1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.AUDIO.OPINION

  • You think our Justice system isn't completely f'd up?

    From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Wed Oct 18 20:49:12 2023
    No charges for this.

    https://twitter.com/gregg_re/status/1714769442054222306

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Thu Oct 19 08:07:42 2023
    On 10/18/23 10:49 PM, ScottW wrote:
    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fascist Flea@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 19 09:14:24 2023
    mINE109 wrote:

    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    Also lazy, obfuscatory, and intentionally prejudicial.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 19 09:31:00 2023
    On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 6:07:51 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/18/23 10:49 PM, ScottW wrote:
    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    It was a test. You failed. Your stupidity isn't illegal, just annoying.

    So let me fill in the blanks in your dim brain.

    A guy was convicted for memes on twitter.
    The link is to a tweet with pretty much the same meme only on Trump, not Clinton.
    No charges on the Trump meme but Mackey was convicted for his on Clinton.

    https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2023/10/18/elon-tears-apart-disgusting-sentence-for-man-convicted-over-memes-n2165260

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to Fascist Flea on Thu Oct 19 11:22:13 2023
    On 10/19/23 11:14 AM, Fascist Flea wrote:
    mINE109 wrote:

    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    Also lazy, obfuscatory, and intentionally prejudicial.

    I hear the the former twitter will start charging to post, so
    technically, no charges *yet*.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Thu Oct 19 12:07:58 2023
    On 10/19/23 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 6:07:51 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/18/23 10:49 PM, ScottW wrote:
    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    It was a test. You failed. Your stupidity isn't illegal, just annoying.

    How's that my problem? Didn't you fail to remember that I generally
    don't look at blind links and make a point of calling them out?

    So let me fill in the blanks in your dim brain.

    A guy was convicted for memes on twitter.

    Was it "memes" or the content of the memes?

    The link is to a tweet with pretty much the same meme only on Trump, not Clinton.
    No charges on the Trump meme but Mackey was convicted for his on Clinton.

    https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2023/10/18/elon-tears-apart-disgusting-sentence-for-man-convicted-over-memes-n2165260

    I'm glad you think this should be prosecuted. And, Elon?

    Googling mackey memes

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/social-media-influencer-douglass-mackey-convicted-election-interference-2016

    I wouldn't call that "convicted for memes" as that's voter suppression.
    Maybe your blind link shows an equivalent thing, in which case, sure,
    there could be consequences especially if it could be demonstrated
    anyone took the message seriously. Mackey aka Ricky Vaughn deceived
    4,900 gullible would-be voters.

    If no one responded to the equivalent tweet, no harm. Maybe Trump voters
    were too smart to fall for it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 19 10:36:14 2023
    On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 10:08:36 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/19/23 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 6:07:51 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/18/23 10:49 PM, ScottW wrote:
    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    It was a test. You failed. Your stupidity isn't illegal, just annoying.
    How's that my problem? Didn't you fail to remember that I generally
    don't look at blind links and make a point of calling them out?

    Your blindness is self-imposed for no reason.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Fascist Flea@21:1/5 to All on Thu Oct 19 10:52:56 2023
    Witless demands to be SERVED!

    How's that my problem? Didn't you fail to remember that I generally
    don't look at blind links and make a point of calling them out?
    Your blindness is self-imposed for no reason.

    <snicker>

    Oh wait, I forgot - you've fantasized that your tiny, heavily armored
    bubble of ignorance is "reality". Inside there, one might imagine that
    your own past behavior should have no bearing on your current behavior.
    The fact (the Reality-based kind) that a high percentage of your links
    do not support your contentions, and often controvert them, is irrelevant
    in your "mind". The Fact that you frequently link to poorly researched propagandists and even more frequently do not even try to vet them
    for accuracy is also water under your infinite bridge.

    Over here in Reality, you are a furiously spinning clown-creature who
    is utterly desperate for attention. You drag in roadkill from your
    favorite pits of ignorance and bigotry, and you demand that the
    Professor debunk them. Which he usually does, but instead of garnering
    some satisfaction in learning why the stinking messes you present
    are inaccurate, biased, incomplete, or dishonest, you fly into a rage
    and call him profane names.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Thu Oct 19 14:47:36 2023
    On 10/19/23 12:36 PM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 10:08:36 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/19/23 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 6:07:51 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/18/23 10:49 PM, ScottW wrote:
    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    It was a test. You failed. Your stupidity isn't illegal, just annoying.
    How's that my problem? Didn't you fail to remember that I generally
    don't look at blind links and make a point of calling them out?

    Your blindness is self-imposed for no reason.

    No, for frequently stated reasons. And you're arguing by keyword again.
    Also, with more to go on, I responded to your presumed points in a
    respectful way although I will mention that it's strange you responded a
    second time to my post as if you hadn't responded already just a few
    minutes before.

    I guess that free association thing must be stronger for you than for most.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to All on Sat Oct 21 20:19:12 2023
    On 10/19/23 12:07 PM, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/19/23 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Thursday, October 19, 2023 at 6:07:51 AM UTC-7, mINE109 wrote:
    On 10/18/23 10:49 PM, ScottW wrote:
    No charges for this.

    Blind links? Not illegal, just rude.

    It was a test.  You failed.   Your stupidity isn't illegal,  just
    annoying.

    How's that my problem? Didn't you fail to remember that I generally
    don't look at blind links and make a point of calling them out?

    So let me fill in the blanks in your dim brain.

    A guy was convicted for memes on twitter.

    Was it "memes" or the content of the memes?

    The link is to a tweet with pretty much the same meme only on Trump,
    not Clinton.
    No charges on the Trump meme but Mackey was convicted for his on Clinton.

    https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2023/10/18/elon-tears-apart-disgusting-sentence-for-man-convicted-over-memes-n2165260

    I'm glad you think this should be prosecuted. And, Elon?

    Googling mackey memes

    https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/social-media-influencer-douglass-mackey-convicted-election-interference-2016

    I wouldn't call that "convicted for memes" as that's voter suppression.
    Maybe your blind link shows an equivalent thing, in which case, sure,
    there could be consequences especially if it could be demonstrated
    anyone took the message seriously. Mackey aka Ricky Vaughn deceived
    4,900 gullible would-be voters.

    If no one responded to the equivalent tweet, no harm. Maybe Trump voters
    were too smart to fall for it.

    Okay, not equivalent to a one-off inappropriate ironic satire, but the
    end result of weeks of planning and explicitly stating his intent to
    trick black people and women from voting.

    https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/mackey-sentencing-edny.pdfhttps://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/mackey-sentencing-edny.pdf

    "Although much of this evidence was presented at trial, some of it was
    not, as the Court held that a significant portion of the government’s evidence was cumulative of the government’s other evidence. This is
    itself illuminating and worth re-emphasizing: the evidence showing that
    the defendant believed that certain groups of American citizens should
    not be permitted to vote was sufficiently voluminous that the Court
    needed to exclude much of it as repetitive. In short, these were not aberrational thoughts or flip opinions—the defendant genuinely believed
    at the time he participated in the conspiracy that black people, women, immigrants and various other political opponents should be prevented
    from voting."

    If this is true of the other poster you mention, similar punishment
    should result.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)