUCH AND NEVER WANTS ANYTHING TO HAPPEN TO THEM

also ,,, nate’s fond look at her when she’s saying this ??? im soft

- - - - -

Cheerleader: Ready! Ready!

Announcer: Let’s hear it for the MHS Badgers!

Announcer: Ready! Ready! Let’s go!

Nate: Ready?

[Congresswoman Berkus’ Office]

Hardison: Ready.

[Sophie’s Office]

Sophie: Ready.

[Hallway]

Eliot: Ready.

[Pep Athletics Headquarters]

Parker: Ready.

Nate: Let’s go.

they’re so extra I love them

- - - - -

Ashley: Where’s coach?

Madison: She’ll be here. She won’t let us down.

Man: Wolves, you’re up.

Female announcer: Let’s give it up for the Wolves.

Parker: I’m here! I’m here! I’m here! All right, let’s huddle up. I bet you guys could use a pep talk right about now, huh?

(cheerleaders agree)

Parker: For Marcy?

Madison: For Marcy.

Parker: Go, wolves.

All: Go-o-o-o, wolves!

(cheerleaders perform an outstanding routine. Barron approaches Nate as he watches)

parker THRIVED during this episode and you can’t change my mind

- - - - -

parker watching over the cheer team with pride is my religion

- - - - -

also BIG PROPS to the producers that showed male cheerleaders too

- - - - -

LeGrange: Hi. (to Parker) How are you? J.J. LeGrange.

Parker: I don’t vote.

parker is chaotic and we love her for it

- - - - -

Hardison: And what was that about?

Sophie: Huh? Oh, I was j... I was, um, just planning a little trip to the gulf. The military are breaking ground on Fort Devereaux.

Hardison: Fort Devereaux?

Sophie: Mm-hmm. I love government.

Parker: Missed you guys this week. Good game.

I WANNA SEE FORT DEVERAUX

also parker wrapping her arms around sophie and hardison, happy to have her people and admitting that she missed them? the pOWER

- - - - -

Nate: Good job on this one.

Eliot: I know what you’re trying to do, Nate. You could have told me how to hook LeGrange the whole time, but you wanted to see if I could figure it out on my own. I trust someday very, very soon, you’re gonna tell me what kind of game you’re playing.

Nate: Good job on this one.

(Nate walks away. Eliot smiles, but watches him walk away)

eliot’s bashful little smile at the end is everything

[lambourngb]

I was tagged by @aewriting to list my top 10 favorite male characters. Everyone should read her list, btw because it made me very nostalgic! I’m listing these historically, starting with the oldest.

1. Jim Craig from ‘The Man From Snowy River’ and ‘Return to Snowy River’ - As my icon reveals, I’m a horse person, so I can comfortably tell you I have seen both movies 1001 times, still cry in the second 1. But I loved the story of a man trying to prove himself in the wake of his father’s death, using his smarts, but also his compassion to succeed.

2. Alex Krycek -the X-Files oh man my first serious fandom love. I was swept up into it, and really my first experience with fanon- because good lord a million words were written about this character we knew nothing about, but he was pretty.

3. Dr. Julian Bashir- I’m a long time fan of trek- didn’t get into Jim Kirk until the reboot, but I loved Bashir and his enduring sense of compassion. Deep Space Nine was an intensely political, I loved how awkward Bashir was in making friends, how he seemed like he was way too much for people- how he slowly won over Miles, and then reveal of his estranged relationship with his parents over illegal genetic alterations? Ugh yes please.

4. Jack McCoy of Law & Order - I dunno, I’m a procedural cop/law show junkie, and I know Dick Wolf turns out a ton of them in cookie-cutter packages, but this guy was amazing, growing up Catholic with a drunk abusive dad forming how he advocated for victims of crime?? Also I’m forever sad about Claire and Jack.

5. Nicholas Fallin - The Guardian, -- so before Simon Baker was the clever and smug Patrick Jane, he played Nicholas Fallin, a rich lawyer who gets caught with drugs, and is sentenced to work for Child Services to represent kids in court. Listen, so many things are wrong with this premise because black/brown guys do hard time for drug offences- but there was something about seeing this slick, closed off man start to examine his own privilege, make changes, fight for sobriety, and work on his outside relationships, especially his tortured relationship with his dad.

6. Lt. Colonel John Sheppard - Stargate: Atlantis -his floppy brown hair and seeming disregard for his own life if it meant saving others? Plus a secret math genius from a very wealthy family with an estranged relationship with his dad? Yeah, I dug it.

7. Raylan Givens - Justified. While Breaking Bad was being hyped as the best off-network show, I was quietly dying at the quality and writing for Justified on Fx. Raylan had all of my kinks as you can see- tortured relationship with his dad, dead mother, firm sense of justice, continually making dumbass decisions with his dick, and he was clever.

8. Brad Colbert - Generation Kill. An outlier in the daddy issues, although he was adopted and has commitment issues after his fiancé left him for his best friend- Brad won my heart in his steely cool, squared away depiction of a Force Recon Marine in Iraq. Smart, resourceful, devoted to his men, and clever enough to gently guide his younger commanding officer in battle decisions (Nate! oh man) - I just loved his competence.

9. Bellamy Blake - The 100. Like from day 1 I loved this guy- he was loyal, protective, but tortured by the actions he had to take to protect his sister- like his overly developed responsibly gland was visible from space. Was I happy at how he fell morally in season 3? No, but it beautifully set up his redemption over the next few years. The man has made mistakes, he tries to do better, he forgives himself on some levels, but he never forgets it.

10. Alex Manes - no surprise fam that I love this character with my whole heart. I just wrote over 100,000 words in his POV. I loved the goth clothes and makeup as a fuck-you senior in high school, I love the sad plaid shirts as an adult. Obviously tortured relationship with his dad ticks that box I have. I just see him as a coolly competent, loyal, smart and compassionate person who will do what it takes to shield others from pain or disappointment, even at the cost of his own self. I think he has a complicated relationship with duty and military service, but ultimately sees it as a useful tool to better himself. It’s only 1 season of information, so I hope I get 7 seasons like I did with Bellamy, to see him rise, fall, and rise again as man who is able to forgive himself.

Next meme let’s do 10 Ten Female characters!

Thanks for the tag! Tagging from my recent notifications-  @zuluoscarecho , @caitlesshea , @larenoz, @malexforlife , @soberqueerinthewild and @unbreakablejemmasimmons

[afraschatz]

Leverage - The Grave Danger Job

It’s been a while since I did one of these, and I MISSED THE TEAM. Anyway, so I just randomly put in a DVD and out came The Grave Danger Job. So here are things I love about this episode: I love...

...the client’s reason for wanting the team to step in. The whole idea of scamming funeral home directors is just so atrocious and that woman sums it up so perfectly

... Parker hanging out in the back. Because that’s just how she rolls

... a Nate/Parker scene. They are too rare, really.

... “Faith. Faith, Parker“. - As someone who couldn’t be more agnostic if she tried, this is such a great way to frame that for me. Because like her, I don’t necessarily get the abstract concept but the show does such a great job to „un-abstractify“ it. Which yes, is totally a word

...Hardison’s and Eliot’s basement time (it’s one of the things I continuously love about this show. All these little off-hand comments that are just so inviting to make up your own backstory and that just always add more little pieces to the puzzle of all of their personal relationships. Because we all know that the two of them kept bickering aaaaall the way through that basement)

... Eliot being annoyed, Hardison being utterly unimpressed by it

... Leverage music. THANK YOU. Because seriously, I hate funeral home episodes and all the doom and gloom in them, and yes, I know it’s a serious thing and all that, but while the team definitely treats it as such (as they always do) the music once again tells us, hey, it’s gonna be fine

... Hardison in a suit <3 with cufflinks. And a horrible tie. Seriously, who bought that thing?

... Parker in a body bag <3<3<3

... Nate and Sophie funeral crashing. Because we all know that this is what they do in their free time as well

... Hardison being grossed out and Eliot making fun of it

... Eliot’s idea of a proper funeral-for-an-ex-con outfit hahaha

... Eliot complaining to Hardison about giving him the wrong information. Because yeah, that was TOTALLY an accident. Hardison, you dawg :D

... Eliot being so quick on his feet as always, going for the simplest and most believable explanation for his outfit. I have such a thing for him adapting so easily

...a casket named „Gentle Breeze“ hahaha

... one named „The Admiral“ because yeah, sure why not

... Hardison’s pinky finger touch. God, I love that he is so easily grossed out

...Sophie emotionally connecting with the dead guy, Nate who couldn’t care less

...“There’s a bunch of kids outside tagging cars“ - ELIOT, STOP BEING SO AWESOME AT THINKING ON THE FLY!

... „Bloody hell“ - I love when Sophie’s utter Britishness comes out. And what do you know, all it takes is Parker dangling in front of a window at a funeral home

...Parker dangling in front of a window at a funeral home

... Nate’s horrible, horrible improvisation. Nate and Sophie turning that improvised speech into a comedy show (Nate) and a Shakespearian drama (Sophie). And just that little detail about the unfaithful widow. Did I mention how I love all the little interpersonal background snippets that aren’t really neceessary but so so good?

... “But where is the money?!“

... two scams at once. I love this about the show, that there is a twist around every corner and that all of it is so fricking fast-paced

... the bad guy’s mobile phone. This has nothing to do with the show itself, really, but that seemingly ancient phone is the only thing that reminds me how old this episode actually is. Because all of the rest of the show? Fricking timeless <3

...family meal aka Chinese food and beer

...a Parker and Sophie scene. “How do you - care?“ God, I love her so much. And I love how her reaction to Sophie breaching the subject is a sigh and an eyeroll and the need to distance herself (totally get that, mate), and yet she listens because what Sophie says is maybe not even as important as how she says it - it’s not a long speech, it’s not about „but you should...“, it’s not prying. It’s answering the question that Parker asked and speaking from HER heart instead of making asumptions about Parker’s. Thank you, Sophie <3

... Parker’s burito eating face and his horribly large camera

... Sophie’s old woman accent

... both of which perfectly balance out the emotional Parker/Sophie scene from before

... the funeral boys being lazy sons

...Hardison and Nate’s little play in the diner

...Nate not blinking when he threatens people. Even when he is in character as a sleezy funeral home director

...the evil speech of evil and Nate’s well hidden disdain

...Nate’s voice when he is pretending to be harmless and a bit scared. You know, that nice guy voice, just a bit too soft to be real, just a bit too stuttery to be trusted - if you happen to know him

...now, the scene that ends with Hardison in a coffin. WHERE IS ELIOT? Dude, seriously. Why isn’t he hanging off a window outside??? (I love that that gets picked up later)

...the way Nate and Eliot talk to one another. I posted about this before, about how I love every 1:1 relationship on the show, and this is yet another example of it. The scene isn’t ABOUT their relationship (just as the little bit about Hardison and Eliot in the basement at the beginning wasn’t about them either) but if you want, you can see SO much about their relationship in this. Eliot waking Nate up and briefing him on the status quo, then looking for clues because Nate certainly doesn’t need mollycoddling. Eliot’s assessment of the evidence and Nate matter-of-factly confirming that („Yeah, got it“). This is how the two of them react in a stressful situation, especially when faced with the kind of emotional stress that is bound to unfold here. With a kind of super-rational coldness that may seem heartless but is the exact opposite; because this is what both of them know is needed.

...I mean I am really against Hardison in a grave, okay. BUT look at all those close ups of his faaaace. I mean, how pretty is he?

...Nate and Eliot arguing about why that situation went South. Because Nate ignored Eliot when Eliot said that he wanted to come with to protect his boyfriend err to provide backup. NATE. Damn you. Everything would be so much easier if everyone just listened to Eliot, like, 24/7. Trufax

...Hardison calling Parker <3

...Hardison freaking out. Aldis Hodge is sooooo good in this, showing how he tries to keep it together but is soooo fucking scared. Aaaah, baby.

...Nate once again proving that he is pretty much a dick. Dude, I know it’s not really helpful to have Hardison interrupt your impromptu crisis meeting, but to just mute him? WTF?

...Nate instantly kinda making up for it. Because it won’t help if the team leader sugar-coated the situation.He needs to be cold-blooded about this

...Nate and Eliot being the ones working this out because of this

...Hardison doing exactly what Eliot told him to (like everyone should)

...the short cut to them stealing the police car and the ambulance. I love the pace of this show and how of course they trust us to just get it

...Hardison working with what he has even if it’s not tech

...Sophie’s argument to Parker for why Hardison needs HER. Not because of emotional whatever (yes, because of that as well, but that isn’t helping anyone). But because she knows what she is doing. - As weird as that sounds, this next scene, that is the most emotional competence porn the show ever gave us.

...God, Aldis, you’re KILLING ME HERE. STOP IIIIT.

...thank fuck for a brief shot to Eliot and Nate and for them keeping it together because I surely am not

...Nate focussing not just on Hardison but also on Javier. Because someone needs to. Cold-Bloodedness pays off.

... “Where did you get the police car?“ - „It’s a rental.“ - You know that you’re up shit’s creek when Nate is not even trying to hide his sarcasm from you

...Eliot, stop playing with the thug and the shovel and RESCUE YOUR BOYFRIEND

...Hardisons desperate attempt cutting at the coffin turning out to be a strategy to get the compass. Again, of COURSE this is about emotions, this entire scene, but how great is it that throughout it is not simply victimizing Hardison? Yes, of course he needs his team to keep him sane and to get him out, but he is not just a damsel in distress. Smartest man.

... now, not to be that guy to make it even worse, but how horrible must those seconds be when Hardison loses contact and just hears machine gun fire outside? MAKE IT STOOOP

... „You have to make it through this. Because you’re my friend and I need you.“ - Yes, Hardison, I am choking as well.

...the utter speed with which Eliot runs to get Hardison out

...“Don’t do that again“ “I won’t“

...Hardison / Eliot hug

... Nate / Hardison hug

... Hardison / Sophie hug

... Parker’s breathlessness

...just deserts for Darlene and her boys and for Javier. Thank you, Nate

...Nate and Hardison computer porn err justice

...Hardison’s little boxing dance

...that Parker and Hardison scene. The shoulder touch. God, the kiss is sweet as well, as is Hardison giving her space, and his fucking smile (and hers), but that initial shoulder touch, that already slays me. That kind of physical comfort they take from one another, that has nothing to do with sex or want or lust, but is pure friendship, that is such a beautiful beautiful thing.

Did I recently mention how much I love this show? Because I do. As much as Parker loves Hardison’s shoulder bumps, as much as Eliot loves being forced into the basement with Hardison, as much as Sophie and Nate love funeral-crashing. Which is a whole damn lot really

[thesportssoundoff]

“Friday Night With Marlon Moraes” The UFC in Utica Preview

Joey

May 28th, 2018

A casual perusal of the Fight Night in Utica, reveals a nothing special lower level card to the average eye at least. It's very light on star power on a not normal UFC night from a place nobody probably equates MMA with (sorry Utica!) without the usual big hook and sell to it. After watching a PPV with some big names then the first MMA card in Chile and then the biggest free WW fight in quite some time in Till/Wonderboy, it might be hard for some folks to then turn around and get giddy over a show in Utica on a Friday night. Making matters worse? Its headlined by bantamweight which is still one of those weight classes struggling to find some acceptance. Having said all of that? I really like this card. It's not a great show by any stretch of the imagination but the main event is sublime, there's a few debuts I'm excited about on the card and there are some damn good action fights on it. It's not going to compete with UFC 225 for card of the year or anything but I believe it's well worth checking out on a Friday Night. Maybe you'll be able to say you saw the next bantamweight champion debut live.

Fights: 13

Debuts: 4 (Jose Torres, Nate Wood, Sijara Eubanks, Chance Rencountre)

Fight Changes/Injury Cancellations: (Bryan Barberena OUT, Ben Saunders IN vs Jake Ellenberger/Leonard Santos OUT, David Teymur IN vs Nik Lentz/Niko Price OUT, Chance Recountre IN vs Belal Muhammad, Hector Sandoval OUT, Jose Torres IN vs Jarrod Brooks)

Headliners (fighters who have either main evented or co-main evented shows in the UFC): 1 (Jake Ellenberger)

Fighters On Losing Streaks in the UFC: 6 (Ben Saunders, Jake Ellenberger, Gleison Tibau, Desmond Green, Walt Harris, Jessica Aguilar)

Fighters On Winning Streaks in the UFC:  6 (Jimmie Rivera, Marlon Moraes, Belal Muhammad, Gregor Gillespie, Vinc Pichel, David Teymur)

Main Card Record Since Jan 1st 2016 (in the UFC): 26-17

Marlon Moraes- 2-1 Jimmie Rivera- 3-0 Vinc Pichel- 2-0 Gregor Gillespie- 4-0 Walt Harris- 2-2 Daniel Spitz- 1-1 Ben Saunders- 2-3 Jake Ellenberger- 1-3 Daniel Teymur- 0-1 Julio Arce- 1-0 Sam Alvey- 6-3 Gian Villante- 2-3

Divisional Breakdown: Lightweight- 3 Welterweight- 2 Bantamweight- 2 Light Heavyweight- 1 Flyweight-1 Featherweight- 1 Heavyweight- 1 Women's Flyweight- 1 Strawweight- 1

Too High Up- Jake Ellenberger vs Ben Saunders

I feel bad for kicking two guys when they're down, I really do. Ben Saunders and Jake Ellenberger probably shouldn't be fighting anymore but this is MMA and you have to basically go out feet first. The winner of this fight will probably wind up getting fed to another dude way higher up in the food chain than them.The loser probably fights Michael Venom Page in Bellator. Both guys are on losing streaks with Ellenberger in particular rocking a nasty 3 wins in his last 10 fights. All of this paints the picture of a really sad fight on the main card because both Saunders and Ellenberger are still "names".

Too Low- Nik Lentz vs David Teymur

So why is this here on the prelims? Nik Lentz since moving up to 155 lbs is a cool 3-1 with wins over Will Brooks and Danny Castillo. David Teymur is 4-0 in the UFC with wins over Drakkar Klose and Lando Vannata plus he's normally good for either a snazzy finish or an exciting fight. Lentz isn't the same dude who would lay and pray his way to wins, dude's improved as a striker, has tremendous grappling chops and still brings pacing and cardio to all his fights. Color me bummed this one is buried on the prelims package since it's not even the prelim headliner (Sijara Eubanks vs Lauren Murphy is in that spot).

Stat Monitor for 2018: Debuting Fighters (Current number: 11-16):  Jose Torres, Nate Wood, Chance Rencountre, Sijara Eubanks

Short Notice Fighters (Current number: 12-6): Jose Torres, Chance Rencountre, David Teymur, Ben Saunders

Second Fight (Current number: 16-15): Jodie Esquibel, Julio Arce, Daniel Teymur

Cage Corrosion (Current number: 10-16, 5 straight wins):  Jessica Aguilar, Jake Ellenberger

Undefeated Fighters (Current number: 18-13): Gregor Gillespie, Jose Torres

Keeping An Eye On But Not Really:

The UFC Win Check Test The records of fighters who have 4 or more UFC fights (or three full calendar years in the organization) but 0 wins against people still in the UFC: Nik Lentz. I would've been SURE that Gleison Tibau would be here but Tibau has two insanely impressive in hindsight wins over Francisco Trinaldo and RDA. Dude was really good once.

Twelve Precarious Ponderings

1- Every fight is its own story and journey through the careers of two athletes. I'd be remiss if I didn't point out how friggin' insane the "How we got here" for both of these guys is. Marlon Moraes was 7-4 going into a fight with Miguel Torres on the first WSOF show, he was there to lose but apparently didn't get the memo. After beating Miguel Torres, Moraes was put up against WSOF's prized signing Tyson Nam. He finished Nam who was coming off an upset over Dudu Dantas which in turn made Moraes a bit of a fan favorite as this super underdog beating all of the hyped dudes. Moraes is now 20-5 which means that since his time as "the opponent" vs Torres until his UFC debut, he went undefeated and racked up 11 wins all over relatively quality competition. It's easy to accuse a dude on a run like his of can crushing but Sheymon Moraes, Josh Hill, Carson Beebe and Josenaldo Silva are quality regional fighters (Moraes has the ability to be a lot more). In the UFC, Moraes' lone loss is a "What can ya do?" split decision vs Rafa Assuncao who basically neutralized him as he tends to do. Since then Moraes decisioned John Dodson in a close scrappy fight and became the only man to finish Aljamain Sterling when he ruined his life with a step in knee. Moraes has proven his worth and his reward is his first ever UFC main event less than a year into his run with the organization.

The road was equally weird for Jimmie Rivera. Rivera's pre-UFC career is littered with fighters you'd know (Jared Papazian, Brian Kelleher, Willie Gates, Carson Beebe) in big time organizations (Bellator, WSOF, ROC and CFFC) but he never really stuck or found a home. Bellator used him frequently but for some reason, never featured him as a name. Perhaps that's because he was a guy who went to the decision more often than secured a dominant statement win. Maybe Rivera is just difficult to negotiate or deal with (more on that later) or perhaps he was just overlooked. He tried out for TUF and fought up a weight class in deference to his friend Louis Gaudinot. That decision proved to be the wrong one as Rivera drew Dennis Bermudez and lost by TKO in the try outs. Rivera eventually did make it to the UFC----as a short notice replacement on an international fight card. Since that point, RIvera has gone 5-0 with wins over Thomas Almeida, Pedro Munhoz and Urijah Faber. Jimmie Rivera has proven his worth in the UFC and his reward after being "the opponent" for what seems like his entire UFC run is his first ever main event spot in Utica.

There's a pride in this, I suppose. We see guys debut, get hyped and get main events far earlier in their careers than Rivera. We've seen guys be "the favorite" long after they've proven they're not the guy for the job while guys like Moraes have to just keep winning. For two guys who had to really earn it, I'm glad they're in a main event spot no matter if it's a Friday UFC event or a Fox spotlight. These guys earned it and in a sport where earn and deserve is more about timing and opinion, it's nice to have two definitive cases of "earning it" colliding at the same time.

2- I'd ALSO be remiss I suppose if I didn't point out how long it's taken this fight to come together. Both guys claim they were supposed to fight on the regional circuit but those sorts of "You might fight X" type rumors are what they are. What we DO know is that Moraes was offered the opportunity to fight Rivera in December as a fill in for Dom Cruz. Moraes said he couldn't make weight and depending on who you ask, he either needed to fight at 145 or higher to fight Rivera. The fight fell apart and THEN it was rebooked for UFC in Orlando. According to Moraes at least. Rivera has said that he wasn't offered a contract or wouldn't sign it or etc etc etc. Whatever the case may be or may not be, we've got it now. The whole back and forth created legitimate realistic tension.  Sometimes it's nice to have dudes who dislike one another a little bit.

3- Jimmie Rivera is currently the slight betting favorite and while that might seem controversial for some, I think it's insanely realistic that he can take a decision. Marlon Moraes' weakness has been guys who can counter strike with him, force him to think and react more than he wants to and challenge him with either a size or a speed advantage. Rivera can fight going forward and backwards, has all sorts of versatility to his game and carries consistent pop in his hands. He's not a fight finisher by any stretch but we've seen him drop dudes like Thomas Almeida and Iuri Alcantara. He's also far more likely to be active during the lulls where Moraes seems to just be trying to patiently stalk a dude down for power shots. Conversely Moraes winning this fight by KO is pretty possible as well given that Rivera loves to exchange, often times abandons defense and security for swangin' n bangin' PLUS Moraes really does hit fucking hard.

4- Is the main event a #1 contender fight? The winner will probably have a hell of a case for the shot, no? The alternatives are Raphael Assuncao who I'd bet the UFC would rather cut than put in a title shot if they were given only those options (although Rapha vs TJ/Cody winner sounds like a fantastic way to kick off your ESPN run), Dom Cruz or John Lineker.  Lineker is a guy who people assume is a draw but never really generates any numbers worthwhile of backing that up. Both Lineker headliners at BW did pretty poorly which, I suppose, helps create the mythos that BWs can't draw viewers. I also can't imagine an audience being that giddy for Lineker vs TJ 2 if Dillashaw wins again. You could make the argument that Dom Cruz has a case over both guys but if Garbrandt wins then whats the point? We've been there and Cruz was soundly handled by Cody. Cruz vs Dillashaw 2 might be a lot more intriguing a second time around for some folks? Still I couldn't count on Cruz to make it to fight night again since 2016 seemed like an anomaly across the board for him health wise. Perhaps the ultimate question mark is Rob Font who seems to be finally getting his act together en route to a clash with Raphael Assuncao in July.

5- So just WHO necessarily is it that the UFC is attempting to hype up and develop in the famed "special showcase third fight" slot? Will Harris is 34 years old and he's already been in the UFC for close to six years now on and off. Harris is coming off two straight losses and while he deserves credit for stepping up vs Fabricio Werdum on like thirty minutes notice, his performance vs Mark Godbeer was hilariously heavyweight. Is the focus on Daniel Spitz? Spitz is a newbie HW who has a 1-1 record in the UFC  with a win over Anthony Hamilton and a loss to Daniel Spitz. Was this just a case of wanting a big guy in a key spot because you've got a bantamweight and a lightweight up top?

6- Sijara Eubanks attempting to make the cut to 125 lbs again seems....dicey. I suppose conversely the same could be said for Lauren Murphy as well so let's just hope everybody makes weight healthily.

7- It took me 7 spots to talk about Gregor Gillespie and at first it kind of bothered me that I had forgotten about. In hindsight, I guess I just don't know what would make him worth remembering to begin with. As a fighter Gillespie is fantastic and while he's slowly creeping out of his athletic prime (he turned 31 in March), he's pretty much dominated everyone he's faced. The only thing a detractor could cling to would be a short brief moment where he was hurt in a firefight vs Jason Gonzalez, a fight he ultimately won in the second round. He's a tremendous wrestler with serious control on the ground plus his hands are really powerful. I just don't know what else there is to really comment on about him. Seems like a nice enough guy, am I right? He fights in an insane division where thus far he's wiped out everybody he's faced----but it's likehe's the world's biggest afterthought. He's really good and really forgettable at the same time. I hope this fight vs Vinc Pichel showcases more of why we SHOULD be excited about Gillespie's prospects. Pichel is one of those guys who exists just below the level of good but way above the level of opposition Gillespie has faced thus far. I'd like a bigger step up for Gregor but in a showcase fight with a moderate step up in competition, you could do a lot worse.

8- If you pay your $9.99 for UFC Fight Pass, your reward for such is the debut of two fascinating prospects who figure to be players in the lighter weight classes. We can begin with Nate Wood who is the easier of the two to explain. Think of everything you liked about Brad Pickett and then make him slightly less chinny and slightly more athletic. The wrestling improvements (or lack thereof) will determine his upside his ultimately. I think he has a more fundamental game than Tom Duquesnoy but I feel more confident on Duquesnoy turning into a bigger deal. On the same card you have the long overdue debut of Jose "Shorty" Torres, a tremendous prospect who has shades of everybody from Chris Weidman to Kelvin Gastelum in his game. He has tremendous pop in his hands, great cardio, a stalking power style on the feet and the ability to absolutely mix it up on the ground as well. I don't know if Torres will be as good as a lot of us think he can be but he's the most excited I've been about a lighter weight fighters debut since probably the aforementioned Duquesnoy last year. Shorty is a really good fighter who I think can comfortably be a force at either 125 lbs or 135 lbs. Both guys get tough matches as Nate Wood gets Johnny Eduardo and Jarrod Brooks welcomes Jose Torres to the UFC.

9- If Sam Alvey vs Gian Villante leaves the first round, I think you're within your right to spend the next 10-20 minutes doing something more important.

10- Daniel Teymur with a full TC is going to give Julio Arce more problems than people imagine. I think that speaks more to the qualities Teymur has than it does about Julio Arce.

11- We're six fights into Belal Muhammad's UFC career and I have zero idea what kind of fighter he really is at this point. I know he's good (wins over Randy Brown, Jordan Mein, Tim Means proves you're quality) but I have no idea if he's anything more than a placeholder in an aging 170 lb division. The Niko Price fight would've told us a lot about him but now he's facing the pretty good Chance Recountre; a regional fighter who would've probably found his way onto the DWTCS eventually.

12- Is Demond Green contractually obligated to just fight massive wrestlers in the UFC? Four fights in he's had Josh Emmett, Rustam Khabilov, the oversized Michel Prezares who was basically fighting at MW vs him and now Gleison Tibau.

Under Pressure

1- Jake Ellenberger

We might as well start here. Ellenberger is no longer the dude who flirted with title contention on multiple opportunities. Those days are long and gone. What remains? Well....it depends. We can start with the cynical view; the raw numbers aren't pretty. Ellenberger is coming up on close to 50 pro fights before the age of 35 in the USADA Era where the dramatic "he's turning back the clock!" runs aren't going to happen. Since the start of 2014, he's just 2-6 with only one decision loss. He's taken damage in his losses and of his two wins, he's Matt Brown changing his mind again away from having 0 current UFC wins. He's chinny, spotty with his offense and it's fair to wonder if he's just been figured out by better fighters who have evolved quicker than he has. An optimistic POV? Ellenberger was far too good for far too long to fall apart this quickly. The quality of competition hasn't helped either given his losses are to genuinely top tier dudes like Rory Mac, Robbie Lawler, Jorge Masvidal and Wonderboy. Even in the losses, he had some moments of life to make you believe that something STILL is in there. In his most recent fight vs Mike Perry, it sure felt like the "old" Ellenberger was back----right before Perry exploded his face with an elbow. He had glimpses vs Masvidal and I felt like he did damn good vs Tarec Saffiedine as well. What if this is just a really bad ugly sort of slide that'll eventually even itself out? Maybe against weaker competition even? Ben Saunders is really the last in the line for Ellenberger. It's win or go home.

2-Jimmie Rivera

Jimmie Rivera's 5-0 run has been fantastic during his time in the UFC----but outside of the cage? It hasn't been as smooth sailing. We detailed the Moraes fight scuffle but beyond that, Rivera sort of got put in an awkward spot as his wife and Aljamain Sterling had a back and forth on twitter that was pretty cringy. Beyond that Rivera has been known to turn down fights in the past and we know that puts a spotlight on a dude. He's not the guy the UFC "wants" so to speak as much as he's the one they got. Rivera has his main event in what is essentially home turf against an opponent with a ton of buzz. You gotta step up and show out.

3- Sijara Eubanks

The Eubanks we saw on TUF was a hell of a lot better than the Eubanks from Invicta. Even with that said, she got yanked from the event the day before fighting for the title due to an awful weight cut. She might've had enough to beat Nicco Montano but alas and alack, it's back to the drawing board. Lauren Murphy is a really tough go of it in your UFC debut but if the TUF Eubanks shows up? Good chance she pulls this off.

4- Jose "Shorty" Torres

It's short notice and that normally is the caveat needed. This is a different situation though. It's not just some prospect but arguably MMA's best unsigned prospect. We're talking about a guy in Jose Torres who is too good to not have these sorts of expectations put on him. He has the ability to be a genuine lightning bolt in a struggling 125 lb weight class or a blossoming 135 lb weight class. It's a lot of pressure to put on somebody making a short notice debut but again, Torres is a different kind of fighter and a different kind of prospect.

5- Vinc Pichel

He is the opponent. Gregor Gillespie is the guy that everybody is excited about which leaves Pichel in the spot of "don't lose too badly!" which is always a bad place to be. Pichel is the sort of fighter who presents enough stylistic questions for Gillespie that even if Gregor is better, you're still looking at a guy who has the ability to give Gillespie some problems.  The pressure is on Pichel to not get blown out here and test Gillespie.

Five Can't Miss Fights

1- Marlon Moraes vs Jimmie River

2- Jarred Brooks vs Jose Torres

3- Walt Harris vs Daniel Spitz on the Walt Harris factor alone

4- Julio Arce vs Daniel Teymur

5-  Nik Lentz vs David Teymur

[nancydhooper]

Randazza: Trump, Twitter, The NFL, and Everything

By Marc J. Randazza

The NFL says that players must stand (or remain in the locker room) during the National Anthem. No more "taking a knee." In the same week, Trump lost a case that says that the "interactive space" in his tweets is a "public forum" and thus he can't block people who criticize him. And, perhaps I did too much LSD in the 80s and 90s, but I see the two as intertwined. The real problem we have is that freedom of expression is the crown jewel in the American enlightenment, but that jewel is tarnished by the fact that our public square is increasingly privately owned. Privatization of the "public square" threatens to render the First Amendment meaningless.

We gotta fix that – or the First Amendment will only really exist in a few tiny spaces — "free speech zones" surrounded (literally or figuratively) by fences to keep the nasty stuff inside.

The NFL

The whole "take a knee" thing needs little explanation. Starting in 2016, some NFL players protested racial inequality in policing by taking a knee during the national anthem before games. The protests began with San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick who initially sat during the anthem. He then had a talk with Nate Boyer, a veteran and former NFL player, who convinced him that sitting during the Anthem was disrespectful. However, the two agreed that taking a knee was a more reverent way to get the same message across.

Personally, I find the whole thing rather ineffective. Take a knee, don't take a knee. Nobody ever changed their mind about how cops behave or racism or anything over an NFL player taking a knee. But that isn't the test for whether the speech has value.

I may find the protest foolish, but I respect the hell out of Kaepernick for doing it. I support any player who wants to do it. If there's one thing that is supposed to differentiate the USA from the rest of the world, it is our purple-mountains-star-spangled commitment to freedom of expression. The second most patriotic thing we have is the National Football League.

Don't start with me with baseball, a boring ass adaptation of a crumpet-eating fairy-assed game from England that is primarily played by Dominicans. Basketball? Yeah, we invented it, but at its core it is a stupid game. Sure, we're the goddamn best at it, and unless we're playing it against the Croatians, we're going to win 101 times out of 100. The Canadians may have a "football league," but it would more appropriately be called the NFL's recycling bin. No other country even tries to compete with us in football. It is America's game. So it goddamn ought to reflect American values, as best it can.

Allowing protest and dissent ought to be ingrained at a chromosomal level if you think that you're amber-waves-of-grain entitled to wave the red, white, and blue.

So fuck the NFL for this policy.

And let me slap you across the face right now if you're starting with a comment like "well actually the NFL is a private employer, so it can have any policy it wants." This morning, I downed an entire mug of espresso, and 10 minutes later I took a huge shit that knows more about Constitutional law than you and your entire family ever will.

This isn't about what the NFL can do, it is about what it ought to do.

And dammit, the NFL ought to let its players take a fucking knee if they want to.

I will go get that shit out of the toilet and throw it at you, as if I were a caged chimp, if you start with the "oh, the NFL policy is just like Nazi Germany!" If that's your view, then correct it in the next 3 minutes, or you get sterilized when I am dictator. No, no, no, no, you fucking imbecile. Sure, Trump has expressed his view that you should "get out of America" if you don't stand for the anthem. That is a dumb-ass-moron position. But, it is hardly the government extending its hand down and pressing on the scale.

Do you think NFL players should shut up and do their job? Ok, fair enough. But, what makes you think that an NFL player can't be a voice of moral leadership? Remember Chris Kluwe? Back before it was cool to say you were in favor of gay rights, Kluwe had the balls to stand up and voice his support (I respected him for that). Did it matter? I think it did. Kluwe doesn't say much now, except for stalking articles about me, whining about who my clients are. Whatever, Kluwe, start shit with me and I'll just have my friend, Mercedes Carrera, intellectually kick your ass again.

But back to the subject at hand: If you think that the players ought to shut up and do their jobs and keep politics out of football, then lets try that.

No, lets really try that.

In 2015, Arizona Sens. Jeff Flake (R) and John McCain (R) revealed in a joint oversight report that nearly $5.4 million in taxpayer dollars had been paid out to 14 NFL teams between 2011 and 2014 to honor service members and put on elaborate, “patriotic salutes” to the military. Overall, they reported, “these displays of paid patriotism [were] included within the $6.8 million that the Department of Defense (DOD) [had] spent on sports marketing contracts since fiscal year 2012.” (source) (other source) (other source)

The NFL took millions of dollars in propaganda money from the military. So the WHOLE FUCKING THING is one big ball of political propaganda. At least the kneelers are honest and open about it. You fucking rubes who stand up during the anthem don't even remember that it wasn't even a thing until 2009. And, can someone remind me who was president during 2011 and 2014 when we were shoveling barrels full of taxpayer dollars into the pockets of billionaires to make sure that the uneducated slobs in the stands were sufficiently reminded of the message that "America" means bombing the living shit out of people thousands of miles away?

So lets put a pin in that… millions of taxpayer dollars flowing toward the NFL for propaganda purposes. And lets add in the billions that the NFL and its teams get in taxpayer subsidies.

Twitter (and all of Silicon Valley) – the New Censorship

After the 2016 election, the Left freaked the fuck out. Quite honestly, none of us thought Trump could be elected. And the morning after, the Trump derangement syndrome set in. Nowhere did it set in more heavily than in Silicon Valley. So, the platforms immediately got to work making sure that they did their part to ensure that we would have a "blue wave" washing away our sins. They got to work banning anyone perceived as "alt-right." It started with literal Nazis, and then it continued to those who might associate with them, to others who simply harbored conservative views. All of this was under the opaque guise of "safety."

It was all bullshit, and we all knew it. If you didn't know it, you were willfully blind.

I don't have a lot of love for Richard Spencer's speech. I don't even like Andrew Anglin's speech, and I'm his goddamn lawyer. I do like Milo Yiannopolous, but that's beside the point. The point is that they started with speakers that would be easy to ban — speakers who lots of people disliked. And they proved that there wasn't a goddamn thing we could do about it.

And very few people saw this as the alarming move that it was. But, as Twitter, Facebook, GoDaddy, PayPal, Stripe, etc. all got into line — shaving off a large percentage of right wing speech, the left cheered. Yay! Maybe we can win next time! Yay Resistance! Go fuck yourselves — you're not a member of any "resistance" unless you just might get captured or killed — and you're certainly not part of any "Resistance" when you control most of the new public square, and you use that virtually monopolistic power to shut down debate.

The fact is, Twitter, Facebook, and Google are the new public squares, and that gives them incredible power. And they are using that power exactly the way a power-drunk dictator would use it — to try and suppress speech they don't like. If you're on the Right, you bemoan. If you are on the Left, you're probably cheering it (just the opposite of the tribal alignment on the NFL issue). But, if you're on the Left and you're cheering it, you're also probably the kind of person who would let a rabid chimp out of its cage if you thought it would tear off your enemy's face — not realizing that it will also turn on you and rip your face off, and your balls, and then probably sodomize you as it ate the back of your head.

Because one day, the CEO of Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, or Google is going to want to run for president. And then, you fucking idiots, they'll have nothing stopping them from suppressing any and all speech that supports their opponents. You'll have the equivalent of Silvio Berlusconi buying power by owning all the private networks.

A few of us see this danger. That's why I volunteered to work on a case for Jared Taylor, suing Twitter for banning him. Twitter filed an Anti-SLAPP motion, and we just got our opposition in. (Complaint, Memo ISO Anti-SLAPP, Opposition to Anti-SLAPP). The case went pretty well so far – if you want to read the transcript, here it is. At least one judge found that the suit has some merit — at least enough to move forward.

Naturally, many have criticized the case — especially since there are many who find Section 230 to be something worthy of religious devotion.

Section 230, for the uninitiated, is a law that was passed during the Clinton administration, which gives Silicon Valley immunity from virtually all lawsuits based on content provided by others. This is why you can post something obviously defamatory on Twitter, and even if Twitter knows it is defamatory and knows it is harming you, it can, and will, say "Fuck you, See 47 U.S.C. § 230."

Now when the Silicon Valley giants said "Fuck you, Section 230" in the past, it at least had some semblance of philosophical honesty in it. Until recently, Silicon Valley loved freedom of speech. The whole promise of the Internet was that we were going to see an explosion of diversity of thought. For a brief period, we did. Some of it was awesome — and some of it was not. We got more porn, more humor, more political engagement, Mr. Spock Ate My Balls, and we also got racist websites, sexist websites, and every other kind of scoundrel online that we could think of. But, we all expected that the marketplace of ideas would flourish. I would like to say it did.

Then came 2016.

In the lead up to the election and in the aftermath of it, the Left lost its fucking mind. Campuses went into overdrive banning speech they didn't like, and Silicon Valley gleefully followed suit. And we on the Left, who once hated corporations and hated the control they might have had over the market, cheered. (I didn't, but as a Leftist myself, I have to accept guilt for my tribe's sins).

Might Trump's Thin Skin Save Us?

Trump is the first "Twitter President." It makes me want to bash my head into the wall to type those words, but here we are.

He got sued for blocking critics on Twitter, and much to my surprise, a judge in the Southern District of New York held that Twitter is a "public forum" — well, at least in part. You see, she couldn't bear to actually rule that Twitter is a new public forum. I think it is. My view is consistent with the old Pruneyard decision. Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74 (1980). In that case, since the California constitution has an affirmative right to free speech, it could be interpreted as requiring private property owners to allow petitioning on their property, if it is a public space. This decision is not without its detractors. If you're a private property rights guy, you might hate this decision — because it does force a private property owner to allow speech it doesn't like on its private property. But, I think that if free speech means anything, it can't simply be the victim of progress moving the town square to an enclosed shopping mall, or even online.

The judge in the Trump case held:

we consider whether forum doctrine can be appropriately applied to several aspects of the @realDonaldTrump account rather than the account as a whole: the content of the tweets sent, the timeline comprised of those tweets, the comment threads initiated by each of those tweets, and the “interactive space” associated with each tweet in which other users may directly interact with the content of the tweets by, for example, replying to, retweeting, or liking the tweet. (Op. @ 41)

She had to rule against Trump. So, she created a new "public forum" limited to the comment threads in public officials' twitter feeds.

I think her decision is open to attack. I could see a pretty clean "Twitter isn't a public forum" decision. I could also see "Twitter is a public forum." But, this half-way decision is bullshit. Lets look at it this way: Twitter bans you because you make fun of Leslie Jones' face. Now you're banned also from the "public forum" of your President's tweets. If we were to analogize it, lets say there was a public park, designated for free speech activities. We privatize the area you have to go through to get into the park. The company that owns that area you have to go through just lets anyone go in and out. But, one day they decide that they just don't want to let anyone in who has ever been a proponent of legalizing marijuana, or who claims that there is a "wage gap," or who supports "Black Lives Matter."

Hey, it is a private property owner. Tough shit if they won't let you on their property. The free speech zone is there for you if you can maybe teleport into it.

So, the Trump decision is, perhaps, the crack in the wall. But, that leaves us with the NFL, and it also leaves us with the possibility that the 2d Circuit throws out this intellectually dishonest decision.

We have the power to break this

So what the fuck do we do?

The First Amendment is a wonderful thing, but what happens if the government just decides to give away all its public spaces to corporations and individuals who support its views? Don't laugh… in San Diego, the government let a huge crucifix go up on public land in a clear establishment clause violation. Federal court ruled against the government, so the government "sold" the little circle of land that the cross was on to a private group. Private group then kept the cross up on its land. That was deemed constitutional by a three member panel of the 9th Circuit.

So how do we fix it?

How about the First Amendment restoration act?

"No private entity may receive any governmental funds nor receive any statutory immunity unless it agrees to be bound by the First Amendment as if it were a government actor."

Why not?

Imagine if the NFL had to choose between receiving taxpayer funds or allowing its players to exercise their First Amendment rights. Imagine if Facebook had to choose between Section 230 immunity and incorporating the First Amendment into its terms and conditions.

Imagine if the First Amendment got the shot in the arm that it desperately needs.

Are there problems to be worked out here? You bet. How would I apply this to the comments section here, at Popehat? Maybe that's a bit too small of an actor to be subject to this Act? I've run this by some smart people — one suggested having it only apply to any companies that might be publicly traded or federally or state regulated. That way we would have just the giants, banks, etc. That might work.

What is clear is that what we have now is a road toward disaster. Because these private constraints on public speech are getting worse, more opaque, and more restrictive — and if we don't do something soon, we won't ever be able to get a handle on it.

And then you'll be left with a First Amendment that only applies in the gazebo in your public park, on alternate Thursdays.

Copyright 2017 by the named Popehat author. from RSSMix.com Mix ID 8247012 https://www.popehat.com/2018/06/19/randazza-trump-twitter-the-nfl-and-everything/ via http://www.rssmix.com/