US Politics: Bike tricks

[Kieppie]

What if... A grand jury was presented with evidence and they determined it was necessary to indict Trump...

Considering that a jury found the memer Douglass Mackey guilty, does not foster much faith in them. At least not in that state.

 

[quovadis]

Depends on whether it's made up of honest people or leftist stooges.

Randomly selected...

 

[rambo919]

Randomly selected...

In politics nothing is random.

 

[quovadis]

Considering that a jury found the memer Douglass Mackey guilty, does not foster much faith in them. At least not in that state.

Great job unless you believe people are allowed to send people BS ...

As proven at trial, between September 2016 and November 2016, Mackey conspired with other influential Twitter users and with members of private online groups to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages that encouraged supporters of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to “vote” via text message or social media which, in reality, was legally invalid. For example, on November 1, 2016, in or around the same time that Mackey was sending tweets suggesting the importance of limiting “black turnout,” the defendant tweeted an image depicting an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for Hillary” sign. The ad stated: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home,” “Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925,” and “Vote for Hillary and be a part of history.” The fine print at the bottom of the deceptive image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by Hillary For President 2016.” The tweet included the typed hashtag “#ImWithHer,” a slogan frequently used by Hillary Clinton. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “Hillary” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which had been used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by Mackey and his co-conspirators.

 

[quovadis]

In politics nothing is random.

Jury selection is random and nothing to do with politicians.

 

[rambo919]

Jury selection is random and nothing to do with politicians.

Yeah I don't buy that.

 

[quovadis]

Yeah I don't buy that.

Well then you perhaps need to spend some time reading how it's done and why it's never/hardly ever challenged by defendants...

 

[Kieppie]

Great job unless you believe people are allowed to send people BS ...

As proven at trial, between September 2016 and November 2016, Mackey conspired with other influential Twitter users and with members of private online groups to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages that encouraged supporters of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to “vote” via text message or social media which, in reality, was legally invalid. For example, on November 1, 2016, in or around the same time that Mackey was sending tweets suggesting the importance of limiting “black turnout,” the defendant tweeted an image depicting an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for Hillary” sign. The ad stated: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home,” “Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925,” and “Vote for Hillary and be a part of history.” The fine print at the bottom of the deceptive image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by Hillary For President 2016.” The tweet included the typed hashtag “#ImWithHer,” a slogan frequently used by Hillary Clinton. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “Hillary” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which had been used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by Mackey and his co-conspirators.

Nice try.
It's a meme, they were unable to provide evidence that anyone was deceived by the meme. Then again the left are notriously bad at understanding the meme culture.

At the end of the day if people are stupid enough to fall for memes, then they should not be voting.
Those type of messages were common at that time irrespective of party affiliation.
This just highlights the nature of juries in NY.

 

[quovadis]

Nice try.
It's a meme, they were unable to provide evidence that anyone was deceived by the meme. Then again the left are notriously bad at understanding the meme culture.

At the end of the day if people are stupid enough to fall for memes, then they should not be voting.
Those type of messages were common at that time irrespective of party affiliation.
This just highlights the nature of juries in NY.

Lol. Sure guy. It's a "meme" and legally protected speech Text messages are now memes too? Did you miss the conspiracy aspect? Enlisting others to retweet/text the content tens of thousands of times per day? Pick another cause to defend.

 

[Kieppie]

Jury selection is random and nothing to do with politicians.

You're forgetting that juries come with build in prejudices based on where it takes place. In this case NY.
The "voir dire" process is kinda meaningless in trying to gauge impartiality.

 

[Kieppie]

Lol. Sure guy. It's a "meme" and legally protected speech Text messages are now memes too? Did you miss the conspiracy aspect? Enlisting others to retweet/text the content tens of thousands of times per day? Pick another cause to defend.

Ah yes the text... which proves nothing, besides making it funnier. They failed to prove any person was disenfranchised, which is a running theme with Dems making such claims.
Meme's are memes, pushing virality is irrelevant. Retweeting is now a "Conspiracy"

I'll wait for baited breath as others who did this get charged as well. (insert usual double standard quip)

 

[quovadis]

You're forgetting that juries come with build in prejudices based on where it takes place. In this case NY.
The "voir dire" process is kinda meaningless in trying to gauge impartiality.

Amazing. They're humans. That's why they have more than one instead of just a single arbiter and for the most part you have to convince them all.

 

[quovadis]

Ah yes the text... which proves nothing, besides making it funnier. They failed to prove any person was disenfranchised, which is a running theme with Dems making such claims.
Meme's are memes, pushing virality is irrelevant. Retweeting is now a "Conspiracy"

I'll wait for baited breath as others who did this get charged as well. (insert usual double standard quip)

Lol. Just memes:

The star prosecution witness, a Twitter user known as Microchip, helped direct online attacks against Mrs. Clinton in 2016, but began cooperating with the F.B.I. two years later. He testified that the private groups that he and Mr. Mackey took part in had the goal of “destroying Hillary Clinton.”

Communications from the groups provided a glimpse into a shadowy world of crass motives and dirty tricks in which anti-Clinton activists developed propaganda, spread falsehoods and exulted in their impact."

As for the disenfranchised argument that's cute. Try better.

 

[Kieppie]

Amazing. They're humans. That's why they have more than one instead of just a single arbiter and for the most part you have to convince them all.

Irrelevant given the views of the majority. Juries tend to acquiesce to a certain view given time.
It's why I asked previously how far a hostile jury can be pushed before they have to rule counter to their own views.

 

[Kieppie]

Lol. Just memes:

Yep just memes. Their motives are irrelevant. Unless you're trying to argue that all anti Trump memes are also an organised attempt to destroy him. Probably a a factor for many come to think about it.

As for the disenfranchised argument that's cute. Try better.

It's cute and at the same time true.

 

[quovadis]

Yep just memes. Their motives are irrelevant. Unless you're trying to argue that all anti Trump memes are also an organised attempt to destroy him. Probably a a factor for many come to think about it.

It's cute and at the same time true.

Disagree. Luckily a court sided with the "not-a-meme" argument. Guess you'll have to wait for an appeal.

 

[quovadis]

Irrelevant given the views of the majority. Juries tend to acquiesce to a certain view given time.
It's why I asked previously how far a hostile jury can be pushed before they have to rule counter to their own views.

Are you missing the point? That's the system they've used for almost 400 years. Perhaps you can come up with a new one and let them know how to do it.

 

[Kieppie]

Disagree. Luckily a court sided with the "not-a-meme" argument. Guess you'll have to wait for an appeal.

Yep I'm hoping the appeal sorts out this mess.
Otherwise people will go start going after all similar events retroactively.

 

[Kieppie]

Are you missing the point? That's the system they've used for almost 400 years. Perhaps you can come up with a new one and let them know how to do it.

I'm well aware of that, as I'm also well aware of how much their landscape have become polarised.
It's still better than a single judge, but you can't ignore obvious problems with the system.

 

[quovadis]

I'm well aware of that, as I'm also well aware of how much their landscape have become polarised.
It's still better than a single judge, but you can't ignore obvious problems with the system.

So what are you arguing it should be replaced with?