Thursday, May 30, 2019

Oh, the things you see on Twitter!

Related image 

Thing # 1:

Related image

Sighhhh. . .this again? We're still doing this? It's not even interesting anymore, it's just sad. Unless. . . .let me just go ahead and click on the link to the story and see. . . .

Among the speakers were Angel Colon and Luis Ruiz, two survivors of the Pulse nightclub massacre who now run a ministry together called Fearless Identity. Ruiz said although he might face temptations every day, “I choose Jesus, because he’s the only man in my life. He’s the only man that didn’t sleep with my best friend 

And there it is!

Luis, dude. You know I'm not one to judge, but your best friend? Your best friend is a whoooooore! Your best friend has slept with every man except Jesus Christ? I'm all for sowing one's wild oats, but that's just nasty!

Ruiz described himself as a combat veteran who served 15 years in the Army, adding, “Today I go to war with a whole bunch of you guys” to call the nation back to Jesus. “This is a new day, baby, and we’re coming in love. We’re coming in relationship. We’re coming with Jesus.

Image result for archer phrasing gif

 In her opening remarks, Woning told the audience on the grounds of the Washington monument and online that Jesus is “meeting us in the bars. He’s meeting us in the backrooms. He’s meeting us in our bedrooms at night when we are dreaming.”

Image result for oh come on! gif

Seriously, these people just want to do sex with Jesus and that is just WRONG!

Thing # 2:

Nooo! You don't say! Are uou trying to tell me that the children of affluent parents are more likely to attend and graduate from college? Can this be?

Thing # 3:

Yeah, that's not a thing.
There are no children who survive abortions. Even assuming that by the word "child" you mean anything from a fertilized egg to an adolescent, how would you survive an abortion? Can you give a single example of any entity that has survived an abortion? Haha, of course you can't. Don;t worry about it.

Thing # 4:

Ummmmm, you do know you shouldn't leave your kids alone in a hot car, right? I mean, you shouldn't leave your kids alone in any car, and you shouldn't live any living being in a hot car, and the fact that you think that this irresponsible behavior should make you immune to criticism AND qualify you to have favors done for you by strangers is kind of mind-boggling, but you do you, I guess.

Thing # 5:

Georgia can be a scary place.

I mean, he's threatening to kill people, right? This is why we don't go "outside the Perimeter" unless we're going directly to a state park.

Image result for atlanta perimeter

Thing # 6:

And people wonder why I don't care for Nancy Pelosi?

You know, the time spent kissing ass at AIPAC is time that you could be spending on impeaching the son of a bitch!

Thing # 7:

This thread by some jerk who thinks he's smart:

Thursday, May 23, 2019

This is a professional opinion writer.

So not only is Peggy Noonan still alive, having somehow not yet succumbed to cirrhosis of the soul, she still gets paid to write things.
Things like this:

The Missing Order in American Politics

Yes, we all feel nostalgic for the days of  unrepentant war criminal Henry Kissinger!
There certainly wasn't any chaos in Kissinger's heyday. The country certainly wasn't divided over Vietnam or Watergate or anything.

I am watching Washington and thinking this: We have reached a new crisis point in Donald Trump vs. the Democrats. 

No. we have reached a new crisis point with Donald Trump. Don't you dare try to "both sides" this one.

I am watching Washington and thinking this: We have reached a new crisis point in Donald Trump vs. the Democrats. They are speaking of contempt citations, subpoenas, executive privilege, hearings. It’s a daily barrage.

Oh my God! Do you mean to tell me that the Democrats are speaking of enforcing the law?

Image result for swoon gif

It's a daily barrage of Cheeto Mussolini defying the law, lying and complaining. And insulting people. And claiming to have powers which the Constitution does not grant him. And then, on the other hand you have the Democrats, led by Nancy "Impeach? Well, I never!" Pelosi objecting to Il Douche flouting the law. So, you know, both sides seem equally to blame for getting Peggy all flustered.

The Democrats are inching closer to impeachment, at least rhetorically, perhaps actually. We’ll see how well Speaker Nancy Pelosi can dance right up to the edge to appease some in her caucus, and not over it.

Why would you think that would be a laudable goal? That's like saying "I sure hope Elliot Ness can manage to assuage the fears of the people of Chicago without actually going out and arresting Al Capone!"
I would love to see what Peggy was saying about Republicans impeaching Bill Clinton over a consensual affair. I'm sure she was equally as concerned about Newt and his goons overreaching.

Related image

But there is such a thing as context, and the Democrats seem to be ignoring it. This is a country divided.

Yeah, of course it is. It always has been. Except for a brief period from 1941-1944 and right after 9/11. We are always a country divided. What country isn't? Some of us want the country to go on a path towards equity, peace and shared prosperity and some of us want to re-institute the feudal system and stone adulteresses.

Related image

Almost half the country is for Mr. Trump—truly, madly, deeply.

Oh my God, that is a bald-faced lie! When has his approval rating ever gotten within shouting distance of 50 percent? Let alone having half the people be truly, madly, deeply in love with this lummox? Whatever argument you're going to make has already failed by being based on an absurdly false premise.

Image result for trump approval rating over time

 Half is against him—unequivocally, unchangeably. 

Well, see, that isn't really true either. First of all, it's more than half. Second, those of us who are against President Cartman would happily change our tune were he to have some kind of Regarding Henry moment and somehow become a decent human being and a competent president.  It's not like we hate him because we have something against spray tans and bad comb-overs. We have a problem with senile racist grifters having ahold of the levers of power

 There is no resolving this. Or rather to the extent it can be resolved, it will be resolved at the ballot box. The presidential election is 18 months from now, on Nov. 3, 2020.
Until then, people are where they are and hold the views they hold, and don’t push them too hard.

So one should never, in this Democratic Republic of ours, attempt to convince others of the rightness of our views or the wrongness of theirs? What if, for instance, we encounter someone who believes things that are demonstrably false, like that a wall is being built on the border, or that President McCheese doesn't spend as much time golfing as his predecessor, or that tariffs on Chinese goods are payed by Chinese companies and not by American consumers? We should just shrug and say "there's no point trying to get anyone to listen to reason. We'll just have to wait until 2020?"That's bullshit.

Democrats unveil charges and accusations—the president is a liar, he’s a tax dodger, an obstructor of justice. 

All of which are obviously, conspicuously, manifestly true. None of these facts are in dispute.

But in a way Mr. Trump’s supporters accounted for all this before they elected him. They are not shocked. They didn’t hire him to be a good man. 

So what? The decision whether or not to indict, subpoena or impeach the president is a legal ethical and moral one. It has nothing to do with whether or not the president's fans are okay with his crimes. Al Capone had a lot of fans, too. That has no bearing on his guilt or innocence. You can not seriously be suggesting that we should allow the president to get away with his numerous crimes because the knuckle-draggers who love him are okay with his having committed the crimes. You're not seriously suggesting that, are you?

Image result for you can not be serious gif

They didn’t hire him to be a good man. Their politics are post-heroic. 

Oh my God, what are you talking about? He is absolutely their fucking hero.

Related image

Image result for trump rally tshirt

Image result for trump painting

I'm so sorry you had to see that.
But these people absolutely see Trump as a hero. Not necessarily a knight in shining armor - type hero, maybe more like a Tony Soprano / Walter White / Dexter - style anti-hero, but a hero nonetheless. If you don't see that, you're even more hopelessly out of touch than I thought.

 They sometimes tell reporters he’s a man of high character but mostly to drive the reporters crazy. I have never talked to a Trump supporter, and my world is thick with them, who thought he had a high personal character. On the other hand they sincerely believe he has a high political character, in that he pursues the issues he campaigned on. They hired him as an insult to the political class

Why are you saying this like it's okay? First off, the Trump supporters who move in the same rarified inside-the-beltway circles as Peggy Noonan are hardly representative of the Trump voter base. You might want to go to one of those diners in small-town America that every other reporter seems obligated to visit and talk to some of these salt-of-the-earth deplorables. There isn't a bit of irony in their support for Cheeto Mussolini. But, putting that aside, how are you gonna sit there with a straight face and act like millions of Americans voting for an incompetent bigot as some sort of middle finger on the establishment isn't indicative of some serious moral rot at the core of white Christian conservative America?

Supporters give him high marks for not looking down on them as they believe most members of the media, who are always trying to “understand” them, do. 

Okay, see, this is what I'm talking about. If they seriously think that Mr. Manhattan penthouse, Mr. Private jet, Mr. Gold Fucking Toilet doesn't look down on a bunch of rubes, hicks, and rednecks who shop at Dollar Tree and think Cracker Barrel is a fancy night out, they have well and truly drunk every last drop of Trump's Kool-Aid.
Trump wouldn't spit on their heads if their hair was on fire, and if they don't realize that, then they are as delusional as you seem to be, thinking that that voting for Trump was some kind of elaborate prank the proles were pulling to demonstrate their frustrations with the elite political class.

 When they jeer the press during rallies at the president’s direction, they don’t really mean it. They’re having fun and talking back.

Do you have any idea how many death threats journalists get from these deplorables? Do you not remember the "MAGA Bomber" sending pipe bombs to reporters?

Image result for trump rally press penRelated image

Pictured: Trump supporter "having fun."

Oh, and I guess you must have missed this headline:

A BBC cameraman was assaulted during Trump’s rally in El Paso. Trump kept attacking the media anyway.

But, yeah. It's totally plausible that when the president calls the press the "enemy of the people," and his supporters scream insults and make obscene gestures at the press pen, that it's all just a big fucking joke and no one is actually serious and it's perfectly fine for the president of the goddamm U S of A to act like a petulant schoolyard bully because he doesn't really mean it.

They’d be happy if their kids became reporters—an affluent profession, and half of them are famous. 

O, my God.

Image result for facepalm gif

A: no they wouldn't.

B: it is not an "affluent profession." Sure, compared to flipping burgers or digging ditches, it pays a lot better, but it's not like reporters are getting rich unless they end up anchoring the nightly news.

C: Very few reporters are famous. Even if you include media personalities who aren't reporters, like the pundits and talking heads that fill the hours of cable news, a very small number of them could be considered "famous." Read the bylines of articles in your local newspaper. Do any of those names sound familiar? No? That's because they are not famous. And half the stories are credited to Reuters or Associated Press or some other news service meaning that the reporters who worked on the story are not only not famous they're completely anonymous.
How many working reporters can you name? Not news show hosts like Rachel Maddow or anchors like Lester Holt, but actual reporters? There's  Amy Goodman, Ian Milheiser, Guy Lawson, Greg Palast, Matt Taibi. . . I'm already out of names. And there are tons of reporters out there.

The president doesn’t really hate the press either, he wants their love and admiration. You don’t need the admiration of people you truly disdain.

Uh, you do if you're a malignant narcissist.

Trump supporters now are looking around and thinking: Things are looking up. The economy is gangbusters, everyone can get a job, good people are on the courts. Something good is happening with China—it’s unclear what, but at least he’s pushing back

Okay, something is "happening" with China. We don't know what it is, but we're sure that it's something good. That's what you're going with?

Because, out here in the real world, THIS is what's "Happening with China."

A soybean farmer explains the challenges facing farmers if Trump's trade war continues.
Economists quit Trump admin after their studies showed tariffs hurt US farmers

But do go on.
To take all Congress’s time right now and devote it to attacking the president, or impeaching him, will be experienced as a vast, disheartening insult by half the country, and disheartening.

A: so. . . it will be both disheartening AND disheartening? Professional writer, are you?
B: So fucking what? You think Congress should neglect its Constitutional duty because "half the country" (bullshit) would get their feelings hurt?

 THIS is your argument against impeachment? Don't do it because it would make these people sad?

Image result for trump supporters Image result for racist trump supporters

That's honestly all the more reason to go ahead with impeachment. And also, why would they feel so disheartened and insulted if they really don't mean any of this anyway and only voted for Trump as an eff-you to Washington?

Hard to believe you're a professional writer!

Tuesday, May 21, 2019

Catching Up.

You know, i wasn't really gone all that long, but I sure seemed to have missed a lot of. . . stuff. Let's say "stuff."

Like, for instance, this:

Exclusive: Presidential hopeful Biden looking for ‘middle ground’ climate policy

Image result for sigh gif 

Oh fer. . . "middle ground?"

What exactly is the "middle ground" on the climate catastrophe down the barrel of which we are now staring?

Okay, how about this? How about only ONE of the ice caps melts, hmm? We'll keep the one with the penguins. You like penguins, don't you?

Oh what if only SOME coastal cities are underwater? We don't really need Miami AND New Orleans, do we? We'll still have Seattle. Probably. And some of Manhattan.

I really do not understand this compulsion among certain Democrats (they know who they are) to always, always, always try to work out some kind of compromise with the recalcitrant sociopathic lunatics of the Republican Party. It will never happen, and if it ever did, the result would still be horrendous. We have something like 10-12 years to take serious, drastic, severe measures to combat this threat to humanity and guys like Biden are seriously going to come out with his trademark "whoa, there, let's not get too far out there on this. Let's to be reasonable, find a way to make everybody happy" bullshit? God! Does he not remember the 8 years he spent as Barack Obama's vp? Does he still seriously have no idea who these people are? Remember, Joe, how you and President Obama offered cuts to Social Security and Medicare as part of a "grand bargain?" What happened, Joe? Did they accept your offer and work out some bi-partisan compromise? No. No they did not. And it's honestly a good thing that they didn't because where in the Hell do you get off offering cuts to Social Security and Medicare? We should be expanding those programs. It's just lucky that those bug-eyed, poo-throwing lunatics in the "Tea Party" refused to take any deal wherein they got less than 100% of what they want or we'd all be living with the consequences of your "grand bargain" today.

Oh, and speaking of  nutty caucuses:

House Freedom Caucus Unanimously Condemns Amash, Its Own Member

How. . . why. . . what could he possibly have done to warrant condemnation by members of his own cabal? Must have been truly egregious!

The House Freedom Caucus on Monday night formally condemned one of its founding members for declaring that President Trump committed impeachable offenses

Image result for what the hell?

Is this the Onion? Is this one of those satire articles like "GOP Congressman censured for telling truth?" Is this for real?

Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio, the top Republican on the House Oversight Committee and a former chairman of the Freedom Caucus, said that every single member in attendance during a weekly caucus meeting was unified in their opposition toward Amash’s comments.

Jim Jordan. Jim fucking Jordan. Jim the enabler of sexual abuse Jordan is taking umbrage.

I mean, Jeezus, even if it wasn't Jim Jordan, how does any member of Congress have the balls to say "this guy made a statement of fact that I don't care for. I therefore, must in the strongest possible terms, CONDEMN HIM!"

Also, how does a Tea Party/Freedom Caucus shitbird like Amash realize that this president needs to be impeached, but Nancy Pelosi somehow doesn't?

What else did I miss? Oh, Texas has really upped the ante for voter suppression.

Now, is that an exageration? Probably. But the bill does contain the following language

A person who assists at least three voters voting under this section at the same time by providing the voters with transportation to the polling place must complete and sign a form that:(1) requires the person to affirm that the voters arephysically unable to enter the polling place without personalassistance or likelihood of injuring their health; and(2) contains the following information:(A) the person's name and address; and(B) whether the person is providing assistance tothe voters solely under this section or under both this section andSubchapter B.
Also, according to the Texas Civil Right Project:

  • It threatens voters with jail time and enormous fines: Voters could be punished for innocent mistakes, such as filling out their voter registration form wrong.
  • It scares voters by weakening the right to a provisional ballot: Voters have a right to a provisional ballot when they sincerely believe they are eligible to vote, but this bill exposes them to possible jail time for doing so.
And there's this:

In a letter sent today to the bill’s sponsor, Republican Sen. Bryan Hughes of Mineola, said Senate Bill 9 would make “voting substantially harder for thousands of Texans … by spreading fear that people may be thrown in jail for honest mistakes while trying to vote.”

Yeah, a Republican from Texas thinks this bill is offensive.
And I don't pretend to know anything about Mineola, but I guarantee Mineola ain't Austin.

And let's see. Oh, we have the first entry in the race to be this year's Todd Akin. It's Missouri representative Barry Hovis.

Image result for larry hovis

No. BARRY Hovis.

Missouri Republican politician apologizes for ‘consensual rape’ statement

Anyway, this is what Hovis had to say:

Let’s just say someone goes out and they’re raped or they’re sexually assaulted one night after a college party — because most of my rapes were not the gentleman jumping out of the bushes that nobody had ever met,”explained Hovis. “That was one or two times out of a hundred. Most of them were date rapes or consensual rapes, which were all terrible.”

Yes. He said "consensual rapes." Which is about as big an oxymoron as one could conjure up, but mostly is just sickeningly offensive.
So, being a fine Southern gentleman, of course he apologized.

He tried explaining that he had misspoke and meant to say, “Date rapes or consensual or rape,” rather than “consensual rapes.”“It’s my apology if I didn’t enunciate the word ‘or,'” said Hovis on Friday.

Image result for angry  
That's not any better!

Oh, and there's this.

There are  children in cages. Roe v Wade is being dismantled. We're rattling sabres with Iran. And our President openly flouts the law with impunity. So a bunch of people in Los Angeles decided to hold a protest.

Lakers fan protest: 'Fire Rambis!' 'Sell the team!' 'No Jason Kidd!'

Yes. They actually held a demonstration outside the Staples Center to protest the way in which a basketball team is being run. Because you know, it isn't like there are any bigger issues to worry about.

Image result for headshake gif

But at least some people understand the urgency of the current political situation and have organized a petition drive.

More Than 1 Million Disappointed Fans Sign Petition Demanding ‘Game of Thrones’ Season 8 Remake

Image result for head exploding gif

Wednesday, May 8, 2019

Does Nancy Pelosi even want to win?

In what alternate universe does Nancy Pelosi live?

Pelosi Warns Democrats: Stay in the Center or Trump May Contest Election Results

Does Ms Pelosi honestly think that there is a scenario in which Donald Trump loses the election and doesn't contest the results? For God's sake, he spent a year contesting the results of the election he WON!

There is no way - NO WAY - that Trump will ever admit defeat. He will never shake the hand of whichever Democrat defeats him in 2020 and say "congratulations and good luck." He will probably have to be forcibly removed from the Oval Office by the capitol police.

Or he may go peacefully. And spend his remaining years telling anyone who will listen about how the deep state and the Democrats stole the presidency from him. But if he loses, there is no way in Hell he just accepts defeat.

I mean, for God's sake, he won't even admit to having been a shitty businessman who lost a billion dollars of his father's money. He's out there saying that he lost that money intentionally for tax purposes because he's so smart.

Image result for I meant to do that

I meant to do that!

“If we win by four seats, by a thousand votes each, he’s not going to respect the election,” said Pelosi in an interview with the New York Times.

Who. Cares?

He doesn't have to respect the election (And he won't). He just needs to make a funny landing when he's tossed out on his ear.

Image result for tossed out  of bar gif

And take Pence and Bolton and Mnuchin with you!

“He would poison the public mind. He would challenge each of the races; he would say you can’t seat these people,” she added, and referenced the 40 House seats gained by Democrats in 2018 midterm elections.

You know what, though? He didn't do that. He didn't challenge the legitimacy of the various Democratic election winners. Because they aren't him. So he doesn't give a shit about them. Donald Trump only cares about people whose name rhymes with Schmonald Schump.
And also, so what if he did? The only people who would take that seriously are the 35% of Americans who already think that Hillary Clinton was running a child sex ring out of a pizzeria when she wasn't having Seth Rich murdered and that some mysterious stranger with a "Q" level security clearance is sending them coded messages on Reddit. Those people still think that Barack Obama wasn't really president because Hawaii is part of Kenya.

“We had to win. Imagine if we hadn’t won — oh, don’t even imagine. So, as we go forward, we have to have the same approach.”

Okay. Good. Let's have the same approach. Let's have dynamic, charismatic candidates withe true progressive ideas like AOC, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Presley, Lucy McBath, Ilhan Omar. . .

Sitting in her office, Ms. Pelosi . . . offered Democrats her “coldblooded” plan for decisively ridding themselves of Mr. Trump:
. .  .do not risk alienating the moderate voters who flocked to the party in 2018 by drifting too far to the left.
“Own the center left, own the mainstream,” Ms. Pelosi, 79, said.

“Our passions were for health care, bigger paychecks, cleaner government — a simple message,” Ms. Pelosi said of the 40-seat Democratic pickup last year that resulted in her second ascent to the speakership. “We did not engage in some of the other exuberances that exist in our party” — a reference to some of the most ambitious plans advocated by the left wing of her party and some 2020 candidates, including “Medicare for all” and the Green New Deal, which she has declined to support.

Image result for head palm gif

Oh, right. Of course. Of course you managed to learn exactly the wrong lesson from 2018. You sure wouldn't want to alienate the elusive "moderate" voters with a radical plan like the Green New Deal which is only supported by. . . **quick Google search**. . .

More than 80% of Americans support almost all of the key ideas in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal

Oh my God! 80 percent?!?! Well, what left-wing rag published this?

Image result for business insider

Oh my God. . .

So Nancy Pelosi thinks that it is vital for Democrats to not only defeat Trump, but to do so by a wide margin, and part of her strategy to achieve this wide margin of victory is to run away from a policy that is supported by OVER EIGHTY PERCENT OF AMERICANS?!?!?!?
And this is who's in charge of the party?

Okay, so maybe she's wrong about the Green New Deal. What about opposing Medicare for All? Surely that must be a smart political stance, right? 70 percent of Americans support 'Medicare for all' proposal

Image result for forehead slap gif

So, instead of running candidates who support policies favored by 70 - 80% of voters, you want to do what, again?

Image result for Joe Biden goofy


Joseph R. Biden Jr. “took off because people know him,” she said. “They trust him.”

No. See, they either know him or they trust him. Not both. People who know Joe Biden know about shit like this:

And this:

And this:

So, you're dealing with an electorate that is 70 percent in favor of Medicare for All, and you want to trot out a guy who's been looking to CUT Medicare for basically his whole career? And you're supposed to be the reasonable one?

Oh, and does it occur to you that we are now doing politics in the #MeToo era?

When asked whether Mr. Biden would pay a political price for his grilling of Anita F. Hill during the 1991 confirmation hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas, Ms. Pelosi shook her head in the negative and waved a hand dismissively.

Image result for facepalm gif

Honest to God, Madam Speaker, just open up Twitter and search "Anita Hill." You are so out of touch with the electorate.

More than anything, Ms. Pelosi is focused on pursuing center-left policies she thinks will help her party out in 2020 — a focus on pragmatic improvements to health care, 

Oh my God. People do not want "pragmatic improvements" to healthcare. We want what the rest of the modern world has. We want single payer. How do you not get this? And we are sick and tired of being told that it isn't "practical" or "pragmatic" or "feasible" when we know good and damn well that it is. We know they do it in Canada, the UK, Australia, the Netherlands, etc etc etc and we know the only reason we don't do it here is because our politicians are too afraid of upsetting the billionaires who run the insurance companies.

You want to beat Trump? Good. So do I. So does every decent person. You don't do it by trying to play down the middle. You know who tried your approach of "owning the center-left" and not alienating the "moderates?" Hillary Clinton. How did that work out again? She lost. And before anyone comes back with "actually she won, because she got 3 million more votes. . ." yes, I know that. But as long as we have this verkackte electoral college, you can get 3 million more votes and still lose if you don't get enough of those votes from the "swing states." And the way you get those voters from the swing states to show up and pull the lever for you is to offer them something to vote FOR, not just a villain to vote against. You have to offer something that they want. And what they want is Medicare for All and a Green New Deal. If you can't figure that out, maybe you're in the wrong line of work.

Oh, and P.S. Joe Biden has run for President at least twice and caused barely a ripple. The only memorable thing about either of his campaigns was his being caught plagiarizing. Joe Biden is not a horse you want to back. Not if you want to win.

Tuesday, May 7, 2019

How to make your child into an alt-right hatebeast.

This lady's kid became an alt-right pig boy but it wan't his fault! And it certainly wasn't his fault. It's that darn internet!

What Happened After My 13-Year-Old Son Joined the Alt-Right

A Washington family's nightmare year.

The problems had started when Sam was 13, barely a month into eighth grade. In the taxonomy of our local public school, his close group of friends was tagged edgy and liberal

Yes. I'm sure they were ever so "edgy." Nothing "edgier" than a "liberal" teenager.

One morning during first period, a male friend of Sam’s mentioned a meme whose suggestive name was an inside joke between the two of them. Sam laughed. A girl at the table overheard their private conversation, misconstrued it as a sexual reference, and reported it as sexual harassment. Sam’s guidance counselor pulled him out of his next class and accused him of “breaking the law.” 

No. No, that didn't happen. No guidance counselor would be that stupid, that ignorant of the law. The guidance counselor may have accused your son of violating school rules or behavioral guidelines, but the law? No way. And, honestly I doubt that the incident happened the way your son told you it did. There is no way a girl just overheard a risque' reference in a private conversation and ran off to report that she had been sexually harassed.  Girls who have actually been sexually harassed rarely report it  for a variety of reasons not the least of which is that the school is unlikely to take their accusations seriously.

Image result for simpsons boys will be boys

If this girl made an accusation of sexual harassment, AND the school took it seriously, your son did something a lot worse than laugh at an off-color joke. I would think maybe something like Jameis Winston did at Florida State. That was based on an internet meme, too.
And if this had actually happened the way your liar son claims it did, wouldn't she have reported the boy who MADE the vulgar joke? Not the one who merely laughed?

You can not seriously take a 13-year-old boy at his word. If I had gotten into trouble at school (which I never did, I was a fucking saint) I would have lied to my mom about it too.

Before long, he was in the office of a male administrator who informed him that the exchange was “illegal,” hinted that the police were coming, and delivered him into the custody of the school’s resource officer. At the administrator’s instruction, that man ushered Sam into an empty room, handed him a blank sheet of paper, and instructed him to write a “statement of guilt.”

And you seriously bought this story? Fuck, I wish you had been my mom. I could've gotten away with murder! (Not that I would have. Saint, you know.)

Image result for simpsons angel

No one called me as this unfolded

And that didn't tip you off? I'm guessing, just by your indulgent parenting some of the other things you write here that you live in a fairly affluent school district. The kind where parents hire lawyers if their precious little angels don't get a passing grade. there is no way they wouldn't have informed you or the boy's father while this was going on. This alone should tell you that this never happened.

No one called me as this unfolded, even though Sam cried for about six hours straight as staff members parked him in vacant offices to keep him away from other students. When he stepped off the bus that afternoon and I asked why his eyes were so swollen, he informed me that he would probably be suspended, but possibly also expelled and arrested.
If Kafka were a middle-schooler today, this is the nightmare novel he would have written.

Yes. Kafka, a fiction writer, might well have written such an implausible scenario.,

At a meeting two days later with my husband, Sam, and me, the administrator piled more accusations on top of the harassment charge—even implying, with undisguised hostility, that Sam and his friend were gay. He waved in front of us a statement from the girl at the table and insisted that Sam would need to defend himself against her claims if he wanted to prove his innocence. But the administrator refused to reveal the particulars of the complaint (he had also blacked out identifying details, FBI-style) and then hid the paperwork under a book. He declared that it was his primary duty, as a school official and as a father of daughters, to believe and to protect the girls under his care.

So the administrator was Joseph McCarthy? You're still expecting us to believe this? And all this, you expect us to believe, was the result of your son merely laughing at someone else's bawdy joke. I mean, you can see why no one believes this, right?

Sam agreed, reluctantly, to write a letter of apology to the girl who’d reported him so that the debacle would come to an end. But no hoped-for resolution materialized. Instead, Sam’s sweet earnestness, his teenage overconfidence, even his tremulous determination in the face of unjust authority drained away, replaced by . . . nothing. He lost all affect. He stopped eating and sleeping, complained of headaches, and regressed in disturbing ways. He couldn’t concentrate, turned in no homework, and didn’t even pick up a pen when it was time to take a test.

 Okay, your son is disturbed. If this is true, and I have my doubts, this kid sounds severely depressed. This isn't funny anymore. You need to get him help.

But the transfer, midyear, to a new school—after he’d been wrongly accused, unfairly treated, then unceremoniously dropped by his friends—shattered Sam. 

Oh my God, he would not have been dumped by his friends for having been mistreated by school officials. That wouldn't happen. Why would they drop their friend if all he had done was laugh at a risque' joke? If anything, they would have rallied around him. You know who would have been ostracized? The girl who made the complaint. No matter how legitimate the complaint was, girls who report boys' bad behavior and get the boys in trouble are usually the ones who face negative social consequences. At least in the real world where real things happen. Not in the made-up world where your son is an innocent angel victimized by cruel authorities over a simple misunderstanding.

 He felt totally alone. I counseled patience, naively unprepared for what came next: when he found people to talk to on Reddit and 4chan.
Those online pals were happy to explain that all girls lie—especially about rape. And they had lots more knowledge to impart. They told Sam that Islam is an inherently violent religion and that Jews run global financial networks. (We’re Jewish and don’t know anyone who runs anything, but I guess the evidence was convincing.) They insisted that the wage gap is a fallacy, that feminazis are destroying families, that people need guns to protect themselves from government incursions onto private property. They declared that women who abort their babies should be jailed.

And your son wasn't intelligent enough to smell this bullshit from a mile away?

Sam prides himself on questioning conventional wisdom and subjecting claims to intellectual scrutiny. 

Really? At thirteen. At thirteen years of age, he prides himself on "subjecting claims to intellectual scrutiny." That's what you're going with. That's what you think seems like a reasonable description of your thirteen-year-old son.
Seem this is half the problem. You have this kid believing this shit. You've been telling him forever how special and intelligent he is, what a deep thinker he is, how he's just so much better than the other kids. So now when something doesn't go his way (which I would bet an awful lot of money was entirely his fault) he can't handle it. He goes into a nearly catatonic depression. Then he gets intrigued by the alt-right, because they also tell him that nothing is his fault. It's the feminists, it's the Muslims, it's the Jews. All these powerful forces are aligned against him simply because he was unfortunate enough to have been born white, male and affluent.

Sam prides himself on questioning conventional wisdom and subjecting claims to intellectual scrutiny. For kids today, that means Googling stuff. One might think these searches would turn up a variety of perspectives, including at least a few compelling counterarguments. One would be wrong. 

No, one would actually be correct. If your son had actually been searching out answers, he would not have found only the alt-right "intellectual dark web."

Here's an example. I just now typed "Do women lie about rape?" into the Google. Here are the top three results:

Only about 2% of all rape and related sex charges are determined to be false, the same percentage as for other felonies (FBI).

Over the past 20 years, only 2-10% of rape accusations (Prof Ford's lawyer says she believes this was attempted rape) are proven to be fake, argue the authors of a 2010 US study.
we should be sceptical of the notion that it is common for women to say they've been sexually abused when they haven't.

False Rape Accusations Are Incredibly Rare - The Cut
Almost No One Is Falsely Accused of Rape

You get the idea. If your son had been honestly searching for the truth, using his famed "intellectual scrutiny," he would have found much more accurate answers. If he went to 4chan and typed in something like "why do these b*tches always lie about rape?" then he would have gotten spmething more like the results that he did actually get.

The Google searches flooded his developing brain with endless bias-confirming “proof” to back up whichever specious alt-right standard was being hoisted that week. Each set of results acted like fertilizer sprinkled on weeds: A forest of distortion flourished.

see, you're almost getting it. You're soooo close to getting it. Confirmation Bias! That's what was going on here. Your son, if he saw an article that said "well, no, women virtually never make up false charges of rape or assault," he disregarded it as it didn't fit in with his preconceived notion that he can never be at fault so the girl must be nefariously trying to harm him because girls are evil. But when he sees an article saying something like, as Rush Limbaugh has infamously said repeatedly, "the concept of date-rape was made up by feminists to destroy the fine art of seduction," well that fits in with his framework of him being the victim And in a way, he probably is a victim. He's probably the victim of your parenting. I mean, I guess I'm going out on a limb here, but I assume you're like one of those mothers you see on Judge Judy who insists that their son would never never do the thing he is accused of doing and he never lies and always tells the truth and then Judge Judy gets him on the stand for about 30 seconds and the kid goes "okay, yeah, I did it." And then at the end of the show the mother still somehow thinks her kid didn't so it.

Image result for judge judy lying

 Kids who are raised like that are going to have an awfully tough time dealing with the real world when it turns out that they actually can't get away with whatever they want. (Unless they are good at football)

 Image result for bret kavanaugh angry

Exhibit A. 
(And this was just him dealing with the possibility that he might not get what he wanted)

I did try to clear my own mind enough to understand some situations as he did, such as his belief that the men’s-rights movement restored justice to the world. Sam pledged fealty to the idea of men’s rights because, as he said, his former administrator had privileged girls’ words and experiences over boys’, and that’s how all of his troubles had started in the first place. I’d never in my life backed the “masculinist” cause or imagined that men needed protecting—yet I couldn’t help but agree with Sam’s analysis.

First of all, let's pretend for a moment that the incident actually happened the way you claim it did. Your son had one negative experience where the word of one girl was taken over the word of one boy, and he extrapolates from that one experience that the entire world is somehow biased against boys and you -- a goddamm adult woman -- think "hey, the kid has a point?"

No wonder this kid has issues.