It's unclear that was why he was fired.

I’m not sure you’re ever going to get the smoking gun you’re looking for to make a conclusive statement here.

In lending, there’s a legal concept of disparate impact, which means even if your policy didn’t explicitly intend to harm this group of people, you implicitly / indirectly impacted them, and that also counts as a bad thing just like explicit impact.

Basically, you don’t have to prove intent, you only have to prove outcome.

…It was a roundabout analogy, but I think the same thing applies here. I don’t need the administration to say, “we did that because we don’t like him.” There is enough impact for me to conclude culpability, regardless of whether I can prove intent.

(Edit: maybe a better concept here is circumstantial evidence)

Trump had Colbert cancelled and said Kimmel was next on Truth Social back in July: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1148744224685...

The FCC chairmen threatened ABC: https://variety.com/2025/tv/news/brendan-carr-abc-fcc-jimmy-...

Seems like a clear cut case of jawboning.

It's not unclear.

Oma has had the 1000 yard stare for the last 10 years.

None of this is unclear.