Jill is moving to freelance status

Status
Not open for further replies.
jillciminillo

jillciminillo

Active member
Hi, all ... just wanted to send a quick note here to let you know I'm officially moving to freelance status here at Pickup Truck + SUV Talk. So, I'm not gone, but I won't be as present. One of the best parts of PUTT has always been interacting with all of you, so, seriously, you can't get rid of me. 😊 If you want to keep up with what I'm doing outside of PUTT, be sure to follow me on my personal YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@jillciminillo ... Or if you're on TikTok, Instagram or pretty much any other social medium, you can find me at @jillciminillo, and I use the hashtag #cardujour.

Carry on ... ✌️
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1959076982479519876

Interesting take, or should I say ignorant take, Jill. You do realize the "your troops" you mentioned, are members of the UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES who are following orders, or is that concept alien to you? Doesn't matter if activated National Guard or Active Duty, they are sworn to uphold the Constitution and obey the orders of the National Command Authority (NCA). They were not Eisenhower's troops in '57 in Arkansas, Johnson's troops in Alabama in '65, or Clinton's troops in Texas in '93, they are our sons and daughters who serve to protect us all. Heck, last time I was at O'Hare (named BTW, for a heroic US Navy Pilot in WW2) I saw a modern day version of myself from 40 years ago, a sailor eating a meal in an overpriced airport restaurant (but at least it wasn't NTC Great Lakes food). I anonymously bought that new "Boot Sailor's" dinner for a bit of comfort, knowing the arduous nature of his duty to come.

In the same vein, I would like none of the young sailors on liberty in Chicago today to be "rolled" (mugged) as we called it back then, after it happened to plenty of our "shipmates" on the town in Chicago. If this means they are protected by their fellow service members from any branch or component, that that us fine by me, you may want to take blows but it would be nice for them to be in one piece before reporting to their first ship or station.

But hey Jill, five foot wonder, if you think America's military members are oppressing you, then I am sure you can go review Cherys, BYDs, Changans, Exceeds, Hongqis, and like under the benevolent protection of Chairman Xi. Just a quick note, if you don't write your reviews exactly as his people tell you to do, the Type 99 MBT at your door isn't there for a review, but to allow you to have your own personal Tiananmen Square massacre re-enactment...Hope you do better than "Tankman " in '89!
 
Fightnfire said:
Never understood the decision to alienate half of your audience in one fell swoop. Hope she heals ok, that sucks.
Click to expand...
But Jill is now another voice repeating the pattern of demonizing the US military personnel by tying them to a particular Commander in Chief (one ELECTED to that position by the American people) as if they were his personal praetorian guard, not American Serviceman following orders with Clear Rules of Engagement. Indeed, it seems Jill is aligning herself with another political figure who recently demonized members of our armed forces:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1956886904009601455

Is Mr. Esterdahl going to continue buying stories from Jill, a person who has shown clear evidence of contempt (like Governor Newsom) of our service members? Or is he going to acknowledge what she wrote is reprehensible and not worth his business' money, especially since his business is allowed to thrive in a safe United States because of the protection of the "troops" Ms. Ciminillo is believes will oppress her city.
 
Fightnfire said:
Let's not dip too far into the political waters. Jill made a post as a public figure so a response in my opinion is fair game. I know Tim reads his private messages on here, hit him up.
Click to expand...
Providing the X post of a prominent elected American leader is not really dipping into political waters, especially when they attack the historically apolitical military in the same manner that Ciminillo did...It's a trend.

Not sure a question as to whether Tim will continue his financial support to Ciminillo by buying stories warrants a PM. Believe there are quite a few active duty, reserve component, and veteran folks frequenting this forum, some who may be interested in Tim's stance on this issue and would like a public response from him as consumers of his content.
 
James-kd2cm said:
I hope Jill is ok. I’ve enjoyed her reviews on this channel.
Click to expand...
Yes, let's hope her injuries/wounds heal from the violent attack she sustained, no reason for her to be harmed. However, from her post (which she cowardly deleted; luckily, the internet is forever) she implies that she would be harmed by having AMERICAN MILITARY PERSONNEL in Chicago. You can argue pretext all you want, but they would not be occupying the city, they would be following strict protocols set out by DOJ and DOD and following their orders like the predecessors I mentioned in my first post. Jill said "...don’t want you or your troops here." So why doesn't she come on the this forum (she started the thread) and explain what she means instead of spinelessly deleting the post and going dark.
 
@GMT 900 these are very tense times for a lot of people and raw emotions are coming out on display in a variety of ways. I certainly don't love the post Jill shared at the same time, however, I can see how she got caught up in the emotions of the moment. We both have a lot of friends in DC at the moment who are sharing a different POV of the situation on the ground. It is difficult for everyone involved. I'm certain many service members are conflicted about patrolling American streets. I'm not going to pretend I know the answers to many of the problems that are plaguing our society.

I would add for those who are very upset with Jill, be upset. That is your right. And that was certainly her right to express her frustration. Isn't that Freedom of Speech after all? Is that what our political leaders do in Congress? We discuss and debate often very conflicting viewpoints in a hopefully respectful manner as best we can as people? We often fail to do so at times, yet that should always be our aim.
I'm not going to judge someone based on their political views nor would I deny them jobs in the future because of something they said. What kind of person or business leader would I be? I'd be a coward. Whether we agree with someone's politics or not, we MUST be better people than that and not be swept up in emotions of the day.

JFK summed it up for me:

"I am certain that after the dust of centuries has passed over our cities, we, too, will be remembered not for victories or defeats in battle or in politics, but for our contribution to the human spirit."

I work hard to contribute to betterment of all of us and even though this is solely a media outlet focused on trucks and SUVs, I think empowering consumers with knowledge to make good decisions is a worthy goal to improve their lives.
 
Tim,

I preface this with I don't know what level of experience is with the military and DoD in general, so I will try to not pre-suppose that I have experienced more than you have, but I do know I am older than you with a lot of experiences stretching back to the 70s. These shape my argument and may not be something this forum's audience may be aware of from their experiences.

I think your whole first paragraph is a bit of a straw man to the question at hand. Indeed, you mention troops being "conflicted about patrolling American streets" however, you miss the point that you don't hear the military personnel talking to the media about any such feelings... because they can't. That is part of the first amendment rights all military personnel have partially abrogated by their service. That is why us veterans who don't currently have those restrictions speak out when people try to disparage our service members, providing them a voice. I factually know Governor Newsom's comments on being an "invading force" hurt our active duty folks (mostly USMC) who put their safety on the line for one of his cities, especially since it added to the time they stay away from their families owing to overseas deployments. Overseas deployments? Yes, to your point of "patrolling American streets," take it from a veteran of two wars and two expeditionary conflicts, a lot of times me and my comrades would wonder why we were on patrol in another second/third world ___hole while our home country had so many situations we could have helped in...Lots of the folks in the military today have these same feelings.

You are too young to remember, but may have family who can relate it to you, the horrific demonization the American public, media, TV and movies put our Vietnam veterans through, blaming them for the policies enacted by the NCA. I was fortunate enough as a pre-teen to have a father, who couldn't (medical) serve, but remembered the indifference the public had to his own friends who served in Korea, and he would invite vets from Vietnam to our house for dinner. He sternly counterpunched the prevailing narrative of the crazy Vietnam vet (see DeNiro in the Deer Hunter) by telling me that these men had served their country and need to be respected. Later, in the 80s and in the military myself, these Vietnam veterans broke us in, being hard and exacting because they knew the dangers of laxity in combat.

Now, we have the same same psychological displacement happening again, with people disagreeing with the elected leader of the country, but taking it out on"your troops" because they can't fight back, like our outnumbered Vietnam returnees, who dared not make a stand or be permanently ostracized and called crazy. For those of us with a voice, we DAMN well will not let this happen again and will call out people who what to demonize our brothers and sisters in arms for doing a tough job that most Americans won't get off their lazy @$$ to do but want to tweet about our servicemen being pawns to a particular leader in office.

Understood, you think people who demonize American Service Members do not warrant any sanction; that is your prerogative. Just be thankful those warriors on the side of your state at USTRATCOM keep your house from being a smoking hole by standing watch 24/7 while you and your family sleep comfortably. I will adjust my consumption of your content accordingly.

As for Jill, I guess my assumption was correct: Despite the usual bloviating, fight the patriarchy (yeah, surprise, I'm a dude), you will hear me roar hype, the chance to directly engage in a conversation with a person of a different opinion is meekly declined. Guess that "Girl Boss" stuff really is only in the current Star Wars and Marvel movies, not real life.
 
Last edited:
GMT 900 said:
Tim,

I preface this with I don't know what level of experience is with the military and DoD in general, so I will try to not pre-suppose that I have experienced more than you have, but I do know I am older than you with a lot of experiences stretching back to the 70s. These shape my argument and may not be something this forum's audience may be aware of from their experiences.

I think your whole first paragraph is a bit of a straw man to the question at hand. Indeed, you mention troops being "conflicted about patrolling American streets" however, you miss the point that you don't hear the military personnel talking to the media about any such feelings... because they can't. That is part of the first amendment rights all military personnel have partially abrogated by their service. That is why us veterans who don't currently have those restrictions speak out when people try to disparage our service members, providing them a voice. I factually know Governor Newsom's comments on being an "invading force" hurt our active duty folks (mostly USMC) who put their safety on the line for one of his cities, especially since it added to the time they stay away from their families owing to overseas deployments. Overseas deployments? Yes, to your point of "patrolling American streets," take it from a veteran of two wars and two expeditionary conflicts, a lot of times me and my comrades would wonder why we were on patrol in another second/third world ___hole while our home country had so many situations we could have helped in...Lots of the folks in the military today have these same feelings.

You are too young to remember, but may have family who can relate it to you, the horrific demonization the American public, media, TV and movies put our Vietnam veterans through, blaming them for the policies enacted by the NCA. I was fortunate enough as a pre-teen to have a father, who couldn't (medical) serve, but remembered the indifference the public had to his own friends who served in Korea, and he would invite vets from Vietnam to our house for dinner. He sternly counterpunched the prevailing narrative of the crazy Vietnam vet (see DeNiro in the Deer Hunter) by telling me that these men had served their country and need to be respected. Later, in the 80s and in the military myself, these Vietnam veterans broke us in, being hard and exacting because they knew the dangers of laxity in combat.

Now, we have the same same psychological displacement happening again, with people disagreeing with the elected leader of the country, but taking it out on"your troops" because they can't fight back, like our outnumbered Vietnam returnees, who dared not make a stand or be permanently ostracized and called crazy. For those of us with a voice, we DAMN well will not let this happen again and will call out people who what to demonize our brothers and sisters in arms for doing a tough job that most Americans won't get off their lazy @$$ to do but want to tweet about our servicemen being pawns to a particular leader in office.

Understood, you think people who demonize American Service Members do not warrant any sanction; that is your prerogative. Just be thankful those warriors on the side of your state at USTRATCOM keep your house from being a smoking hole by standing watch 24/7 while you and your family sleep comfortably. I will adjust my consumption of your content accordingly.

As for Jill, I guess my assumption was correct: Despite the usual bloviating, fight the patriarchy (yeah, surprise, I'm a dude), you will hear me roar hype, the chance to directly engage in a conversation with a person of a different opinion is meekly declined. Guess that "Girl Boss" stuff really is only in the current Star Wars and Marvel movies, not real life.
Click to expand...
First let me say thank you for your service. Not serving remains one of my largest regrets in my life. Whenever my children ask about regrets, I tell them not serving is number one. My 20s were a mess and I truly think I'd be a better person at this point in my life if I had served. I love this country and I suspect I'd love it more if I had donned the uniform.

Second, I feel your frustration about Vietnam. I'm a generation removed from that conflict and I've spent many an hour listening to veterans speak of the return home. Yes, I've seen all the documentaries and the Hollywood movies, however, you and I both know they don't really capture the emotions. Some probably come close, but if you weren't there, you simply weren't there.

I was there for Desert Storm, 9/11 and all the conflicts through my generation. I worked at the Denver airport and vividly recall being on planes making plans to tackle the guy with the "towel on his head" if anything happened. Also, the store managers and I would have discussions about anyone spotted wondering the airport who didn't look right and tried to alert the military personnel walking around with M16s. That was a scene I hope my children don't have to live through frankly.

I don't think anyone should demonize American Service members and I truly don't think that was Jill's point. And I have many friends on both sides of the political aisle and many family members who have served who see this situation differently than you. It is a tough situation with lots of emotions involved as I said.

I respect our service members and the applaud the work they do. Last night, I had dinner with 3 of them in fact. There was some discussion on this topic and, like I just typed, opinions varied. We quickly moved on because it was family b-day party and I don't want to ruin anyone's night with politics.

I'm sad to hear you have chosen to watch less content based on your view of my handling of the situation. That is your decision and I respect it. I wish you the best and I hope we can move past this situation.
 
testerdahl said:
First let me say thank you for your service. Not serving remains one of my largest regrets in my life. Whenever my children ask about regrets, I tell them not serving is number one. My 20s were a mess and I truly think I'd be a better person at this point in my life if I had served. I love this country and I suspect I'd love it more if I had donned the uniform.

Second, I feel your frustration about Vietnam. I'm a generation removed from that conflict and I've spent many an hour listening to veterans speak of the return home. Yes, I've seen all the documentaries and the Hollywood movies, however, you and I both know they don't really capture the emotions. Some probably come close, but if you weren't there, you simply weren't there.

I was there for Desert Storm, 9/11 and all the conflicts through my generation. I worked at the Denver airport and vividly recall being on planes making plans to tackle the guy with the "towel on his head" if anything happened. Also, the store managers and I would have discussions about anyone spotted wondering the airport who didn't look right and tried to alert the military personnel walking around with M16s. That was a scene I hope my children don't have to live through frankly.

I don't think anyone should demonize American Service members and I truly don't think that was Jill's point. And I have many friends on both sides of the political aisle and many family members who have served who see this situation differently than you. It is a tough situation with lots of emotions involved as I said.

I respect our service members and the applaud the work they do. Last night, I had dinner with 3 of them in fact. There was some discussion on this topic and, like I just typed, opinions varied. We quickly moved on because it was family b-day party and I don't want to ruin anyone's night with politics.

I'm sad to hear you have chosen to watch less content based on your view of my handling of the situation. That is your decision and I respect it. I wish you the best and I hope we can move past this situation.
Click to expand...
Tim,

Thanks for your perspective and bringing others perspective also to the conversation. I don't suppose to know Jill's entire motivations, but it did appear to me she latched on to a theme gaining prevalence:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-national-guard-la

From the article: "Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.) added, "They yell 'invasion' at the border—but this is the real one: Trump is seizing control of California's National Guard and forcing 2,000 troops into our streets."

Again, a quick X "Tweet" to the POTUS that she disagreed with his suggested policy decision to employ federal resources in Chicago for Law Enforcement support is in the spirit of debate...Putting in "Your troops" crossed the line and I will not be persuaded otherwise.

Full disclosure, I keyed in on the X post after seeing it on a sports board and did not know of the full nature of the "going viral" nature of her post until after I posted my objections here. There has been quite a firestorm in some areas of the media:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...d-numbing-post-against-more-policing-n2662251

I will note, one X post had her tube channel mentioned and I did go to her last vid posted. It is a quite illuminating, as it was used as a forum on her X post, owing to her X account being unavailable (I believe it has returned as a private account).


Curiously, she still has the following in the header:

"Jill is a syndicated automotive writer, currently serving as the managing editor for Pickup Truck + SUV Talk and co-hosts two podcasts: the Consumer Guide Automotive Car Stuff Podcast and the Pickup Truck + SUV Talk Podcast.

Given the much more vitriolic comments about her X post on the You Tube video and other media outlets: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/08/chicago-woman-who-admits-being-carjacked-assaulted-sparks/
I believe you may want her to update her You Tube channel to correctly limit it to her freelance role. This to shield your business from an incorrect "guilt by association" in some people's minds.
 
GMT 900 said:
Tim,

Thanks for your perspective and bringing others perspective also to the conversation. I don't suppose to know Jill's entire motivations, but it did appear to me she latched on to a theme gaining prevalence:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-national-guard-la

From the article: "Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.) added, "They yell 'invasion' at the border—but this is the real one: Trump is seizing control of California's National Guard and forcing 2,000 troops into our streets."

Again, a quick X "Tweet" to the POTUS that she disagreed with his suggested policy decision to employ federal resources in Chicago for Law Enforcement support is in the spirit of debate...Putting in "Your troops" crossed the line and I will not be persuaded otherwise.

Full disclosure, I keyed in on the X post after seeing it on a sports board and did not know of the full nature of the "going viral" nature of her post until after I posted my objections here. There has been quite a firestorm in some areas of the media:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...d-numbing-post-against-more-policing-n2662251

I will note, one X post had her tube channel mentioned and I did go to her last vid posted. It is a quite illuminating, as it was used as a forum on her X post, owing to her X account being unavailable (I believe it has returned as a private account).


Curiously, she still has the following in the header:

"Jill is a syndicated automotive writer, currently serving as the managing editor for Pickup Truck + SUV Talk and co-hosts two podcasts: the Consumer Guide Automotive Car Stuff Podcast and the Pickup Truck + SUV Talk Podcast.

Given the much more vitriolic comments about her X post on the You Tube video and other media outlets: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/08/chicago-woman-who-admits-being-carjacked-assaulted-sparks/
I believe you may want her to update her You Tube channel to correctly limit it to her freelance role. This to shield your business from an incorrect "guilt by association" in some people's minds.
Click to expand...
I can share with you she’s changed her social media accounts to private to protect her family for the time being. I’ve had attacks on my personal social media accounts and have had to change some of my privacy settings accordingly. The attacks on my wife and kids are going too far for my comfort level. People seem to think they have a right to attack based on my public figure status, they don’t. I won’t allow it.

I’ll ask Jill to change her bio. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.
 
GMT 900 said:
Tim,

I preface this with I don't know what level of experience is with the military and DoD in general, so I will try to not pre-suppose that I have experienced more than you have, but I do know I am older than you with a lot of experiences stretching back to the 70s. These shape my argument and may not be something this forum's audience may be aware of from their experiences.
Click to expand...

And as another retired member of those armed forces, I disagree quite a bit with you and back Jill wholeheartedly.

She in no way is directing anything toward the military in a pos or neg fashion. Just the negative use of the military. There is zero reason to deploy any of the armed forces to any state for police work. A governor should ask the federal gov't for help before that happens. That is purely being used as a political vendetta. Which is rather sad when things get to that point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top