10-22-2018 12:21:07 PM -0700
10-22-2018 09:32:15 AM -0700
10-22-2018 07:13:32 AM -0700
10-21-2018 04:49:40 PM -0700
10-21-2018 10:49:06 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

Friday's HOT MIC

Friday's HOT MIC

Boycott San Francisco?

Conservatives angry with the Kate Steinle decision (see Liz's great recap of the verdict here) have decided to boycott San Francisco, and the hashtag went viral on Twitter.

Here's a good example from former prosecutor Mark Pantano.

Naturally, liberals also tweeted the hashtag, mocking it mercilessly because ... Twitter's offices are in San Francisco. Is it ironic to tweet a boycott of the city while using a platform based in the city? Worse, the verdict was decided by a jury. Should San Francisco pay for the actions of a jury? It is a "sanctuary city," but the city did not make the decision, a jury did.

To boycott San Fran or not to boycott it? I understand the outrage, but I don't think a boycott will achieve much.