Convicted of tweeting....
-
The idea of an ‘overt act’ is important in conspiracy law.
If George and I get shit faced and say we’re going to blow up a federal courthouse then the next morning we’re all hung over and never mention it again, that’s not a conspiracy. That’s drunk guys talking shit.
However, if in the morning he rents a truck and I purchase a shit load of fertilizer, we’re now in conspiracy land.
And no, George wouldn’t be arrested for ‘renting a truck’ and I wouldn’t be arrested for ‘buying fertilizer’. We’d be arrested for conspiring to blow up a courthouse.
-
You know, if all this stuff was not so obviously selective and designed to send a message, I'd buy your explanation. It's not just this case. It's multiple cases.
I think the Just-us Department has undermined its trust with a huge segment of Americans. That simply does not bode well for the future.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
You know, if all this stuff was not so obviously selective and designed to send a message, I'd buy your explanation. It's not just this case. It's multiple cases.
I think the Just-us Department has undermined its trust with a huge segment of Americans. That simply does not bode well for the future.
@Jolly said in Convicted of tweeting....:
so obviously selective
By way of example, how many of the alphabet people were arrested and charged with felonies after breaking into McCarthy's office this year? How many felonies were charged in the takeover of the Wisconsin statehouse? And, it'll be interesting to see how many felonies are charged with yesterday's demonstration of
HamasPalestinian support in the US Capitol, how many are being held without bond? -
-
You know, if all this stuff was not so obviously selective and designed to send a message, I'd buy your explanation. It's not just this case. It's multiple cases.
I think the Just-us Department has undermined its trust with a huge segment of Americans. That simply does not bode well for the future.
@Jolly said in Convicted of tweeting....:
You know, if all this stuff was not so obviously selective and designed to send a message, I'd buy your explanation. It's not just this case. It's multiple cases.
I think the Just-us Department has undermined its trust with a huge segment of Americans. That simply does not bode well for the future.
Maybe what’s selective is the reporting you expose yourself to.
-
Compare this to yesterday’s protest. Or to a handful of jackasses doing a sit-in in the speakers office. Notice any differences?
Link to video
-
I thought British holidaymakers were bad.
-
First question 18 were arrested. Yesterday about 300.
What felonies did they commit? How many officers did they beat? How much property did they steal? How many doors and windows did they destroy?
@jon-nyc said in Convicted of tweeting....:
First question 18 were arrested. Yesterday about 300.
What felonies did they commit? How many officers did they beat? How much property did they steal? How many doors and windows did they destroy?
According to this:
18 U.S. Code 1752 says, “(a) Whoever (1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so; (2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct.
Every fucking one of them.
EVERY. ONE. OF. THEM.
Now, let's see how many are charged with a felony.
-
BTW, for shits and giggles...The number of cases involving January 6...
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases
For those of you who haven't counted, it's 970 of them.
-
From Reason...
https://reason.com/2023/10/20/hes-going-to-prison-for-twitter-trolling-thats-not-justice/
Maybe this needs to go to SCOTUS...
-
@jon-nyc which false tweet do you believe had a bigger impact on the election and disenfranchised more voters? This meme, or The NY Times articles that were tweeted claiming the laptop was Russian disinformation?
@LuFins-Dad said in Convicted of tweeting....:
@jon-nyc which false tweet do you believe had a bigger impact on the election and disenfranchised more voters? This meme, or The NY Times articles that were tweeted claiming the laptop was Russian disinformation?
The meme misleads some eligible voters away from voting entirely -- that's disenfranchisement. The NYT article's x/tweets may influence how some voters vote but do not mislead them away from voting.
"Big impact" does not necessarily mean "disenfranchisement." Any number of policy pronouncements or campaign ads or x/tweet campaigns can have "big impacts" on elections, but not "disenfranchisement."
-
Disenfranchised does not mean to remove the right to vote, it means to strip the power from a group of people. The falsehoods spread by the NYT and WP, very likely removed the power of millions of voters.
If the Biden laptop/corruption story had impact .4% of PA voters and .2% of GA, AZ, and WI voters, Trump would be President right now. Do you think that story and the Russian hoax impacted at least that small number of voters? I do.
-
Disenfranchised does not mean to remove the right to vote, it means to strip the power from a group of people. The falsehoods spread by the NYT and WP, very likely removed the power of millions of voters.
If the Biden laptop/corruption story had impact .4% of PA voters and .2% of GA, AZ, and WI voters, Trump would be President right now. Do you think that story and the Russian hoax impacted at least that small number of voters? I do.
@LuFins-Dad said in Convicted of tweeting....:
Disenfranchised does not mean to remove the right to vote, it means to strip the power from a group of people. The falsehoods spread by the NYT and WP, very likely removed the power of millions of voters.
If the Biden laptop/corruption story had impact .4% of PA voters and .2% of GA, AZ, and WI voters, Trump would be President right now. Do you think that story and the Russian hoax impacted at least that small number of voters? I do.
I think that's a lead-pipe cinch. IIRC, somewhere around 15% of Biden voters may have not voted for him if they had known the Hunter laptop story was true.
