- Dołączono
- 14 Kwi 2018
Twitter is never going to be held accountable.
Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿
- Twórca wątku Randall Fragg
- Data rozpoczęcia
-
🔎 Please read my article, How to Dox Anyone: A Liz Fong-Jones Story. (Xitter), (Substack).
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Matthew216
kiwifarms.net
- Dołączono
- 18 Paź 2018
Perhaps something like this is the natural aftereffect of Woodward and Bernstein. Now every "reporter" is convinced that they are the one that is going to take down the wicked man in the White House (as long as he's a republican.) The guys who were most obsessed with Nixon continued to go after him for decades after he stepped down, their lives were nothing without him. When Trump finally dies, a part of these guys are going to be devastated.
- Dołączono
- 4 Sty 2019
Many lawers have offered to help the boys and honestly i hope these fuckers get sued into oblivion, even considering how hard it can be to win a libel case in the US they have a solid base go on.
Edit
The list of names possibly getting sued is huge
https://twitter.com/thecjpearson/status/1087115979807748096?s=09
Edit
The list of names possibly getting sued is huge
https://twitter.com/thecjpearson/status/1087115979807748096?s=09
Ostatnio edytowane:
- Dołączono
- 6 Paź 2018
Lol. Trump is fucking ridiculous. He dragged Nancy Pelosi, of all people, a lace curtain reptile lord, into a twitter flame war. This shit is excellent.
That makes me think.... @AnOminous , is there any sort of RICO case even possible since by this point Twitter obviously knows the details, or should, under a reasonable level? People are calling for death against these kids, and in some cases offering renumeration. Twitter is certainly enabling it.
I don't think I really agree to anyone DOING that, but from the little I understand American law, isn't that viable?
- Dołączono
- 28 Gru 2014
RICO isn't an angry mob doing something, it's an ongoing criminal enterprise with two predicate acts from a limited list of crimes.
- Dołączono
- 19 Wrz 2013
- Dołączono
- 21 Kwi 2013
- Dołączono
- 12 Lis 2015
Don't cut yourself on all the edges in that wood chipper, Jack.
- Dołączono
- 23 Sty 2015
What a shocker, a correspondent for Buzzfeed judging someone purely based on the colour of their skin.
- Dołączono
- 6 Paź 2018
Holy Shit! White men smiling!?!?!? Fascism! Reeeeeeeeee----
What a shocker, a correspondent for Buzzfeed judging someone purely based on the colour of their skin.
Ok. Gotcha. I think. So, an organization which (for the sake of argument knowingly) makes money from providing a venue for people to openly call out contract kills wouldn't suffice?
- Dołączono
- 13 Sie 2016
White men smiling is the new KKK secret handshake!! Move over “ok” symbol!
- Dołączono
- 6 Paź 2018
Tomorrow on CNN: "SMILING is the new alt-right dog whistle!"
Edit....
As soon as I posted that, it doesn't seem unlikely. Jesus are we down a fucking insane rabbit hole.
- Dołączono
- 5 Lut 2018
- Dołączono
- 4 Lis 2017
The reasoning behind this mostly true, but in this case it is explicitly false. I was also misled about this.
There are two types of Furloughs: Administrative and Emergency.
If employees from a Federal Office are administratively furlowed (example: lack of budget or lack of work) for more than 22 days out a 30-day period, the office has to implement Reduction in Force policies, no exception. This does not apply to Emergency Furloughs. There was some debate about if the shutdown furloughs were administrative or emergency,
The Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management have both explicitly stated Tuesday that the current shutdown is an emergency shutdown and RIF requirements do not apply.
https://federalnewsnetwork.com/gove...nment-shutdown-extends-past-30-days-omb-says/
Building off of what @AnOminous said, RICO wouldn't apply because there is no organization to go after. The twitter mob doesn't have leaders profiting from the enterprise to go after.
Or more to the point:
You can't charge Umberto's Clam House under RICO just because mobsters meet there; while the owners might have known or have reasonable suspicions that criminals were meeting and discussing crimes, but they weren't aiding the criminals. Umberto's is making money off of criminals and being the meeting place of criminals, but they are only doing so through normal and accepted means.
Now if Umberto's were to go an install copper insulation turning the place into a faraday cage to inhibit law enforcement listening in on conversations, then you might be onto something.
- Dołączono
- 14 Lip 2016
Being against smiling is a completely logical next step for modern leftists. How many times have we said that a huge motivator for them is being miserable, and wanting everyone else to be equally miserable? I'm not sure how strong a platform of "no happiness allowed" will be, but what do I know.
- Dołączono
- 26 Lis 2018
The tolerant left cries out as they strike you.
- Dołączono
- 9 Kwi 2017
Amazing what power the MSM has over these brain dead leftist drones.
Put a MAGA hat on a dog and they would surely kick the dog for it.
These people don‘t think.
They react.
They only have feelings. No logic.
Takes some really low IQ people to STILL believe the MSM after 2 years of fake news.
I‘d have them all together in front of a cliff and throw a MAGA hat down for them to jump after.
Put a MAGA hat on a dog and they would surely kick the dog for it.
These people don‘t think.
They react.
They only have feelings. No logic.
Takes some really low IQ people to STILL believe the MSM after 2 years of fake news.
I‘d have them all together in front of a cliff and throw a MAGA hat down for them to jump after.
- Dołączono
- 6 Paź 2018
Ahhh. That makes sense, and I understand the reasons for that limitation, I think. That law makes perfect sense the way you describe. Otherwise, there would be an endless "guilt by association" sort of scenario, and any association would bog down innocent people in criminal charges.
I've been through the criminal legal system in Canada (not guilty fwiw), and I have sisters who are lawyers who answer questions (granted, one is all mergers and acquisitions, and the other is family law). But I must say, all legal systems, while usually internally coherent, don't really make sense from the outside. It's incredibly opaque and couter-intuitive. Thanks to both of you. I think I understand the reason for that limitation.
- Dołączono
- 5 Lut 2018
Ostatnio edytowane: