Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Amazon demonetizes conservative website (us) [Updated]

Amazon demonetizes conservative website (us) [Updated]

Our participation in Amazon Associates terminated without warning, with false and shifting explanations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JROFIBGh1lI

For as long as I can remember, Legal Insurrection has participated in Amazon Associates, a way for websites to earn fees when readers shop at Amazon.com via links from our website.

It was an important source of revenue to us, and paid for some of the operating expenses readers never see.

On Saturday morning, April 28, 2018, I woke up to an email in my inbox from Amazon Associates telling me our participation in the program was terminated, our account closed, that the decision was final and there was no appeal. On top of that, Amazon was holding back any accumulated money it owed us.

There was no prior indication of a problem, or chance to cure. It’s always been our intent to comply with the program requirements. I detail what happened, including all the email communications, below.

In isolation, it’s just a website cut off from a source of revenue by an internet behemoth because the internet behemoth could. But if there was an anti-conservative ideological angle to it, either at inception or during the review process, it would be consistent with what is happening at high tech companies more generally. The problems Prager U and others have had with video restrictions and demonetization at YouTube, the exposure of Twitter shadow-banning, and the intolerance revealed at Google are just a few of the examples of an anti-conservative bias among internet giants.

We have not been immune to such problems, YouTube removes influential conservative website’s channel.

Amazon does not perform the same gatekeeper role as other internet giants, but it is not just a shopping site. Its cloud computing service plays an increasingly important role in access to information, potentially including such giants such as the Department of Defense.

Now that the month-long futile process of seeking reinstatement is over, it is clear to me that someone at Amazon wanted us gone. Amazon Associates came up with false explanations as to our alleged violation of the Operating Agreement, then additional false explanations, and at the very end a new explanation that was previously resolved 5 months ago to Amazon’s satisfaction.

As I was going through this process, the proverbial light bulb went on when when I saw an article at The Daily Caller about a problem at a different Amazon program, Prominent Christian Legal Group Barred From Amazon Program While Openly Anti-Semitic Groups Remain.

False and Shifting Reasons for Termination

The reason given in the April 28 termination email was that we violated the Operating Agreement as follows:

“You are promoting your Special Links in an offline manner, such as printed material, mailing, or oral solicitation.”

Over the following weeks I repeatedly explained to Amazon on the phone, through its Amazon Associates portal, and by email, that we did not do any of those things, and that this termination explanation made no sense.

I asked Amazon to provide me with evidence that we did any of those things, but was told they could not tell me because it was proprietary. As I pressed the issue, Amazon began to add new reasons why we were terminated:

“You are incentivizing others to visit the Amazon Site via your Special Links by offering rebates, cashback, discounts, points, donations to charity, or other incentives, or by stating that customers can support you by shopping through your Special Links.”

Again, this was bizarre. We didn’t do any rebates, cashback, discounts, points, donations to charity, or other incentives. Moreover, as I explained in writing to Amazon, stating that a customer can support us does not actually violate the Operating Agreement, which permits disclosure that we earn a fee. I wrote:

We DO NOT offer rebates, cashback, discounts, points, donations to charity, or other incentives. We DO state that readers can help us by using our links, but that is NOT PROHIBITED anywhere in the Operating Agreement. To the contrary, the Operating Agreement, paragraph 5, specifically permits us to inform customers that we are helped by purchases: “As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.”

Accordingly, we do not do any of the things of which we have been accused except for indicating that we are helped by purchases, which we are permitted to say under the terms of the Operating Agreement.

Please have this reviewed by a Supervisor since we are not in violation of the Operating Agreement and our account has been incorrectly terminated.

Similar language has been permitted in the prior version of the Operating Agreement as well, which permitted the following:

“We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.”

So we didn’t do any of the things in the termination email, or most of the things in the appeal decision. The one thing we did do, let readers know that purchasing through our links helps us, is expressly permitted under the current and prior versions of the Operating Agreement.

A Supervisor at Amazon did respond further, repeating the same alleged Operating Agreement violations addressed above, and declining to tell me what it was we did that was a violation:

After diving into the account it seems our account specialist with associates has provided you with the correct information. Due to the proprietary nature of the process, we can’t share the criteria by which the process for decision of termination was made.

In another effort to understand what it was we did, I emailed again:

You say that you cannot share the criteria, but can you provide me with any specific examples where we have violated the operating agreement in the manner suggested in the termination emails? I also wonder why if there are such an examples we are not given an opportunity to cure the problem.

I also emailed both Amazon Associates and Amazon media relations seeking comment on this bizarre situation, and asking why we were targeted:

We are a popular conservative politics and law website which has been a participant in Amazon Associates for several years.

On April 28, 2018, we received a notice shutting our account without any advance notice or ability to cure, and most important, without telling us specifically what we did that allegedly violated the Operating Agreement. We have communicated several times (see email chain below) with Amazon Associates, and while they have cited two broad provisions of the Operating Agreement, they refuse to tell us what we did that would be a violation (we deny violating the Operating Agreement).

Given concerns about Amazon and other major internet players shutting down and demonitizing conservative political websites and media properties, and since Amazon will not give us examples of what we allegedly did that violates the Operating Agreement, we find it likely that someone at Amazon determined to shut us down and the citations to broad provisions of the Operating Agreement were just a pretext.

I never heard from Amazon Media Relations, but I did hear from Amazon Associates again, and this time they added a completely new justification for the termination, that we used Amazon links in emails:

As stated in our previous communications, our decision to terminate your Associates account is final. Any further requests to review your account for reinstatement will not receive a response.

Because you are not in compliance with the Operating Agreement, Amazon will not pay you any outstanding fees related to your account. Amazon exercises its right under the terms of the Operating Agreement to withhold fees based on violations, which include the following:

-You are promoting your Special Links by including them in emails to your customers.

-You are incentivizing others to visit the Amazon Site via your Special Links by stating that customers can support you by shopping through your Special Links.

This is the first time during the termination communications that Amazon Associates raised the issue of emails. That was an old issue resolved to Amazon’s satisfaction 5 months ago. We used to include an Amazon link in our Morning Insurrection newsletter. We were contacted by Amazon in early January 2018, and given five days to fix the use of the link in emails, which it claimed violated the Operating Agreement. It’s not clear that that even is a violation, but it didn’t matter, we complied with Amazon’s request, and they were satisfied. I included the screenshot in my response regarding the termination:

Now you are raising the email issue, but this was addressed with Amazon last January. When it was called to our attention, we removed the link and have not included the link in our newsletter since then, and Amazon acknowledged that:

So why has this issue been raise now 5 months after it was remedied within the timeline required by Amazon?

We also are permitted, under the express terms of the Operating Agreement, to inform readers that we earn a fee (we don’t go even that far, just say they can help us), so you are inventing an Operating Agreement violation that is not in fact a violation of the Operating Agreement.

You say you will not respond further, but someone at Amazon is not applying the Operating Agreement correctly. You should reinstate us.

No further response from Amazon.

Clearly someone wanted us gone. The first and second lists of violations were either things we didn’t do or were not in fact violations of the Operating Agreement. In the last and final communication, Amazon raised an issue which may not even be a violation, but in any event was resolved to Amazon’s satisfaction 5 months ago and never before given as a reason for termination.

None of this passes the smell test.

Timeline and Emails

Here is the timeline and emails:

***********************************

Amazon Associates
Apr 28

to me

Dear Sir or Madam,

We are writing to tell you that, effective as of today’s date, Amazon is terminating your Associates account and the Operating Agreement that governs it. Under the terms of the Operating Agreement (https://affiliate-program.amazon.com/help/operating/agreement), we may terminate your account at any time, with or without cause. This decision is final and not subject to appeal.

Because you are not in compliance with the Operating Agreement, Amazon will not pay you any outstanding advertising fees related to your account. Amazon exercises its right under the Operating Agreement to withhold fees based on violations, which include the following:

-You are promoting your Special Links in an offline manner, such as printed material, mailing, or oral solicitation.

It is important that you immediately stop using the Content and Amazon Marks and promptly remove from your Site(s) and delete or otherwise destroy all links to the Amazon site, all Amazon Marks and all other and any other materials provided or made available by or on behalf of us to you under this Operating Agreement or otherwise in connection with the Program.

Please be aware that any other accounts you have, or may open in the future, may be closed without payment of any fees. Amazon reserves all other rights and claims.

Want to help the Associates team improve our emails? Please take minute to take a three question survey. Click here

Warmest Regards,

Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/associates

****************************

Appeal submitted via Amazon Online Portal (no copy available to me) disputing any conduct that would violate the cited provision of the Operating Agreement, and also in phone call to Amazon Associates customer service, who told me it would be referred for review. Such review normally takes 2 business days, but when no response was received after several days, I called again. Was told that it was under review and I should hear in a couple of days. When no response received, I called a third time and was was told it was under review, and taking longer than usual for reasons the person  was not aware of. Finally received the email below.

********************

Amazon Associates
May 9

to me

Dear Sir or Madam,

We received your appeal regarding the termination of your Associates account. A specialist has reviewed your account and the decision to terminate your account was found to be correct. As stated previously, under the terms of the Operating Agreement (https://affiliate-program.amazon.com/help/operating/agreement), we may terminate your account at any time, with or without cause. This termination is final and not subject to appeal.

Because you are not in compliance with the Operating Agreement, Amazon will not pay you any outstanding fees related to your account. Amazon exercises its right under the terms of the Operating Agreement to withhold fees based on violations, which include the following:

-You are promoting your Special Links in an offline manner, such as printed material, mailing, or oral solicitation.

-You are incentivizing others to visit the Amazon Site via your Special Links by offering rebates, cashback, discounts, points, donations to charity, or other incentives, or by stating that customers can support you by shopping through your Special Links.

It is important that you immediately stop using the Content and Amazon Marks and promptly remove from your Site(s) and delete or otherwise destroy all links to the Amazon site, all Amazon Marks and all other and any other materials provided or made available by or on behalf of us to you under this Operating Agreement or otherwise in connection with the Program.

Please be aware that any other accounts you have, or may open in the future, may be closed without payment of any fees pursuant to our rights under the Operating Agreement. Amazon reserves all other rights and claims.

Warmest Regards,

Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/associates

****************************

Legal Insurrection <[email protected]>
May 9

to Amazon

I request that this be escalated to a Supervisor. The decision to terminate the account is not supported by any facts as to what we do.

The original reason given in the original termination email was:

“You are promoting your Special Links in an offline manner, such as printed material, mailing, or oral solicitation.”

In my appeal, I pointed out that we don’t do any of those things. We are strictly online.

In the response to my appeal, you have added an additional reason:

“You are incentivizing others to visit the Amazon Site via your Special Links by offering rebates, cashback, discounts, points, donations to charity, or other incentives, or by stating that customers can support you by shopping through your Special Links.”

We DO NOT offer rebates, cashback, discounts, points, donations to charity, or other incentives. We DO state that readers can help us by using our links, but that is NOT PROHIBITED anywhere in the Operating Agreement. To the contrary, the Operating Agreement, paragraph 5, specifically permits us to inform customers that we are helped by purchases: “As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.”

Accordingly, we do not do any of the things of which we have been accused except for indicating that we are helped by purchases, which we are permitted to say under the terms of the Operating Agreement.

Please have this reviewed by a Supervisor since we are not in violation of the Operating Agreement and our account has been incorrectly terminated.

Thank you,

William A. Jacobson

***********************************

Hello William,

This is [name redacted] a member of the leadership team with Amazon.com. I am glad I was able to assist you with providing you the information you requested regarding your Amazon Associates account. I completely understand your frustration with this issue. After diving into the account it seems our account specialist with associates has provided you with the correct information. Due to the proprietary nature of the process, we can’t share the criteria by which the process for decision of termination was made. However I can confirm the information provided to you was correct and can be found below:

A specialist has reviewed your account and the decision to terminate your account was found to be correct. As stated previously, under the terms of the Operating Agreement (https://affiliate-program.amazon.com/help/operating/agreement), we may terminate your account at any time, with or without cause. This termination is final and not subject to appeal.

Because you are not in compliance with the Operating Agreement, Amazon will not pay you any outstanding fees related to your account. Amazon exercises its right under the terms of the Operating Agreement to withhold fees based on violations, which include the following:

-You are promoting your Special Links in an offline manner, such as printed material, mailing, or oral solicitation.

-You are incentivizing others to visit the Amazon Site via your Special Links by offering rebates, cashback, discounts, points, donations to charity, or other incentives, or by stating that customers can support you by shopping through your Special Links.

It is important that you immediately stop using the Content and Amazon Marks and promptly remove from your Site(s) and delete or otherwise destroy all links to the Amazon site, all Amazon Marks and all other and any other materials provided or made available by or on behalf of us to you under this Operating Agreement or otherwise in connection with the Program.

Please be aware that any other accounts you have, or may open in the future, may be closed without payment of any fees pursuant to our rights under the Operating Agreement. Amazon reserves all other rights and claims.

I hope this information helps, please understand we do not have any further insight on this matter but we will be more than happy to assist with any further Amazon related questions or concerns outside this issue.

Best regards,
[name redacted]
Amazon.com

*******************************

Legal Insurrection <[email protected]>
May 9

to customer-servi.

You say that you cannot share the criteria, but can you provide me with any specific examples where we have violated the operating agreement in the manner suggested in the termination emails? I also wonder why if there are such an examples we are not given an opportunity to cure the problem.

*****************************

Legal Insurrection <[email protected]>
May 12
to amazon-pr, amazon-ir, Amazon

We are a popular conservative politics and law website which has been a participant in Amazon Associates for several years.

On April 28, 2018, we received a notice shutting our account without any advance notice or ability to cure, and most important, without telling us specifically what we did that allegedly violated the Operating Agreement. We have communicated several times (see email chain below) with Amazon Associates, and while they have cited two broad provisions of the Operating Agreement, they refuse to tell us what we did that would be a violation (we deny violating the Operating Agreement).

Given concerns about Amazon and other major internet players shutting down and demonitizing conservative political websites and media properties, and since Amazon will not give us examples of what we allegedly did that violates the Operating Agreement, we find it likely that someone at Amazon determined to shut us down and the citations to broad provisions of the Operating Agreement were just a pretext.

We are considering writing about this shut down on our website, possibly as early as Sunday night, May 13, and would like to provide Amazon an opportunity to comment. Accordingly, please send me any comment by 3 p.m. Eastern on Sunday, May 13.

Regards,

William A. Jacobson

Here is the email chain:****

****************************

Amazon Associates
May 14
to me

Dear Sir or Madam,

As stated in our previous communications, our decision to terminate your Associates account is final. Any further requests to review your account for reinstatement will not receive a response.

Because you are not in compliance with the Operating Agreement, Amazon will not pay you any outstanding fees related to your account. Amazon exercises its right under the terms of the Operating Agreement to withhold fees based on violations, which include the following:

-You are promoting your Special Links by including them in emails to your customers.

-You are incentivizing others to visit the Amazon Site via your Special Links by stating that customers can support you by shopping through your Special Links.

It is important that you immediately stop using the Content and Amazon Marks and promptly remove from your Site(s) and delete or otherwise destroy all links to the Amazon site, all Amazon Marks and all other and any other materials provided or made available by or on behalf of us to you under this Operating Agreement or otherwise in connection with the Program.

Please be aware that any other accounts you have, or may open in the future, may be closed without payment of any advertising fees pursuant to our rights under the Operating Agreement. Amazon reserves all other rights and claims.

Warmest Regards,

Amazon.com
http://www.amazon.com/associates

************************************

Legal Insurrection <[email protected]>
May 20
to Amazon

Now you are raising the email issue, but this was addressed with Amazon last January. When it was called to our attention, we removed the link and have not included the link in our newsletter since then, and Amazon acknowledged that:

So why has this issue been raise now 5 months after it was remedied within the timeline required by Amazon?

We also are permitted, under the express terms of the Operating Agreement, to inform readers that we earn a fee (we don’t go even that far, just say they can help us), so you are inventing an Operating Agreement violation that is not in fact a violation of the Operating Agreement.

You say you will not respond further, but someone at Amazon is not applying the Operating Agreement correctly. You should reinstate us.

UPDATE 5-25-2018 8 p.m.

The Daily Caller News Foundation tried to get answers from Amazon and found “Amazon’s claim that Legal Insurrection used language that implied Amazon supports Legal Insurrection is dubious at best” and Amazon “would not provide TheDCNF … with details” as to the alleged email linking violation.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:
,

Comments


healthguyfsu | May 23, 2018 at 7:09 pm

Disgusting group and the lack of appeal, remedy, or clear explanation is definite grounds for civil remedies if that would be a possibility.

    The remedy is to vote with your pocketbook.

    The hell with Amazon. Go to Walmart.com.

    Enough with this fascist industrialists. The last time they pulled this crap, they enabled Adolph Hitler – whom they thought they could manipulate. Hitler turned out to be a lot more talented than “barack hussein obama,” or whoever the hell he really is.

    Take Bezos and shove him up Neflix’s behind.

      Milhouse in reply to TheFineReport.com. | May 23, 2018 at 9:11 pm

      Finally FineReports writes something I agree with. Right now I’m too invested in Amazon to boycott it immediately (got points and gift cards to spend), but a boycott is the right response and as soon as I’m in a position to I would join it. But not just a few of us, it has to be an organized effort that can have a real impact, something to show Bezos that his foolish policies hurt his bottom line.

      I’ve been doing a bit of research because I spend a lot of money at Amazon and appreciate the inexpensive products, cheap/free shipping, and fast service. However, I will not stay if this is not reversed and then LI’s site properly reinstated and not just in name only (i.e. they appear to cave but end up “shadow banning” us).

      It turns out that everything I get from Amazon, I can get from Walmart and Overstock (Overstock is not run by leftist loons). I won’t miss Prime for streaming, either, since they changed the set-up and you have to “subscribe” (i.e. pay) for a lot of shows/movies that used to be included in Prime. They have nothing I want to watch that I can’t watch elsewhere.

      I’m sputtering mad about this if you can’t tell.

    I suggest setting up a sucks web site, with subdomains for each of the offending businesses using their trademark, then encourage all conservatives and conservative web sites to start frequently mentioning and linking to the various subdomains. The format would be Amazon.word-sucks.xxx. using sucks in the domain name is related to case law.

    There should be an intellectual property attorney on hand to deal with those companies who object to the criticism.

    Actively refer people to competitors of these companies. One example might be wikibuy.

    Also, looking into hosting everything either with smaller businesses or creating a hosting entity specifically for these causes. It really is not that hard to setup a server farm in a shipping container.

    The idea is to preemptively take all that cash flow from these punk like companies.

    I spent much of my career (now retired) kicking the crap out of companies who felt entitled to steal my and other people’s inventions.

    mrtomsr in reply to healthguyfsu. | May 24, 2018 at 7:45 am

    When I purchased from amazon, I always came here and used the portal to get there. Then, all of a sudden, the portal went missing. Now I know why. I liked their free shipping and the pricing, but I can sometimes afford a more expensive version of what I want and take it if it is made in America, or has a substantial quality difference. Banning or discriminating based on political views epitomizes quality difference to me. I will pay in convenience and costs, but to me, it will be worth that cost to shop elsewhere.

Ever read ‘The Trial’, by Kafka?

On the other hand, it’s good to know that this site is so effective getting its message out that big California companies are out to get it.

Do you know any lawyers?

I do a lot of business with Amazon, I will be contacting them for answers.

Awful. I can now support Trump’s efforts to raise their postage, but hardly an equalizer.

I believe it is safe to contend that a broad conspiracy to defame, demonize and eliminate any voice of dissent to the anti-American agenda of the left is actively being pursued.

The msm, many of our courts, schools (from kindergarten through college), self-proclaimed “scientists” and liberal politicians are owned by the left. From algore, to Hillary, to mueller, to silicon valley, to la raza, to the open borders nuts, to the splc, to the anti-2A freaks, to the defenders of jihadists and ms13, we are witnessing a socialist war against our nation.

I believe we are in a continuing existential war, the outcome of which is uncertain. We on the right wish for a non-violent outcome based on the rule of law, our constitution and common sense. The left has declared, “by any means necessary.”

Our votes this fall will help determine the climax. It’s obvious that the last election has only caused the anti-Americans to redouble their efforts to destroy our nation.

Once more, and as far into the future as required, we must stand firm in order to deny the left its destructive victory.

Juba Doobai! | May 23, 2018 at 7:35 pm

Now we are seeing the pernicious influence of Communists and Moslems in our society.

You should escalate to executive services. Get the the contact information for Bezos and mail a letter.

I do a fair amount of business with Amazon (who doesn’t, anymore) and regret to say I never did so via a link here, though I support the site by monthly donation.

I will be sending a vigorous denunciation of this malicious act to Amazon PR. I hope other readers of LI will do likewise.

It is obvious the people at Amazon involved in this have no scruples or shame.

DINORightMarie | May 23, 2018 at 7:36 pm

Sounds like a case for Ron Coleman. Maybe others who have been hit by this ban can come together for a class-action lawsuit, or a violation of applying policies in a biased manner regarding allowing financial benefits to some, while blocking them from others, without legitimate cause.

TheAbidingDude | May 23, 2018 at 7:38 pm

I used to be 100% laissez-faire regarding the Internet.

Now I favor government regulation of every one and zero of their operations, with joint and several liability of all C-officers, directors, and shareholders for any regulatory violation, no matter how slight or unintended.

Stuff like this is why.

    Milhouse in reply to TheAbidingDude. | May 23, 2018 at 8:03 pm

    On what grounds? They built that.

      TheAbidingDude in reply to Milhouse. | May 23, 2018 at 9:19 pm

      “On what grounds? They built that.”

      On the grounds that Congress has the authority to do so if it is deemed to be in the national interest, and the fact that it is most assuredly not in the national interest to have the digital economy controlled by a single group of interlocking BoDs and C-officers with zero accountability. Because there are three choices: picturing a boot smashing into a human face forever (and worthless mewling quims like you saying “Thank you sir, may I have another?”), extralegal regulatory action as a self-help effort, or impartial regulatory action by duly constituted authority. Option 1 isn’t sustainable in the long run. Option 2 involves large-scale use of Buda’s Wagon, and is both unsustainable and has a nontrivial body count. That leaves Option 3.

        Milhouse in reply to TheAbidingDude. | May 23, 2018 at 10:46 pm

        Congress has no such authority. And nobody has the authority to grant it such authority.

          I spent most of my business career joined at the hip to more attorneys than I can remember. My experience is that attorneys are great at telling me yay or nay when I present a specific approach to a problem, but that most are not good at developing approaches.

          There are ways to get at these companies, many ways.

          Oh, I don’t know. If Congress can fine a farmer for feeding his own animals wheat grown on his own farm under a theory of an effect on interstate commerce, I think that Congress can probably make a good argument that Amazon’s intentional actions in political witch-hunting of Conservatives and Amazon’s direct actions in sales across state lines sufficiently interact with Interstate Commerce to justify some regulation.

          See Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942).

          I think that Wickard v. Filburn was wrong, and should be overturned. But if it’s going to exist, weaponize it against the Leftists as they have attempted to weaponize it against Conservatives and Constitutionalists. Maybe a regulation by Congress under the same theory would now be enough to get the SCOTUS’ attention to fix that blight upon logic.

          TheAbidingDude in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 7:30 am

          “Congress has no such authority.”

          Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 grants Congress the power to regulate interstate and international commerce. And internet commerce is going to be by definition interstate.

          Thank you for playing.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 3:21 pm

          What is proposed would be either a bill of attainder or a taking, both of which are prohibited.

I may even cancel my Prime membership. Screw ’em. Nothing they offer I can’t live without.

While I know Amazon to be no fan of conservative causes, I would chalk this up to getting caught up in Barney Fife driving compliance to their policy.

The proprietary process is probably a spreadsheet managed by a couple of bewildered millennials smacked with a huge task and not enough resources to complete it all while having their short careers dangled over their head.

If the referrals cost the buyer no extra for crap they were already going to buy from Amzn- Amzn benefits by trimming the list right?

As much as I’d like to go all tin foil hat- my bet is on you getting caught up in a larger compliance pendulum.

    Close The Fed in reply to Andy. | May 24, 2018 at 8:51 am

    Re: Andy

    I saw the Project Veritas tape of the foreigner working for Twitter, who said, yeah, if they talk guns or God, we assume they’re a bot and shadow ban or ban them.

    How do we know Bezos doesn’t have a bunch of foreigners in that department, who have values contrary to American values?

    I bet he does.

      Having been on the other side of these things, it’s not as “well oiled” as you might think. I’m not saying the political persecution isn’t happening at these companies- rather I think in this instance it’s something else. It’s like when bad things happen to black people minding their own damn business and has nothing to do with them being black or racism…it’s just an idiot on the other end of the equation.

      On the other hand- I have in fact been inside the beast and know the “magic” behind what appears in newsfeeds- and what you say is actually not far off the mark with regard to stuff like anti trump stories leading.

You know, that’s kind of funny in an odd sort of way. I was an Amazon Associate myself for a while a few years back until Amazon cut us off in just this way with no warning because of the state that I live in. They used to encourage associates to include links in their emails and one of the criteria they used to select associates was the size of your email lists.

Henry Hawkins | May 23, 2018 at 8:00 pm

Professor, did you explain you self-identify as an illegal immigrant transsexual MS-13 member?

Bust-up Amazon, Facebook, Alphabet etc under existing anti-trust laws, before they destroy the nation.

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws

This should be considered a Red Badge of Courage. In a positive way, it verifies your value and your significance.

Within government there are avenues to address this, but in the marketplace hard to get redress. The old saw of “the business of government is busines … is now “the business of business is government”.

If they actually are refusing to pay you money owed before their official termination I’d highly suggest you sue them. Discovery should be fun.

    Edward in reply to Olinser. | May 23, 2018 at 8:37 pm

    That was my thought. While they have the right to refuse to include the site in their program (while not a good PR move, it is legal), they do not have the right to refuse to pay the financial obligation earned prior to termination.

    malclave in reply to Olinser. | May 23, 2018 at 8:45 pm

    That’s what I was thinking. As far as this layman is concerned, it’s one thing to say that they can terminate the relationship with or without cause, but quite another to refuse to pay money owed without explanation of exactly why.

Tortious interference of some nature?…laws vary from state to state

Seems to me you have a “cupcake case” here. If a bakery has to bake for a gay wedding, then Amazon has to allow you to do the same business it offers to other customers.

I believe that we need to apply Alinksy Rule #4: 4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

    Milhouse in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 23, 2018 at 9:16 pm

    Nope. Come on, you know better than that. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal in a lot of places (though not everywhere, and bakers in places where it isn’t are free to do so all they like), but discrimination on the basis of political opinions is illegal only in a few places, and I don’t think WA is one of them.

      puhiawa in reply to Milhouse. | May 23, 2018 at 10:06 pm

      But it is definitely illegal in Seattle. It is under the political ideology section of the statute. The professor has 180 days to make the complaint.
      I am merely addressing the nail to hang the case on, not the strategy that might take weeks to discern for a viable legal theme.

        Milhouse in reply to puhiawa. | May 23, 2018 at 10:53 pm

        If Seattle is one of those places, and if Amazon in its interactions over the internet is subject to Seattle law. I doubt it is, though. Assuming it’s incorporated in WA it would be subject to state law, but I don’t see how city law can cover what it does outside the city limits.

      Your theory is interesting, but the reality on the ground makes war necessary.

        Milhouse in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 23, 2018 at 10:55 pm

        What theory? I gave you the facts. If you think you can change them merely by disliking them then you’re no better than a SJW.

You’re a lawwer. Sue them.

I hit the donation jar, using my Amazon card. It will be interesting to see what they do to the donation or my card.

BTW, I use this card for all internet buys so I only have one place to complain if it gets stolen.

    Milhouse in reply to Liz. | May 23, 2018 at 9:17 pm

    Me too, but if there’s a boycott I’ll stop using it, just as soon as I’ve spent my accumulated points.

    Sanddog in reply to Liz. | May 23, 2018 at 11:20 pm

    Me, too. Gotta love that cash back for donating to a good cause.

4th armored div | May 23, 2018 at 8:51 pm

i left a msg at insty!
if others want to follow up here is the link

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/297558/#respond

Just so you know, I have made a point of using Amazon through your website in the past, and I was surprised to see them gone when I came to look for a recent purchase. I did not make the purchase, because I decided to wait for resolution of what I presumed was a website glitch.

No, I never saw, or received, a rebate for similar activity. I think disclosure that you earn a fee from having the Amazon link on your site is appropriate and ethical, because it elucidates the relationship between you and Amazon, which is important to evaluate any potential commentary about Amazon. This objection by Amazon is not merely specious: it is ethically suspect.

I do not have to use Amazon to shop. I did it as a favor to you. I can revert to my prior habits.

My guess is…just the start.
For instance, if this article were on any number of sites that I frequent, I would not be able to comment.
Why? Because readers must be able to login with facebook to comment. Well I’ve been apparently banned from farcebook….no reason given….no way to ask anyone.
And as nati conservative as farcebook is, it’s amazing how many conservative sites link to farcebook….including this one….but at least here, i can login.

assemblerhead | May 23, 2018 at 9:08 pm

Cutting of the source of their own income … stupid.

Business’s drive away potential customers this way. As big as they are now … growth is almost impossible.

Do they wan’t to start shrinking?

SeekingRationalThought | May 23, 2018 at 9:11 pm

What can we do to hurt Amazon? I’ve already cancelled a couple of orders (Costco is just as good a place for large purchases like TV’s) and will avoid Amazon wherever possible (where there is a reasonable alternative) but would be happy to beat them about the head and shoulders some other way. It may be a good time to unload some stock while its high.

As a staunch free-market supporter, I have ample admiration for Bezos’s entrepreneurialism and his success. He is also entitled to side with whatever sociopolitical causes he wants to.

Using an 800-pound gorilla of a business to arbitrarily and unfairly rob affiliates of revenue — based on their ideological leanings — smacks of the worst kind of bully tactics.

I cancelled my Amazon Prime membership over one year ago and started directing my shopping expenditures away from Amazon and towards eBay, Target and Wal-Mart, months ago. This news only validates my decision.

If Amazon is holding money owed while the agreement was in effect that seems it is liable for a lawsuit.

Does the ‘Operating Agreement’ constitute a contract? And if Amazon is withholding funds duly earned under the the terms of said contract, without good cause, would that not constitute a breach of contract?

I know there are many out there that game the system, and Amazon is well within its rights to establish criteria for its program, and to enforce those criteria. But it seems to me basic contract law should require that Amazon enforce those criteria with fairness and transparency.

But I am not a lawyer, and do not play one on the internet…

I just cancelled my Prime membership. It was the free trial first thirty days period, but I did not want to wait.

Who are your Congress critters? It would be just too bad if Amazon was subjected to scrutiny and maybe hearings right on the heels of FacePlant.

“Facebook, Google, Twitter and… what’s the other jackass?”

“Amazon. That’s right. Saw them on CSPAN getting grilled for 6 hours”

Probably won’t mean anything but I sent them an email from my account. I am tired of all this.

Clinton or the WP come to mind. They simply told Bezos to can LI.

cjharrispretzer | May 23, 2018 at 9:56 pm

Wow. This sends a chill up my spine. Second time in as many days that an article about Amazon’s practice of cutting off customers with barely any recourse has affected me. Yesterday, the WSJ has an article about Amazon informing its customers their accounts are suddenly closed for “too many returns”, with examples in the article that seem far less than my own habits. Makes me wonder now if Amazon may target customers in the future based on a combination of politics and return habits they don’t like?

    puhiawa in reply to cjharrispretzer. | May 23, 2018 at 9:59 pm

    Rumor is 30%, and merchant reports of chronic returnees. There are such. My spouse has a friend that should be barred from Macy’s.

      Daiwa in reply to puhiawa. | May 23, 2018 at 10:15 pm

      Laughing here. Had a friend years ago who would purchase furniture, leave all the tags on everything and return it all months later. Usually got away with it, too. There’s frugal, then there’s frugal.

    That’s a joke. Amazon has screwed up many of my orders by sending something other than what was ordered, sometimes twice. (Remember, we can expect only so much of the $8/hr fulfillment employee who hasn’t slept in 3 days.) Put up with it because it cost me only time. And they push that as a benefit!

    To blame customers for the returns is laughable.

About time Trump employed the old Democratic anti-trust ploy and break up Amazon. Into 7 regional entities sounds about right. The old ATT model.

Henry Hawkins | May 23, 2018 at 10:01 pm

I’m afraid if every LI reader and commenter boycotted Amazon it wouldn’t make the slightest dent in such a huge company’s sales. My aim is to address the more immediate problem – loss of an income stream by LI. I’ve just subscribed to a monthly donation to LI at the ‘Option 3’ level.

I challenge every LI reader and commenter to do the same. Money/mouth people!

If the matter is too confidential, then so be it. Roughly, in round numbers, how much does it cost to operate the site, per year? Alternately, about how much does it take, from regular readers, to keep you guys on the air?

Powerline has offered a regular internet presence for everyone but also offers a premium service to those who wish to subscribe. Their content, similar to your own, is lively, informative, current and enjoyable.

LI has developed a valuable trade name and reputation. You don’t have to be pushed around by creepers. If Amazon is trying to starve you off of web, some of us can pony up some bucks to keep the site going while you all prepare your case with Amazon.

Update: immediately after cancelling my Prime membership, I donated to the LI web site. A much better value for my money.

If you bought anything from Amazon through a link to this site, return it for a refund.

I have an Amazon Prime account now.

I will not next month.

They will know why.

ObeliskToucher | May 23, 2018 at 10:32 pm

I’ll bet this paragraph in the last note explains what happened:

It is important that you immediately stop using the Content and Amazon Marks and promptly remove from your Site(s) and delete or otherwise destroy all links to the Amazon site, all Amazon Marks and all other and any other materials provided or made available by or on behalf of us to you under this Operating Agreement or otherwise in connection with the Program.

Wouldn’t surprise me if someone ginned up a complaint mob campaign on the subject of a conservative website with Amazon “support”.

Well this certainly makes the decision not to renew Amazon Prime that much easier. Their $20 increase this year seemed excessive for what I was getting out of their service, but I was still on the fence about whether to renew or not. This decides it.

amatuerwrangler | May 23, 2018 at 10:54 pm

I just jumped over to Patterico to see if he was still up with the Amazon link: as if 1930hr PDT it is still up. Here is how he phrases the Amazon link: “Purchases made through this search function benefit this site, at no extra cost to you. We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites. ”

It will be interesting to see if Patterico gets dumped.

I was pondering getting Prime as a TV program source… that just got resolved. Since Amazon vendors do not honor their obligation to refund for purchases returned to them (when they originally say they will) I stopped buying through them. I might search there, but then, where possible, find the actual source and order direct. Its mostly parts for outdoor equipment so many are one-off or at least infrequent.

I’ll will be kicking down some cash for the Prof… I’ve been freeloading too long…

Maybe put out a general call to action. EVERYBODY call Amazon Associate Customer Service:

US and Canada
1-800-372-8066
Sunday – Saturday from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m. Pacific time.

We know RUSH pays attention to Legal Insurrection. See if he will do a segment on it and if he will mobilize his listener base. If even a TINY percentage of his audience calls, Amazon’s phone lines will melt. 1% of his weekly audience is 200,000 phone calls.

Contact Hannity, Levin and Beck. See if they will each do a segment and see if THEIR listener bases will make the calls.

Flood the lines, melt Amazon’s phone management software. Eat up their time having to explain to caller after caller after caller that it is unacceptable for Amazon Associates to be attacking popular Conservative websites by cutting off their revenue streams.

Demand to speak to Supervisors. Demand to be routed to managers. Mangle the ENTIRE chain of command.

Request that any and all individuals with non-business critical Amazon Associate accounts separately send their OWN demands to Amazon Associates regarding Legal Insurrection’s ouster.

Patriot Dan | May 23, 2018 at 11:57 pm

When the Washington Post and New York Times showed their true colors in 2008 election, I stopped putting my money into their coffers. We need to start doing the same with Amazon
We need to fond a conservative-friendly competitor to support. I went to a neighboring restaurant this last Saturday whose staff wanted you to stand up and order and then they would get you a table. So, we went somewhere else where our business was appreciated. Our country is putting billions into China for products and the middle East for oil when most of those governments hate us and our capitalism and our Judeo-Christian perspective.We put our money into Holleywood so the movie stars can use their millions against us.

When are we going to wise up?

Baby Elephant | May 24, 2018 at 12:16 am

Tell us what we can do to help. Is there a phone number we can contact? Is there an e-mail that we can write?

Sounds like a perfect reason to go directly to the top… I know of multiple sellers and other people who make money via Amazon that have had success by emailing [email protected]

    That’s the email I used. A while back I did a Quick Take on a customer in the UK whose dog was stolen by an amazon delivery person, and the owner wrote to Bezos and got his dog back. I figured if he cares about a customer’s dog, he’s got to care about what his customers think of this, too. Guess we’ll find out soon enough.

    creeper in reply to mekender. | May 24, 2018 at 9:26 am

    Thanks for that e-mail. I wrote Bezos, adding that e-mail to the chat I had this morning with a supervisor.

    Why don’t I feel any better?

Seems a lot of you have been using Amazon. Their Leftist bent is well known. So you knew you were enabling them every time you made a purchase. Likewise with the administrators of LI for using them.

I have never purchased an item from Amazon so as not to enable them. It was a monetary sacrifice but not a hard decision.

Stop enabling Lefties. And stop complaining about their power if you’ve been supporting them.

    healthguyfsu in reply to Max17. | May 24, 2018 at 7:48 am

    It’s not much of a money sacrifice these days…their products have gone up quite a bit and there are often cheaper alternatives.

Amazon is NOMAD.
Star Trek / The Changeling
https://youtu.be/G6o881n35GU

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

    Vancomycin in reply to Satta. | May 24, 2018 at 7:19 am

    Except those groups you’re mentioning? Yeah, actually evil.

      Vancomycin in reply to Vancomycin. | May 24, 2018 at 7:19 am

      Except for the jews. The Socialists and the Unions…yeah, evil.

      YellowGrifterInChief in reply to Vancomycin. | May 24, 2018 at 10:36 am

      Apparently Amazon doesn’t agree with you and neither do I (for what that is worth.

      But let the Professor seek some remedies. How about regulations? Oh, wait he hates regulations. Perhaps this is a particularly worthy cause. Nope, there are plenty of worthy causes.

      Maybe he should move to the EU? They might have his back. Nope, he doesn’t like the way the EU does things.

      How about a Class Action law suit of all the conservative websites discriminated against by Amazon. Perhaps SCOTUS, given its conservative bent, will overlook its hostility to the little guy and decide that a bunch of conservative websites are a worthy class; even if a bunch of women working for wages who are cheated is not a worthy class.

      I second the statement at the head of this sub-thread. Either we all are protected or none of us are. This site is dedicated to a warped version of Libertarianism in which we are all essentially on our own and ‘equal’. I will remember this the next time I am cheated out of $20 by a bank or my mortgage payment is not credited properly and I have no recourse because the Trump administration has gutted the CPFB and I can’t join a class of similarly cheated individuals because SCOTUS supports ‘business’.

        SpaceInvader in reply to YellowGrifterInChief. | May 24, 2018 at 10:49 am

        The wage gap disappears when the other variables are considered. In fact many times women make more once the other variables are considered. Get informed.

          YellowGrifterInChief in reply to SpaceInvader. | May 24, 2018 at 11:25 am

          You missed the point and you emphatically missed the irony.

          Milhouse in reply to SpaceInvader. | May 24, 2018 at 2:50 pm

          He’s not talking about the alleged “wage gap”. He’s talking about the Supreme Court’s decision in Walmart v Dukes, and repeating the old, tired, Marxist spin that the decision was motivated by the relative sizes of the parties, i.e. that had the merits been reversed Walmart would still have won. Which is a baseless smear.

          YellowGrifterInChief in reply to SpaceInvader. | May 25, 2018 at 12:28 pm

          @Milhouse You, sir are the ideologue. This is not a matter of Marxism or any ideology. It is a matter of practicality.

          Who other than an outstanding devotee of individuality (such as yourself) is going to hire a lawyer over a relatively small financial beef when you opposing party in worth billions and the award will not cover the legal fees?

          Some years ago, I bought a car whose alloy rims bent like soft butter. Over time I replaced the rims repeatedly. Some years later I was invited, by a law firm with an obvious mercenary motive, to join a class action lawsuit. To my pleasant and unanticipated surprise, I eventually received cash compensation for the full cost of every rim which failed during the warranty period. I had the receipts.

          Had there been an arbitration clause, it is not clear what, if anything, I would have received. I had made inquiries and lodged complaints with the company and with my state AG. But there never was recall. I am guessing that was because it was not technically a safety issue – just a major inconvenience and expense.

          The irony that you seem to have so sourly missed is that Bezos is every bit the capitalist. Capitalism is as much about power as money. Is that too Marxist for you? If Bezos wishes to hurt sites he sees as antithetical to his beliefs, you have choices – Contribute, boycott, sue or seek regulations. The latter 2 may involve some degree of hypocrisy – sort of likely supporting Trump because he will appoint the judges that Judicial Watch names.

        Amazon may not be your best example right now of a SJW considering it has balked at paying its fair share in Seattle, nor in how it treats its (human) employees.

        “The Little Guy”… ah yes, the more caring, more concerned, more giving are never in the ranks of conservatives… good one. Maybe because soft bigotry and soft tyranny are a comfortable fit for the Left.

        Whether you agree or not doesn’t change the facts. It is simply not true that the Supreme Court is hostile to the little guy. The majority of the court obey the Biblical injunctions to hear the big and the small guy equally, and to neither favor a poor man nor defer to a great one.

        If there is some cause of action here, such as for the money already earned that is being withheld, then it seems likely that all affiliates dumped for their political opinions would form a class. It’s equally obvious that the plaintiffs in Walmart v Dukes did not form a class, because there was no conceivable way for them to show that they’d all been victims of the same exact alleged offense. It was beyond dispute that there was no corporate-wide policy to discriminate against women, so any discrimination that might have occurred must have done so at a local level. Thus even if every one of the plaintiffs had in fact been discriminated against as they alleged, the facts and causes would be different in each case.

        Did it ever occur to anyone that this site was turning into Gateway Pundit or Conservative Treehouse.
        Most of the posts seem to come straight from the White House War Room.
        Sorry, but you cooked your own goose.

          scooterjay in reply to Lee Jan. | May 24, 2018 at 4:46 pm

          yep, DJT has been sending me missives to post since 2008.
          got us, totally got us!

          Shane in reply to Lee Jan. | May 24, 2018 at 5:12 pm

          You haven’t met Ragspierre yet … you will.

          Milhouse in reply to Lee Jan. | May 24, 2018 at 9:14 pm

          Some of the commenters here did come from those places, or worse. I don’t think they should be welcome here. But the posts? You’re smearing and defaming them, and you have no right to do that. Especially as a guest here.

          C. Lashown in reply to Lee Jan. | May 25, 2018 at 12:57 am

          WOW! Thanks for the compliment! BTW, I’m the ‘turd in the punch bowl’ who gave you a thumbs up…the ONLY one at this time, BTW.

          So…how are things shaking over at ‘Little Green Lizard Turds’? Is that snake CJ still sucking oxygen, or has he went to visit his buddies in Gaza?

          Latus Dextro in reply to Lee Jan. | May 25, 2018 at 2:56 am

          Dare I say testament to a widening and strengthening appeal in a increasingly toxic, and to coin a popular Leftist euphemism, ‘diverse’ divided sociopolitical arena, no thanks to a power crazed Left drunk on the platitudes of ‘he who promised change’ without specifying what … and by Christos, didn’t you get it.

        JusticeDelivered in reply to YellowGrifterInChief. | May 24, 2018 at 4:54 pm

        Just in case you have not noticed, LI puts up with your inane opinions, it would be well within their rights to ban you. If you support Amazon’s weasel actions, including theft of LI revenue, then maybe we should cheerfully give you the boot?

        If you are going to hang out here, you should make at least a $100 annual contribution.

          YellowGrifterInChief in reply to JusticeDelivered. | May 26, 2018 at 10:18 am

          I have noticed, although your judgment on the quality of my comments is less than astute.

          it would be well within their rights to ban you

          Absolutely, although it would involve a certain degree of hypocrisy.

          I contribute when I think an organization does good work.

        Hey YGnC….I’m impressed how you worked a Trump and EU reference into a post about Amazon….

        I also have good news…
        Amazon is running a special on their, “I Hate Trump” t-shirts!

        You can buy one for every day of the week!!!

    imwithstoopid in reply to Satta. | May 24, 2018 at 6:27 pm

    From what is said here that are their responses to you, (and I have no reason to disbelieve) them or you. I would think that they are in Breach of Contract from what you say you indicated that none of the reasons they gave you were valid and were not applicable to you.

    blah deblah in reply to Satta. | May 24, 2018 at 11:47 pm

    The ARE the socialists.

Time for LI and others to get together and begin a legal process to either expose this or correct it.

Good luck.

Can we NOW start treating leftists/liberals like the enemies that they are?

Treating them fairly has now become their weapon to attack.

Either force them to comply with the legal contract or start using their rules against them.

The timing of this is not coincidental.

DouglasJBender | May 24, 2018 at 5:06 am

I don’t recall that I have ever used Amazon. (Maybe I have; but if so, I don’t recall doing so.)

Have I been missing out on life?

    Lewfarge in reply to DouglasJBender. | May 24, 2018 at 8:26 pm

    I have been using Amazon for around 12 years. I live in a relatively rural area and any real shopping is a 60-70 mile round trip. The internet and Amazon Prime have been really valuable to me. BUT I really am having some concerns, highlighted by this incident.
    My current Prime membership ends in September and with this situation and the $20 price increase, I have some serious thinking to do.

    Mike H. in reply to DouglasJBender. | May 25, 2018 at 9:38 pm

    No.

How can we help Professor?

    Another Voice in reply to kjon. | May 24, 2018 at 9:51 am

    Yes, What is it that we can do Prof. J. to support you and “our” LI?

    Hit that PayPal button!

      JusticeDelivered in reply to Redneck Law. | May 25, 2018 at 9:00 am

      People need to beware of PayPal. I was running two nonprofits using PayPal for donations. When we setup the accounts they were given all the relevant information, a year they forze one account, and a few months after that froze the other. They were demanding more, and intrusive information.
      I promptly switched to another means of accepting donations, and ignored their demands. I removed all PayPal references from the websites.
      About three months later they unlocked the accounts, I removed all the money and never used them again.
      It seems that young highly successful companies develop a god complex, where they think they can do whatever they want.
      If using PayPal, frequently remove incoming funds to limit their ability to disrupt by freezing funds.

I love using Amazon – but now they’re giving customers and associates the middle finger, and they don’t even pretend they’re not. I don’t want a ‘conservative’ option, I just want an option that cares about doing business, not about giving me the business.

This is the response I imagine a future government healthcare provider/death panel might provide for denial of service.

Contact Tucker Carlson. He loves exposing this sort of thing.

    pfg in reply to Obie1. | May 24, 2018 at 11:54 am

    One by one, my sites are disappearing or are being so limited that they become ineffective. My conclusion: I’m on the correct side of things.

I’m saddened, but NOT SURPRISED to hear that AWS/Amazon has BLACKLISTED Legal Insurrection/College Insurrection.

While we never used the Amazon Link (as my wife does most of the online shopping, we never got around to linking our purchases – DOH!), it seems that if we don’t follow the Left Coast’s Liberals (whether it be Amazon, Apple or Alphabet/Google/YouTube) lead they’re going to try to pressure us until we do. The Left/Deep State knows that Economic Pressure (Higher Prices) works.

This episode shows the tremendous depth and stakes in the Culture War. Big Brother is really watching/recording/taking notes of who’s ideologically against them, BEFORE we actually declare it to them. The line from the 1979 Movie MadMax, when charges against Johnny, the boy have been dropped and the Goose goes crazy in the parking lot and assaults him, comes to mind: “We know who you are.”

Connivin Caniff | May 24, 2018 at 7:52 am

Regardless of the outcome, I admire Professor Jacobson for just being able to achieve a conversation with a human being in the right department at Amazon. (At least I assume it was a human being, although the logic and responsiveness of the “human being” does raise considerable doubt.)

American Human | May 24, 2018 at 8:12 am

I expect that Amazon may bite off more than it can chew at some point however, in principle, how is this different than refusing to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding?

    Another Voice in reply to American Human. | May 24, 2018 at 9:52 am

    We can only hope this is “the bite” they choke on!

    Milhouse in reply to American Human. | May 24, 2018 at 1:34 pm

    Sigh. This again? You (and a lot of others) seem to think there is some sort of legal principle requiring people to do business with all comers. There is no such principle. This is (mostly) a free country, where the presumption is that we are free to associate or to refuse to associate with anyone we choose, on whatever grounds seem good to us — or even on a mere random whim — except where specifically prohibited by law.

    Businesses may not discriminate on the grounds of race, only because Congress made a law saying so. Ditto for sex, religion, disability, and age over 40. Congress has not made a law banning discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or political opinion, so these remain perfectly legal except where state or local legislatures have decreed otherwise.

    No matter how you rant and rave about it, not one baker has ever been compelled by a federal court or by any US agency to bake cakes for gay people or for their weddings. All such actions have been brought under state or local law, in those states or localities where such a law exists. Anyone not in such a place is free to put up a sign in his bakery saying “NO FAGITS” and refuse to even let gay people set foot there, let alone buy cakes. It would be a foolish and hateful thing to do, but it’s his place and his life.

    The same is true for what Amazon appears to be doing, discriminating on the basis of political opinion. Almost everywhere in the USA this is perfectly legal, because neither the state nor the locality have made laws against it. I’m informed that Seattle does have such a law, but I imagine that city laws only only apply to transactions that happen (or that would happen) inside the city limits, not to something like this which happens entirely on the web. I imagine that state law would apply here, so if WA had such a law there’d be grounds for a suit, but I’m unaware that it does have one.

    And that’s the sum of it. The general principle remains that you have the right to discriminate any way you like except where there’s a law saying otherwise.

      henrybowman in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 2:42 pm

      Aptly stated.

      And not in any way to blame the victim here, but any conservative endeavor whose business model DEPENDS on obtaining funds from entities aligned with the totalitarians is operating on shaky ground — like a prepper who assumes his local electric company will always be in operation. I realize that obtaining funding from sympathetic sources is much harder to achieve, but it’s time for our standard-bearers of independence to find a way, however novel, to make independence work for them.

      American Human in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 3:15 pm

      Mr. Milhouse, it was merely a question. It seems the principle is similar excepting there is no law against this type of discrimination.
      This seems as if it would be tailor-made for an activist judge to declare discrimination but only a left-wing one.

        Milhouse in reply to American Human. | May 24, 2018 at 9:18 pm

        The principle is that by default we have the right to discriminate. Only the legislature can take away that right, and only by legislation that specifies unambiguously the exact actions that are to be forbidden.

      rdmdawg in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 5:14 pm

      Bake me my cake, bigot.

      I kid, of course, your legal analysis is spot-on, from what little I know.

So … what exactly is the problem here? Amazon is trimming back some program which gives away free money?

    Hello, this is Amazon Customer Relations…I know we told you that as a Amazon Associate your site could earn some fees…

    BUT WE WERE JUST KIDDING…It was a joke…get it? HA, Ha, HA!!!

    No…what happened was…an unpaid intern typed up that associate offer deal…and sent it to you by mistake!!!

    Sorry for any confusion,
    Team Amazon

    aka Hoss in reply to tom_swift. | May 24, 2018 at 9:11 am

    Reading is hard, isn’t it. You’re either a complete moron or being deliberately obtuse.

    Milhouse in reply to tom_swift. | May 24, 2018 at 1:36 pm

    Not free money. A commission for drumming up business. If LI were dropped because Prof J is a Jew, or because he’s male, or because he’s over a certain age (which is more than 40), what they’re doing would be illegal. But doing it because of his political beliefs is legal in most places.

    tom_swift in reply to tom_swift. | May 24, 2018 at 2:18 pm

    So … no knowledgeable—or even topical—responses.

    Well, no surprise there.

    That’s OK, everybody gets a participation trophy anyway. It’s in the mail.

      Hey TS, will the participation trophy be large enough to look good on my mantel?

      I plan to set it between my, “Tallest Kid in 6th Grade Award” and my, “Least Rotten Ex-Husband Medallion”…..

      Just wondering….,Thanks!

buckeyeminuteman | May 24, 2018 at 8:34 am

I should say I will stop shopping on Amazon because of this. But I can’t, my family is hooked now. Taking 3 kids all under 3 to the store for anything is too much of a burden for my wife. And I work 10-hour shifts and have no energy to shop at the end of the day. You can’t beat the tax free and free shipping. Amazon is like crack, I’m hooked.

I do remember a commenter here stating that any organization that doesn’t start out as expressly conservative eventually slides left and off the deep end. I have no reservations about that statement.

What is the common link between (Fox News Contributor)Tomi Lahren’s assault at a Minneapolis restaurant last Sunday and the demonetization of LI by Amazon?

For the past few years, the ‘demonization’ of conservatives by their “bettors” has become both socially acceptable and encouraged by the Progressive Media. Rude, illegal and dangerous behavior has now become commonplace, and often without any legal recourse. (See: Councilwoman Kellye Burke screaming obscenities at kids for wearing MAGA shirt. Case dismissed) Alleging that Conservatives are “evil” and that they engage in “hate speech” has allowed for all sorts of dangerous behavior to become excusable. (But see: Rand Paul attacked by neighbor, charges filed)

Apparently, Amazon employees have allowed politics to color their business decisions by direct or indirect policies of the corporation. Whether or not their motives are benign, there is ample evidence that political viewpoint discrimination is supported by management, utilizing the cudgel of demonetization.

I have little hope that anything can be done by us little people to the behemoth Amazon Deathstar, other than to financially support Legal Insurrection and its excellent stable of writers. So, fellow readers, if you are as pissed as I am, there is a PayPal button somewhere. Think of it as buying a War Bond. After all, we are involved in a fight whether we want it or not.

    alaskabob in reply to Redneck Law. | May 24, 2018 at 1:04 pm

    What? No YellowGrifter to declare you aren’t “the little guy”?

    Need to dig out that old documentary on the shift from nation states to corporate states…. “Rollerball”.

My Amazon Prime account comes up for renewal in December. I WILL NOT RENEW. Screw Amazon and the bald Bezos.

    JohnSmith100 in reply to walls. | May 24, 2018 at 9:29 am

    Amazon is increasing its Prime price by 20%, adding another $20. At the same time, USPS, which Amazon insists on using, is becoming increasingly arrogant and incompetent.

      Lee Jan in reply to JohnSmith100. | May 24, 2018 at 3:40 pm

      Where I live Amazon uses UPS. FedEx, the USPost Office and it’s own fleet of trucks.
      Did you mind that the president tried to convince the US post office to double Amazon’s rates?

Professor, I had a chat with Amazon this morning. A copy of it is in your e-mail.

It was an interesting experience. They did not seem to know how to handle the call, especially since I am both a Prime and Kindle Unlimited subscriber and I made it clear to them that I would not be buying anything until Amazon Assistant is restored here. I average two to three hundred dollars a month on Amazon and it often runs to five. It won’t hurt them a lot but it may get their attention.

C’mon, all. Get on that chat and let Amazon know how you feel.

    WhatsaSeawolf in reply to creeper. | May 24, 2018 at 9:04 am

    Hadn’t thought of this. FANTASTIC idea! Everyone should call and email Amazon, especially if you are a frequent user of their site.

    Only way this can change (without conservative alternatives popping up) is for us to speak up.

      JohnSmith100 in reply to WhatsaSeawolf. | May 24, 2018 at 9:34 am

      Calling Amazon is fine, but people need to be bad mouthing them across lots of sites. There needs to be a groundswell of negative publicity.

        Joe-dallas in reply to JohnSmith100. | May 24, 2018 at 12:13 pm

        Several years ago an employee of mine had repair work on her car done at a large auto dealership. Work that in no way addressed the mechanical problem. They refused to refund the money.

        I showed up on the next busy saturday morning on the sales floor demanding to speak to new car sales manager regarding the crappy repair service. They refunded the money within the next 10 minutes.

WhatsaSeawolf | May 24, 2018 at 9:03 am

Long, long time reader and very seldom poster.

This is ABSURD! If you decide to fight back, I would gladly donate to a legal defense fund.

Close The Fed | May 24, 2018 at 9:18 am

I called the number a previous poster posted (800-372-8066) and hit “1” and spoke with a nice lady at Amazon. I told her I would be buying less from Amazon because they had terminated LI from this program.

She said that if LI had breached the terms, then the department responsible for that would terminate them. I explained to her that Prof. Jacobson is a law professor, and I am a lawyer, and he posted the emails back and forth, and I’m completely satisfied it was handled improperly.

As she was trying to continue defending it, I told her to have a nice day and hung up. 🙂

Then I emailed [email protected] and told him I’ll be shopping less at Amazon, and basically what I said to the nice lady on the telephone.

I spend very little there, but I’m completely free to give them a piece of my mind.

I’ll now sign up to send the Professor a very small amount every month.

    SeanInLI in reply to Close The Fed. | May 24, 2018 at 12:54 pm

    Why “shop less” at Amazon.com? Why not just “don’t shop” at Amazon? There is absolutely nothing they sell there that you cannot find elsewhere online.

    Conservatives need to find principles and stick to them.

Jet.com’s parent company is Walmart. Walmart has been leaning left, but also fighting for market share from Amazon, and I think the best positioned to compete with it.

Having dealt with Amazon Seller Central this is typical behavior, they can dump a multi million dollar seller for a miniscule infraction,and there is nobody to talk too. I highly doubt it is related to politics.

    Shane in reply to marc1244. | May 24, 2018 at 11:22 am

    Thank you marc .. this is the most clear headed comment so far.

    I used to live in Seattle and had a friend that worked for them many moons ago. I can say this, they are absolutely brutal on their mid tier management. And I remember the stories of employee issues not so very long ago. Seattle is a terrible environment for business, the big get big there because they play every trick dirty or not to keep ahead of the progressive creep. Most can’t cut it and get out, but the ones that stay are a special kind of hungry, and learn to play the game with the local government. I think that is the only real conservative bias at play here. Amazon has to be more profitable and pay more attention to making money than other companies in other cities that are more business friendly.

    That said, I view what has happened here at LI as the harbinger of things to come. I also saw this with Washington Mutual and then Wells Fargo. I was pretty early in leaving these companies, but I was very thankful that I did move.

Close The Fed | May 24, 2018 at 9:33 am

Also, BTW, I use the Brave browser, which is by the fellow run off from Mozilla for supporting the traditional marriage initiative in California. It has a system of making payments to websites which I’m trying to figure out how to sign up for.

It uses bitcoin-types of payments, which I haven’t used. But the idea is that you make a monthly payment which then gets distributed to the websites you visit.

This is a VERY cool idea and I’m looking forward to using it.

    SeanInLI in reply to Close The Fed. | May 24, 2018 at 12:50 pm

    The Brave browser is a branch of Google Chrome’s browser. You are basically giving Google your entire online experience, instead of search items entered to Google search bars.

Hasn’t Amazon done this to enough conservative sites to warrant a class action suit?

Albigensian | May 24, 2018 at 10:15 am

“As stated in our previous communications, our decision to terminate your Associates account is final. Any further requests to review your account for reinstatement will not receive a response.”

Even Ma Bell at her peak was not so arrogant as this. Nor are the other big internet businesses are any better: it’s always “Our word is final, and we need not tell you or anyone else anything. And we’re not going to.”

Anyone who’s had a Facebook or other online account closed has had the same experience: it’s always “We don’t need to tell you why we closed your account, and we’re not going to tell you why, and you have no recourse.

Yes, these are private companies. BUT it’s hard to believe this obnoxious arrogance will not damage their long-term prospects. Unfortunately in the short run, there’s little recourse to be had other than (when possible) finding alternatives to what they offer.

    Shane in reply to Albigensian. | May 24, 2018 at 11:59 am

    Washington Mutual acted this way for quite some time. I was young so up put up with it far longer than I should have, but I did leave. For me it was a very important lesson about what happens to companies that become self serving and forget where the money is coming from.

    theduchessofkitty in reply to Albigensian. | May 24, 2018 at 4:12 pm

    Remember one thing: if Ma Bell denied you phone service, you had no recourse – and no phone service. It took a Federal antitrust court action by a small outfit named MCI to break it up.

    Today, if FB or Twitter deny access to your account, you practically have no voice in the public square.

    Things like these are the reason antitrust laws were placed on the books. A corporation with too much power acts exactly like a government with too much power: it is corrupt. It needs to be brought down a few notches. No one can forget why John D. Rockefeller was brought forth to answer for antitrust violations. He was a bully and a thief, masquerading as an entrepreneur. The decision to split Standard Oil into 36 smaller entities was the correct one.

    Amazon has too much power. Time to break it apart.

    I have a feeling Professor is not the only Conservative out there to have been shut out of Associates.

      We don’t need anti-trust laws they are evil and full of unintended consequences. The free market works, just not as fast as you want it to.

        healthguyfsu in reply to Shane. | May 25, 2018 at 9:23 am

        Anti-trust laws are useful in an era of crony capitalism. There is a legal remedy to seek against big companies using the dark side of politics to gain advantage.

          Shane in reply to healthguyfsu. | May 25, 2018 at 12:00 pm

          They are never useful and they are full on part of crony capitalism.

          The power of no is far greater than giving some bureaucrat MORE power.

happened to me too only due to my state deciding to charge taxes for online stuff in state where amazon has ZERO land/buildings/etc.

    YellowGrifterInChief in reply to dmacleo. | May 24, 2018 at 10:45 am

    Doesn’t your state already have a requirement that you pay your sales taxes even if they aren’t collected by the vendor? There is a space on my income tax form where I am required to report any sales tax that was not paid at the time of purchase.

    So you were just a tax evader and now you are not. You should thank Amazon.

      And what happens if those goods come from another state? Do you pay their sales tax or do you pay your sales tax? Or do you pay both? This hasn’t been sorted out yet at Federal level, so yah guess he isn’t a tax evader (like that is a bad thing).

      The more I read your comments YellowTroll the more I hope that you drop dead. Sooner rather than later. I am sickened by your deceptive arguments that are simply a cover for your lies. I really don’t know how someone like you can look in the mirror everyday and continue to want to live.

        this. gas taxes (for supposed road mtx) were paid for by transport company, any money I made was reported for taxation during 1040 filings, etc on and on.
        yet dumbasses like above dumbass are too stupid to realize how multiple taxation effects things.

        Milhouse in reply to Shane. | May 24, 2018 at 1:48 pm

        For a wonder, YellowFellow is right this time. I suppose it had to happen once in a while. Almost every state requires its citizens who buy things from out of state, and therefore did not pay that state’s sales tax, to self-report the tax owed and pay it. Of course hardly anybody does this, because you’d have to be insane to do so, or insanely committed to keeping the law even if you will never be caught. I know some people like that, and I assume they do carefully comply with this law. I don’t, which means I am a tax evader. I don’t see anything wrong with that, but it is a fact, and if the state finally figures out a way to make me comply I can hardly complain. I’m not happy that I can no longer get away with breaking the law, but the state does have the right to enforce its laws if it can.

          Shane in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 2:32 pm

          Almost … every state.

          healthguyfsu in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 4:14 pm

          This is not to dispute your legal position on the matter, but the rationale behind another state collecting sales tax on online purchases from another state.

          The state of residence doesn’t provide the civic and municipal services that support the business collecting and paying the tax to their state (if different from yours). There is no justification for collecting this. It is confiscated money to slush fund the money hoover’s special interests and political projects.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 9:24 pm

          I think you’ve got this backwards. Sales taxes, like all taxes, are owed to your state, not the state where the business you bought from is located. Generally when you order anything from interstate you are not charged that state’s sales tax, but you owe your own state’s tax instead. It’s up to you to report yourself to your state and pay up. And of course hardly anybody does so, including me. I acknowledge the state’s right to enforce its taxes on me if it can, but I feel no moral obligation to cooperate with the process.

        JusticeDelivered in reply to Shane. | May 24, 2018 at 5:20 pm

        Yellow Grifter probably uses LI without paying his way, making it a grade A hypocrite.

      #too_stupid_to_deal_with

I just canceled automatic renewal for my Prime subscription and removed payment information. Prime has now become substandard.

Serious questions for the legal eagles on this site: Can you sue in this situation? What are the chances of a victory? Thanks for any info.

    Milhouse in reply to khunley73. | May 24, 2018 at 1:52 pm

    Maybe for the money owed, but there’s probably a clause in the original agreement giving Amazon the right to do this whenever it alleges there’s been an infringement, without having to prove it. And there’s almost certainly a clause forcing it to arbitration, where the normal laws don’t apply.

      khunley73 in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 2:16 pm

      That makes sense. Thanks for the info Milhouse.

      Close The Fed in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 10:17 pm

      Re: Milhouse

      Milhouse’s shorthand that “normal laws don’t apply” in arbitration is misleading.

      Normal laws DO apply in arbitration, however, the PROCEDURE for the dispute itself is different.

      However, contract law would still apply in arbitration, even if you had no option of a jury trial, etc.

bobinreverse | May 24, 2018 at 11:48 am

100 + ridiculous comments. Dr Evil (Bezos as per Chris Plante) is richest guy in world and does whatever he wants until someone else smarter comes along. Who knew?

Amazon can indeed terminate the agreement at any time without cause, as stated in item 6 of their agreement. BUT in my opinion, they need to say that in their communications to you, instead of falsely claiming that you broke their terms of agreement. Unless you somehow broke an agreement, which it looks like you did not, they are liars.

    Milhouse in reply to BarbD. | May 24, 2018 at 1:49 pm

    Yes, but there’s no law against lying.

      Close The Fed in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 10:20 pm

      Re: Milhouse

      There most certainly is a basis for claiming breach of a contract if one of the parties lies about the other party breaching the terms of the agreement.

      Gosh, Milhouse, some of the fatuous things you type!

This is part of a concerted effort on the internet, particularly social networks, but others, as well, to silence conservative views, and it appears to be working quite well. All of Mr. Trump’s tweets on Twitter are hidden from re-tweets, for example. Sadly, there does not appear to be anything we can do about it, and no credible alternative platforms available.

    Shane in reply to dogbert. | May 24, 2018 at 1:44 pm

    Writing is on the wall. LOL and the idiot progressives did it to themselves. Read this. Interesting things happen when Social Media becomes public accommodation.

      Milhouse in reply to Shane. | May 24, 2018 at 2:00 pm

      What the **** are you talking about? (a) The case you refer to has nothing to do with public accommodation laws; (b) it did not change Twitter’s legal status in any way at all; (c) in any case public accommodations are still allowed to discriminate based on political opinion; (d) Amazon is not social media.

      Just to save people having to read through that thread, here’s the bottom line: No, the court did not say that Twitter is bound by the first amendment, let alone that it is a designated public forum, and anyone who reports that it did is lying to you. Not even Trump’s account, which is covered by the first amendment because it’s government controlled, is a designated public forum; only the interactive space around it is.

        Shane in reply to Milhouse. | May 24, 2018 at 2:37 pm

        Ok .. don’t know the legalities but how on earth can the president’s personal account (@therealdonaldtrump vs. @POTUS) now be under the first amendment without Twitter being public forum (believe the judgment refereed to it as public forum). That is like saying that Trump can’t not choose who he will receive calls from on his personal phone.

          Milhouse in reply to Shane. | May 24, 2018 at 3:05 pm

          It’s not his personal account. If it were, he could do whatever he liked with it. The judge specifically noted that politicians don’t lose their first amendment rights just by being elected. @realDonaldTrump was originally a personal account, but since the day he took office he has been using it as a government account, so it came under the control of the first amendment. The decision goes into great detail listing the evidence for this, and it’s overwhelming and irrefutable. He’s free at any time to stop using it that way and take back personal control, and then this decision will no longer apply.

          And no, the decision did not refer to Twitter as a public forum, and emphasized repeatedly that it is not one. Anyone who claims it did is lying to you.

          Shane in reply to Shane. | May 24, 2018 at 5:17 pm

          Thank you for the clarification. I was hopping Uncle Unintended would kick in and grab these social media giants by the balls but alas I was wrong.

          Valerie in reply to Shane. | May 24, 2018 at 6:22 pm

          So now we have to give a heckler’s veto to every nut that attends a political rally for someone they dislike?

          Trump has done not one thing to stop anybody from using their own account.

          Milhouse in reply to Shane. | May 24, 2018 at 9:27 pm

          At rallies held in public space there is usually a right to heckle. Government may regulate this, but only in a content-neutral manner. Any regulation they enforce on those making hostile interjections they must enforce equally on those making supportive interjections. This has always been the law; don’t tell me you didn’t know it.

          Rallies held on private property (including property that is owned by the public but rented by a private party) can be regulated any way the owner or renter likes. The first amendment doesn’t apply.

    Close The Fed in reply to dogbert. | May 24, 2018 at 10:22 pm

    Re: Dogbert

    What is a “credible” alternative? I’m on Gab.ai. It’s a credible alternative.

    If by credible you mean, they ban people they don’t like, so that it’s all neat and clean for snowflakes, then Twitter is where you belong because they kick off anyone who makes the water ripple.

    My handle? Why, CloseTheFed, of course!!!

Walmart.com is a good, American alternative to Amazon.com. I left Amazon’s anti-conservative storefront behind well over a year ago and have not missed them a bit. American

We just need to start exerting pressure on Wal-Mart to buy or at least promote made-in-America options.

Are you going to file a law suit and open them up to disclosure under oath?

I see as much benefit to that as actually getting your owed money or being reinstated, since they could otherwise easily just repeat their bad practices after reinstating you.

Hi,

Just wanted to let you know I am a fan and have been reading here for a long time, though rarely comment.

I also rarely comment anymore on anything in real life. I live in a deep blue bubble and have had several encounters with leftists and anti Zionists who practically caught on fire when I disagreed with them. So I count on your POV.

The world has gotten extremely ridiculous if your intelligent and reasonable website was blacklisted. My immediate reaction was to subscribe via PayPal and hope it helps a little.

My chat with Amazon customer service:

Initial Question: I just wanted to inform you that I cancelled my prime membership today because of your cancellation of your relationship with http://www.legalinsurrection.com Your decision is clearly politically related. I’m headed to Walmart.com and other outlets before shopping with Amazon in the future.

11:24 AM PDT Tara(Amazon): Hello, my name is Tara. I’m here to help you today.

11:24 AM PDT [me]: I don’t have anything to add to what I already sent.

11:24 AM PDT Tara: I apologize for the inconvenience you experienced

11:25 AM PDT [me]: It’s not an inconvenience. Amazon is trying to muzzle conservative voices and I won’t economically support a company that does that. I hope you will forward this message to Mr. Bezos.

11:26 AM PDT Tara: every customer is valuable for us.
i’ll make a note of this

LI dust-up with Amazon was mentioned on the Rush Limbaugh show today in the first segment! Guest host Todd Herman. Any other sympathetic media outlets which can take up the cause and embarrass Amazon?

    alaskabob in reply to Tunkmaster. | May 24, 2018 at 6:05 pm

    Which means Soros et al will add additional resources to the LI site. I noted that also. I have a feeling LI will be a must see site in the future and maybe be listed on Drudge (Mark Steyn taken off!!) Now if Obama would wear a blue dress…

henrybowman | May 24, 2018 at 2:35 pm

“Over the following weeks I repeatedly explained to Amazon on the phone, through its Amazon Associates portal, and by email, that we did not do any of those things, and that this termination explanation made no sense.”

Haven’t I heard this somewhere before? Oh yeah, I remember now…

A Wolf was drinking at a spring on a hillside. On looking up he saw a Lamb just beginning to drink lower down. “There’s my supper,” thought he, “if only I can find some excuse to seize it.” He called out to the Lamb, “How dare you muddy my drinking water?”

“No,” said the Lamb; “if the water is muddy up there, I cannot be the cause of it, for it runs down from you to me.”

“Well, then,” said the Wolf, “why did you call me bad names this time last year?”

“That cannot be,” said the Lamb; “I am only six months old.”

“I don’t care,” snarled the Wolf; “if it was not you, it was your father;” and with that he rushed upon the poor little Lamb and ate her all up.

MORAL: Any excuse will serve a tyrant.

I simply quit using amazon. They are not the only way to buy stuff nor even the best way.

I left Facebook a year ago and survived.

I’ve already begun separating myself from Amazon. This article is further encouragement to continue that process.

The ONLY thing these people will listen to is $$. If 40% of the country refuses to spend $$ there it will have an impact.

Find neutral or conservative sites and spend your $$ there.

Henry Hawkins | May 24, 2018 at 3:18 pm

Just got back from my attorney’s office having changed my will to add Legal Insurrection as beneficiary of several specific items that could be easily auctioned off for a tidy sum, intended as a bulwark against future and ongoing attacks on the financial status of conservative media outlets, to wit:

Upon my death LI will receive:

1) My collection of TV Guides running from 1961 through 1987.

2) All on 33 rpm vinyl, my collection of *every dang record* released by The Cowsills.

3) A full-size free-standing full color slightly stained cardboard cut-out of Barbie Benton, plus another of Billy Carter.

4) Since none of my kids have expressed any interest, I’m throwing in my ball of ear wax and nail clippings collected since 1972, which is now an impressive ‘glob globe’ of 4’9″ in diameter and weighing 211 lbs. (Requires refrigeration).

5) An adult size Halloween costume of Floyd the Barber from the Andy Griffith Show.

6) An official NHL hockey puck which came off the ice at Joe Louis Arena in Detroit during a 1994 game between the Red Wings and the Colorado Avalanche and proceeded to knock out four teeth of the lady sitting beside me. You can still see the blood stain.

7) 950 copies of the hardcover edition of Rules For Radicals by Saul Alinsky. I acquired them with the intent of a nice fall weather bonfire for the kids, but never got around to it. They grow up so fast.

8) Leather bound file containing copies of every article written for LI by Fuzzy Slippers (which turns out to be a pseudonym, btw).

9) A Barack Obama dart board.

10) Last, but not least, I’ve instructed my attorney that upon my death he will have my keyboard bronzed for placement in a prominent place in the Legal Insurrection office lobby.

Getting old is not for sissies I’m learning, and it’s like with a used car – it’s not so much how old the car is, but how many miles does it have on it? I’ve got a lot o’miles on me and am surely not long for this world. Which means……… commenters can go ahead and start bidding on these items!

Wow…this is so dangerous for America!!

Funny thing…I’d been with them for years as an Associate and they terminated me suddenly also (sometime within the last year–would have to check up on exactly when)…and I have a conservative blog (absolutely no match for this one of course) that is listed on your blogroll!!

You know….Amazon uses robots (gasp!) at it’s distribution warehouses to move orders. I thought leftists feel robots are bad, they take jobs humans could do.
where is the outrage?

    Henry Hawkins in reply to scooterjay. | May 24, 2018 at 6:14 pm

    Sure, Scootman, but you see, although robots take jobs *some* humans could do, in America robots do the jobs Americans won’t do. See? That’s how you libify a thang.

And you ask why the crocodile did not eat you last?

I am so angry about this. I do a lot of shopping on Amazon, and I always figured that at least going through the LI link made it of some benefit to the conservative cause. For the last few weeks, when I couldn’t find the link on the front page, I searched LI and found the link on an old post about the Amazon associate program, which still took me to Amazon, so I assumed LI was benefitting. The leftists are destroying everything and driving me crazy. All of this SJW crap, the constant media gaslighting, the neverTrump d-bags like McCain, Flake, Kristol et al, my liberal neighbors and siblings with their Trump Derangement Syndrome and “resistance” BS. It is truly becoming unbearable. I have to keep reminding myself that Trump is in the White House in spite of it all, so we really are winning, but sometimes it doesn’t feel that way.

Damn Prof Jacobson, from reading this I would swear you just got stopped from boarding a plane and told you were on th “No-Fly List”

Just sent a message to Amazon via my account that I put my spending on hold until they provide a clear & consistent answer or reinstate legalinsurrection.

jeannebodine | May 24, 2018 at 10:39 pm

I had a live chat with Rahul, a kindly fellow at Amazon. I told him that the situation with LI was untenable and as a result, I was going to stop using Amazon so frequently. I buy everything on Amazon. He expressed his electronic concern and told me a customer service rep would contact me within 24 hours.

A couple of hours later I received an email from Amazon with a $5.00 credit on my next purchase. What kind of Judas do they think I am? I ain’t gonna sell out my principles for less that $25.00.

blah deblah | May 24, 2018 at 11:48 pm

Welcome to the “information economy.” If you didn’t know this was coming, you weren’t paying attention.

BierceAmbrose | May 25, 2018 at 12:20 am

The customer is whoever pays, so when you read ad-supported, or referral-supported “media” you’re not the customer, you’re the product.

Whoever controls access to the paying customer ultimately is in charge. So, if your depend on your media “distribution” via Facebook’s feeds or Google’s search portal … they’re in charge.

Interestingly, conservative “economic literacy” does not seem to extend much to the organizational n operational specifics of how things work. It seems like while conservatives get economics in the large n economic fundamentals, the other guys get capturing individual relationships and fine-grained payoffs.

BierceAmbrose | May 25, 2018 at 12:23 am

Pay for your playground. From time to time, I kick the cost of a magazine subscription to the places I play.

BierceAmbrose | May 25, 2018 at 12:25 am

I wonder of B & L has an affiliates-like program?

Or link direct to publishers or author.

BierceAmbrose | May 25, 2018 at 12:38 am

4 of 4 … I’m trying to keep each comment to one subject.

Amazon has become steadily more difficult to deal with since about the millennium. They — meaning Bezos — made — meaning exposed — a deliberate choice — meaning his preferred way of thinking — to optimize high-volume, commodity transactions vs provide a mass-customized service.

The bulk math works, and is appealing to El Heffe, who permits his minion hordes essentially 0 autonomy. Read “Inside the Giant Machine” for a sense.

Just last week, I gave up after 3 rounds back and forth when I was trying to ask them if a bank branded pre-paid, generic gift card was OK with their payment processing. Their online materials says they handle corporate gift cards, and bank credit / debit cards. I have a bank branded gift card. Not sure that will work. Thought I’d ask before I do something sideways of the payment processing system.

They’re bad collaborators and a poor partner in any relationship in any direction. Sometimes they’re worth dealing with, but remember who they are.

For me, I’ve never owned one of their devices, subscribed to prime or even purchased electronic media through them. Right now, they host my extensive topic-sorted wish list. Eventually, I’ll pull that. And in a reversal of the big concern about people selecting at “bricks and mortars” then buying online, I’m increasingly using Amazon’s catalog, similarity search and similar to find particular interesting items … then buying them directly from the affiliate, or similar alternative.

I think I may have found the language in their agreement that the SJW idiots would consider grounds to terminate your participation:

Your Site will not be eligible for inclusion in the Associates Program, and you cannot include any Special Links or Product Advertising Content on it, if your Site is unsuitable. Unsuitable Sites include those that:

(a) promote or contain sexually explicit or obscene materials;

(b) promote violence or contain violent materials;

(c) promote or contain false, deceptive, libelous or defamatory materials;

(d) promote or contain materials or activity that is hateful, harassing, harmful, invasive of another’s privacy, abusive, or discriminatory (including on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, or age);

To the leftist jerks with Trump Derangement Syndrome, simply being a conservative and supporting Trump means you are deceptive, hateful, abusive, discriminatory, etc. Some SJWs probably contacted Amazon and demanded they remove you and other conservative sites on that basis, and Amazon was only too happy to comply. That’s my guess anyway.


Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend