The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Reply
0
0
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 797
Total Cats: 219
From: Las Cruces, NM
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
https://twitter.com/realLizUSA/statu...73797518533036
I'm old enough to remember that there was no widespread election interference, that's a crazy right-wing talking point.
I'm old enough to remember that there was no widespread election interference, that's a crazy right-wing talking point.
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Reply
0
0
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
Reply
0
0
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
It's been interesting to watch many Palestinian-American groups in the US (actual Palestinians, not just trend-following college kids) turn against "Genocide Joe" and "Killer Kamala" in recent days.
Some Americans still pay attention to actual issues, not just slogans and party stereotypes.
Some Americans still pay attention to actual issues, not just slogans and party stereotypes.
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
In my view, a pure democracy can easily become a tyrannical thing, once 51% of the populace all agree that they are entitled to the work-product of the productive class. Or that censorship of speech is preferable to the risk of being exposed to "offensive" speech.
The Republican form of government was intended to insert a buffer of neutral and objective elected representatives in between the people and ultimate authority, to prevent such a tyranny of the masses. Two foxes and one chicken negotiating as to what to have for dinner, so to speak.
In practice, those representatives figured out how to manipulate the electorate such that they have become a de-facto aristocracy, after voting power was expanded to every person, rather than just those who were a contributor to, rather than a beneficiary of, the public coffer.
Reply
0
0
I'm genuinely curious to hear your answer on this.
In my view, a pure democracy can easily become a tyrannical thing, once 51% of the populace all agree that they are entitled to the work-product of the productive class. Or that censorship of speech is preferable to the risk of being exposed to "offensive" speech.
The Republican form of government was intended to insert a buffer of neutral and objective elected representatives in between the people and ultimate authority, to prevent such a tyranny of the masses. Two foxes and one chicken negotiating as to what to have for dinner, so to speak.
In practice, those representatives figured out how to manipulate the electorate such that they have become a de-facto aristocracy, after voting power was expanded to every person, rather than just those who were a contributor to, rather than a beneficiary of, the public coffer.
In my view, a pure democracy can easily become a tyrannical thing, once 51% of the populace all agree that they are entitled to the work-product of the productive class. Or that censorship of speech is preferable to the risk of being exposed to "offensive" speech.
The Republican form of government was intended to insert a buffer of neutral and objective elected representatives in between the people and ultimate authority, to prevent such a tyranny of the masses. Two foxes and one chicken negotiating as to what to have for dinner, so to speak.
In practice, those representatives figured out how to manipulate the electorate such that they have become a de-facto aristocracy, after voting power was expanded to every person, rather than just those who were a contributor to, rather than a beneficiary of, the public coffer.
A Republic is the rule of law. It's a nation of laws, not of men. It enforces an agreed-upon structure that helps the stability of the society, it protects the minority group, and helps prevent knee-jerk political decisions, among other things.
And of course our tripartite government structure that is supposed to balance the powers between them is supposed to keep everything running. See "fiat currency", "IRS" and "government alphabet agencies" on the short list of reasons why our system doesn't work, among other things.
Last edited by cordycord; Aug 8, 2024 at 11:42 AM.
Reply
0
0
It's been interesting to watch many Palestinian-American groups in the US (actual Palestinians, not just trend-following college kids) turn against "Genocide Joe" and "Killer Kamala" in recent days.
Some Americans still pay attention to actual issues, not just slogans and party stereotypes.
Some Americans still pay attention to actual issues, not just slogans and party stereotypes.
Reply
1
1
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 80,552
Total Cats: 4,368
From: Chantilly, VA
The rule of law is a threat to Muh Democracy.
Novel Prosecutorial Theory on Financial Misconduct in Election Campaigns Under 18 USC 241 **I would like to wish Kamala Harris the best of luck, she’s gonna need it. Remember, I didn’t choose to be here, 241 knocked on my door and it chose me.** Introduction This prosecutorial theory posits that the alleged financial misconduct by Kamala Harris, involving the improper takeover of Joe Biden's campaign funds, constitutes a conspiracy under 18 USC 241 to injure voters' rights. This theory will demonstrate serious interference with the electoral process, compensable injuries under civil liability, and will be supported by extensive case precedents that underscore the application of 18 USC 241 to conspiracies that infringe on constitutional rights, even without overt actions being completed. Legal Framework 18 USC 241: Conspiracy Against Rights - Statute: Criminalizes any conspiracy to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the Constitution. - Requirement: No overt action is required; the statute focuses on the agreement and intent to oppress rights. United States v. Classic (1941) - Precedent: Established that primary elections are an integral part of the electoral process and that corrupt practices in primaries can infringe on constitutional voting rights. Haddle v. Garrison (1998) - Precedent: Concluded that a plaintiff is “injured” under the Enforcement Act of 1871 when the plaintiff suffers “a compensable injury under tort law.” This interpretation applies to 18 USC 241, meaning a conspiracy to injure encompasses conspiracies to engage in conduct recognized as tortious at common law. Additional Case Precedents: - Ex Parte Yarbrough, 110 U.S. 651 (1884): Affirmed the federal government's power to protect voting rights in federal elections. - United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787 (1966): Recognized that 18 USC 241 applies to private conspiracies that interfere with federally protected rights. - United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966): Held that private conspiracies to interfere with the right to travel can be prosecuted under 18 USC 241. - Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88 (1971): Confirmed that 42 USC 1985(3) can be used to address conspiracies to deprive individuals of equal protection of the laws, reinforcing the interpretation of conspiratorial injury. - Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, 138 S. Ct. 1876 (2018): Stated that states may prohibit messages intended to mislead voters about voting requirements and procedures. - Richardson v. Ramirez, 418 U.S. 24 (1974): Addressed the disenfranchisement of voters and upheld that any action infringing on voting rights must be scrutinized under federal law. - Anderson v. United States, 417 U.S. 211 (1974): Confirmed that conspiracies to interfere with federal elections, including indirect actions, fall under federal jurisdiction. - Burson v. Freeman, 504 U.S. 191 (1992): Upheld that states have a compelling interest in preventing voter confusion and preserving the integrity of the electoral process. Scenario Description Allegations and Actions The Trump campaign filed a Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint alleging that Kamala Harris improperly took over Joe Biden's campaign funds. This action involves: - Misappropriation of Funds: Allegedly transferring campaign funds intended for Biden's campaign to Harris's control. - Intent to Control: The intent behind this action is to control financial resources to influence the primary and general election outcomes, favoring Harris.
UPDATE: Last night, Kamala Harris personally filed an updated Statement of Candidacy (aka Form 2) to designate Tim Walz as her running mate. Since she used Biden’s personal candidate ID number (P80000722) instead of her own (P00009423), the FEC records are convoluted. Her newly filed Form 2 shows up on Biden's personal FEC page. But if you look at the 2024 election cycle, Biden is erased and replaced with Harris, as if he was never never running for President. Looking at Biden’s campaign committee’s FEC record, it’s now associated with both Biden’s and Harris’s candidacies for President for the period of 2020-2022. But that makes no sense, because Harris’s Presidential run in 2020 was never linked to Biden’s, and she ceased her campaign for President in 2020 and did not run again until 2024. Now Harris’s personal FEC candidate ID number (P00009423)—which is supposed to follow her for all Presidential campaigns for life—is somehow linked to Biden’s Presidential campaign in 2020. Only her Vice-Presidential campaign was ever linked to Biden’s, but that is separate from any Presidential campaigns. The current 2023-2024 FEC record for “Biden for President” (aka “Harris for President,” ID number C00703975) is linked to two Presidential candidates. Both are both named “Kamala Harris.” One of these candidates is associated with Harris’s candidate ID number (P00009423), and the other “Kamala Harris” is associated with Biden’s candidate ID number (P80000722). The Statement of Candidacy that Kamala Harris filed on July 29, using Biden’s personal candidate ID number (P80000722), now shows up under Harris’s ID number. But last night’s filing for that same candidate—number P80000722—shows up for the other “Kamala Harris” who is running for President. (Based on what happened previously, I suspect the FEC will shift these records in the future, to make it seem like there aren’t so many discrepancies between the names and the ID numbers.) Confused? That’s because these filings from Harris are irregular. If Kamala Harris had used her own candidate ID number, like every other candidate in modern history, this wouldn’t have been so complicated, but then it would have been difficult to make the case that she’s entitled to Biden’s war chest. Undoubtedly, these filings are trying to circumvent those pesky campaign finance laws. By the way, since Walz has never run for President, he doesn’t have his own FEC candidate ID for a Presidential run. According the the logic of Harris’s supporters, Walz is equally entitled to any funds from the campaign committee associated with ID number C00703975. And, just as Harris felt entitled to file an amended Statement of Candidacy using Biden’s personal candidate ID number because she was the Vice Presidential candidate, Walz could do the same, using Biden’s personal candidate ID number to run for President if he wanted to. The Democrats could pass this campaign down in perpetuity, without even obtaining the formal agreement of the prior candidate. This reminds me of a system of government that isn’t considered anything like a democracy.
Reply
0
0
We'd be looking at a different landscape now, with a reduced need for military aid to Israel. I know, wishful thinking.
Reply
0
0
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 797
Total Cats: 219
From: Las Cruces, NM
It's honestly pretty clever that they're pairing Harris' events with preexisting shows of popular artists (Meg the Stalion and most recently Bon Iver) but they're still doctoring images of the turnouts.
Gotta make the steal believable to the mouth-breathers.
Reply
1
1
