He is engaging a new hairstyle slowly
2024 US Presidential Election
Misinformation works, and a handful of social 'supersharers' sent 80% of it in 2020 | TechCrunch
The studies, by researchers at MIT, Ben-Gurion University, Cambridge and Northeastern, were independently conducted but complement each other well.
techcrunch.com
GenghisKush
Well-known member
Misinformation works, and a handful of social 'supersharers' sent 80% of it in 2020 | TechCrunch
The studies, by researchers at MIT, Ben-Gurion University, Cambridge and Northeastern, were independently conducted but complement each other well.
Check out this related article
Opinion | How white nationalists on social media are trying to exploit the Gaza war
And that is only the tip of the iceberg.
www.msnbc.com
And then go check out the last coupla pages of the War thread.
And then ask yourself, are we fucked or will someone who is not Trump win the election?
you must have walked a long way.
greyfader
Well-known member
all of this will be considered in the appellate court. he gets his due process, just like everyone else.I'm sure he did break the law somehow but it's kinda like going to prison for getting caught with a joint. This post makes some good points on both sides. I'd rather we have 2 totally different candidates personally, but this is the shi*t storm that's forced on us.
The best — and worst — criticisms of Trump’s conviction
Was Trump wrongly convicted? The debate, explained.www.vox.com
In Trumps defense
1) Trump may have falsified business records, but he did not do so with an “intent to defraud,” in the legal sense of that term. As the National Review’s Andrew McCarthy argues, the Supreme Court recently confirmed that “intent to defraud” has a very specific and narrow legal meaning: It describes the intention to deprive someone of money, property, or some other concrete good through deception.
There is no evidence that Trump falsified business records for the sake of tricking any specific individual into giving him cash. But Bragg’s office argued that, under New York state law, “intent to defraud” can refer to deliberately misleading the government or voting public.
McCarthy argues that this is much too broad: If you can commit fraud without actually trying to “steal something in which people have a concrete interest,” then “any untrue statement a candidate makes” could be prosecutable fraud, since such statements deceive voters.
2) The claim that Trump falsified business records to conceal a separate crime rests on a dubious interpretation of an obscure and arguably inapplicable law. Legal analysts (from across the political spectrum) have long argued that the shakiest part of the prosecution’s case was the claim that Trump’s fraudulent paperwork was intended to cover up another crime.
After all, there is no law against paying your ex-lover not to speak with a tabloid about your sordid liaison. The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the assertion that the payment to Daniels violated federal campaign finance law.
There are two potential objections to this: First, as David French notes in the New York Times, the Department of Justice chose not to charge Trump with violating campaign finance law by arranging Daniels’s payoff, apparently concluding that the case would be difficult to win. Yes, Cohen did plead guilty to a campaign finance violation related to the Daniels payment. But a guilty plea does not have the same weight as a jury verdict, from the standpoint of legal precedent. And in any case, Cohen’s plea did not establish Trump’s guilt in the alleged scheme.
Second, Mark Pomerantz, a former prosecutor in the Manhattan DA’s office, has observed that it isn’t clear that a violation of federal law can qualify as “unlawful means” under New York state law. Before this trial, the question had simply never been adjudicated.
To its credit, Bragg’s office anticipated this problem, and argued that Trump not only promoted his own election through federal campaign finance violations, but also through other unlawful means, such as the falsification of separate business records and violations of tax law. But the validity of these supplementary charges is contested.
More fundamentally, some legal scholars argue that New York’s law against promoting a candidate’s election through unlawful means is preempted by federal law. “Federal election law, generally speaking, preempts state election law when it comes to a governing of federal elections, except there are exceptions whereby certain state election laws can come into play,” Jerry H. Goldfeder, a campaign finance lawyer, told CNN last year.
3) There is little evidence that Trump knew he had violated campaign finance laws, let alone that he knowingly tried to conceal having done so. Donald Trump does not have a reputation for being highly fluent in the details of public policy or the legal niceties of the political system.
As National Review’s McCarthy argues, “there is not a shred of evidence that Trump was even thinking about FECA (the Federal Election Campaign Act) in 2016-17, much less willfully transgressing it — which, to establish, prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump was aware of a legal duty to comply with FECA’s contribution limits and reporting requirements, yet intentionally violated them.”
4) Even if Trump were guilty, the statute of limitations on his offense has already expired. The statute of limitations on misdemeanor business records falsification is two years; for the felony version, it’s five years.
Trump committed his alleged offense in 2017. But New York law holds that the clock on its statute of limitations stops when a defendant is “continuously” outside of the state. Therefore, it is plausible that the years Trump spent primarily in the White House and Mar-a-Lago do not count against the clock.
Still, even under this interpretation, Syracuse University law professor Gregory Germain argues that two years have certainly passed since Trump allegedly falsified records related to his hush money payment. In Germain’s view, it “is not clear whether the felony can stand when the misdemeanor is time barred” because the “felony statute requires showing that the misdemeanor was committed, since the felony is really a penalty enhancement on the misdemeanor.”
5) The prosecution was blatantly politically motivated, and the judge was politically biased. Finally, the prosecution’s skeptics point to all of its case’s dubious elements — and then to the surrounding political context — and argue that Trump has been politically persecuted. As former federal prosecutor Elie Honig notes in New York magazine, Alvin Bragg ran for district attorney on a promise to indict Donald Trump. And the judge in Trump’s trial, Juan Merchan, donated to “a pro-Biden, anti-Trump political operation,” in violation of a rule barring New York judges from contributing to political campaigns, according to Honig.
And there is indeed some evidence that Trump’s prosecution was highly selective. No state prosecutor has ever cited federal election laws as a predicate state crime. The Manhattan DA hardly ever brings cases in which the sole charge concerns the falsification of business records. And the statute prohibiting conspiracies to promote a person’s election through unlawful means has almost never been used: According to an analysis from the Washington Post, since 2000, no judge issued a single legal opinion concerning the statute until Trump’s trial began last year.
i'm with you on not having a decent choice this time and many times in the past. the two party system has predictably broken down. we need a party based on moderation and common sense. everyone is a fucking extremist now.
imagine if that person was Donald John Trump and the bell tolls for your perspective.
that is why he prevailed in 2016, peeps were sick of the evil killery hinton et al represented.
exactly why the persecution/prosecution of Trump suborned legal standards, 'they' (the old guard) was threatened by the American people supporting this outsider and would resort to 'any means necessary' to eliminate their threat. 'they' hamstringed his entire term with fabricated Russia nonsense, phone call bullshit, impeached him twice, released a bioweapon to facilitate mail-in voting to steal the election, and now convicted him in a court of law to interfere in a federal election in which he could conceivably be reelected.
moose eater
Well-known member
how about a party not beholding to the DoD/MIC and corporations?
moose eater
Well-known member
I believe he used all of the populist buzz words with disingenuousness and his heart set on doing what he has always done, gaining ground for Donald J Trump.
i am wholeheartedly behind this concept.
i can't in conscience though accept your description of the two party system.
you have stated that corporate influence guides that system yet refuse to identify it as Fascism.
it is the uniparty pretending to write law and the two wings of the same warbird flapping their wings for personal benefit.
just end war.
Trump is not a politician as you well know, one of few that didn't get us into conflict while serving.
PadawanWarrior
Well-known member
I know it'll get overturned but not until after the election so it's kinda f'd up. And ya where is a normal candidate that isn't so left or right. I think most people are more in the middle anyways. But the left has really lost their minds so I don't see myself voting for any Democrats anytime soon.
PadawanWarrior
Well-known member
No sh*t. And they call Republicans a threat to Democracy,
greyfader
Well-known member
so how's all that evidence on hunter biden going? he's about to be tried on the gun charge, but that's as far as it will go with him.
how about all that irrefutable evidence you had for Biden's impeachment?
why are you still blaming the Biden admin for not doing anything about the border after Trump had his lap dog maga mike refuse to bring the bill up for vote just so Biden could not take any credit for a solution before the election? the bipartisan bill gave the Republicans everything they've been asking for all along.
so it looks like maybe the Republicans in the House don't really want to solve the problem?
the economy that you claim is in recession has actually been in a growth phase for the last 2 years. the Dow is near an all-time high.
we lost 2,876,000 jobs during the trump admin
economic growth rate dropped 3.4%
federal debt held by the public increased 50% from approx 14 trillion to 21 trillion. the largest increase in debt in history. a 50% increase in the national debt in just 4 years. at that rate it would be over 30 trillion by the time he gets through another term.
the trade deficit increased by 40.5%. remember Trump promised to bring it down.
the number of people lacking health insurance increased by 3 million.
the list of failures is huge and the list of successes looks like a BB rolling down a 4 lane highway.
ok, fine.
you believe he lied.
proof? none, it's just speculation moose.
he lost wealth, served while donating his salary, suffered great persecution and still got things accomplished.
bribem turned all of his policies on their head and instituted lawfare to eliminate his opponent, is involved in Ukraine corruption (war), has been funding hammas in gaza (war), gave monies to iran that supports the houthis in Yemen (war)...yet, Orange Man BAD!
rights movement to driving 18 wheelers.
...and you consider Trump disingenuous.
you believe he lied.
proof? none, it's just speculation moose.
he lost wealth, served while donating his salary, suffered great persecution and still got things accomplished.
bribem turned all of his policies on their head and instituted lawfare to eliminate his opponent, is involved in Ukraine corruption (war), has been funding hammas in gaza (war), gave monies to iran that supports the houthis in Yemen (war)...yet, Orange Man BAD!
oh, and showered with his preteen daughter, stole secret documents he had no authority to possess, sponsored drug legislation that punished blacks more severely while ignoring that his son was using those same drugs, lied about almost everything from marching in the civil
rights movement to driving 18 wheelers.
...and you consider Trump disingenuous.
go clean your vagina, you have a strange odor.
moose eater
Well-known member
Yes, I do, and there's plenty of proof of it in his actions... for anyone objective enough to simply look for it.
greyfader
Well-known member
so corporate influence is Fascism? ok, i'll agree with you and at the same time ask you why Trump's only real piece of legislation gave those corporations windfall profits in the form of tax breaks?
corporate profits went up 8.5% during the Trump admin.
it's the well-known "trickle-down" theory! a favorite of greedy corporate fucks for a long time! "If we give the wealthy big tax breaks they will stimulate the economy and the wealth will "trickle-down" and enrich everyone.
right, the only thing that has ever trickled down from the wealthy is the diarrhea they get from conspicuous overconsumption.
greyfader
Well-known member
because people had more money to spend.
only 'real piece of legislation'? gtfoh
those weren't arguments genius. that is called insult.
