Monday morning links

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Monday, April 3. 2023

These two ancient empires shaped Passover - The holiday celebrates the Israelites’ liberation from Egyptian slavery, but it continued evolving after the Neo-Babylonians conquered Jerusalem in 587 B.C.

Important New Report Explores The Futility Of Wind Power

The Wages of Sin at Stanford Law

‘I Felt Bullied’: Mother of Child Treated at Transgender Center Speaks Out. She was told medical intervention would help relieve her 14-year-old’s psychological distress. That’s not what happened.

Bill Maher and J.K. Rowling Are Asking Questions About Transgenderism That Many on the Left Won’t

Bragg brings murder charges against man who shot thief who shot him first

Superintendent claims his $150K-a-year job offer at new school board was abruptly canceled because he addressed committee members as 'ladies' in an email - which was a microaggression

To Everyone Celebrating Trump’s Indictment

As anticipated, news broadcasts all Trump all the time - Biden crime family, crickets

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 07:30 | Comments (65) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Political Memes, Illegal In America?

QUOTE:

In 2016, meme-maker Douglass Mackey decided to lampoon Democrat Party voters by creating and posting an image that claimed they could vote simply by texting “Hillary” to a cell phone number, instead of waiting hours in line.

. . . This week, Mackey was convicted in Brooklyn, New York, on a charge of Conspiracy Against Rights stemming from what the U.S. District Attorney’s office called “his scheme to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote.”

. .. Mackey faces 10 years in prison

https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/04/01/political-memes-illegal-in-america/

Yep. It's official. Memes that offend Democrats can now get you convicted of a felony and land you in prison.

First Amendment? What First Amendment? We don't need no steenking First Amendment. At least not for Republicans.

#1 feeblemind on 2023-04-03 09:57 (Reply)

feeblemind: Memes that offend Democrats can now get you convicted of a felony and land you in prison.

Memes that purposefully try to interfere with the right to vote are a criminal offense. Mackey conspired to limit voting. He also fraudulently claimed to be working for the Hillary for President 2016. Nearly 5,000 people texted to the number provided by the meme, so it was not an inconsequential act.

feeblemind: First Amendment?

The First Amendment doesn't protect fraud and doesn't preclude laws to protect election integrity. If he has a First Amendment claim, which was rejected by the trial judge, he can appeal, but it is very unlikely to be successful.

#1.1 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 11:26 (Reply)

There is an argument that Mackey’s conviction is warranted. He suggested that people who supported Hillary should text in their votes. That might actually have interfered with the election since if one is going to vote for Hillary, you are very likely to be stupid enough to think that was a valid way to vote.

#1.1.1 mudbug on 2023-04-03 12:23 (Reply)

Were they even legal voters.

#1.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 12:32 (Reply)

The conservative tree house blog 2023/03/31

After the jury remined deadlocked for three days, and after thrice telling the judge they were deadlocked, judge Ann Donnelly threatened not to release them from duty unless and until they came to a decision on guilt.

The judges behavior will not be treated very well on appeal.

#1.1.2 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 12:29 (Reply)

Torture the jurors long enough and they will render any verdict the judge desires.

#1.1.2.1 Zachinoff on 2023-04-03 14:11 (Reply)

mudbug: That might actually have interfered with the election since if one is going to vote for Hillary, you are very likely to be stupid enough to think that was a valid way to vote.

Or they were just young. Next thing you know, they'll have popular TikTok influencers selling lite beer.

indyjonesouthere: Were they even legal voters.

There's no way to know, but if they went to vote at the polling place or by mail-in voting, they would have been directed to the proper procedure by the election officials.

indyjonesouthere: The judges behavior will not be treated very well on appeal.

That's not unusual. Judges always prefer that juries reach a verdict—when possible—rather than having a hung jury and the prospect of having to retry the case, with all the time and expense that would entail.

#1.1.3 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 12:46 (Reply)

So it isn't necessary to know if he actually interfered in anyone voting. Just find him guilty of "maybe".

A judge threatening a jury is not unusual ... my, what a twisted judicial system we have created. But it is NY and a NY jury.

#1.1.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 13:45 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: So it isn't necessary to know if he actually interfered in anyone voting. Just find him guilty of "maybe".

No. The charge requires a finding of intent of two or more persons. It's against the law to conspire and then attempt to rob a bank, even if the attempt fails.

indyjonesouthere: A judge threatening a jury is not unusual . . .

It's called an Allen charge, consistent with Allen v. United States (1896). And it is standard procedure in many, but not all jurisdictions. It's always amazing when people on the right finally realize how the system works when white people are caught up it. It's almost as if they thought the criminal system wasn't designed with them in mind.

#1.1.3.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 14:07 (Reply)

Quibble-DickZ pulling out their overused race card again.

#1.1.3.2.1 Zachinoff on 2023-04-03 14:15 (Reply)

z's race card is in tatters and it only works in academic world and at the DNC cult.

#1.1.3.2.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 14:49 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: z's race card

Perhaps you can provide another reason why so many on the political right are suddenly, since the J6 riots, now concerned about due process issues after generations by many on the political left (though a few on the political right) of advocating reform, including concerning Allen charges, pretrial detention, and jail conditions?

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 14:57 (Reply)

Marxists, prog, dems, and socialists have been outraged ever since Trump beat Hillary. Even before that we had the weaponization of the Patriot Act where intelligence focused inward on US citizens rather than outward toward potential enemies. Obama and the intelligence agencies were spying on all the republican candidates during the primaries and when Trump won they doubled down on getting rid of Trump before Trump found out about their spying. Russia, Russia, Russia was an attempt to get rid of Trump and they continue to do so to this day. This isn't about white people as you assume because you are race obsessed. This is about the weaponization of the institutions against Americans by the Marxist/socialists authoritarians. Your J6 riots is only the latest weaponization.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 15:09 (Reply)

Funny how the Quibble-DickZ keep repeating the same lame mantra over and over again.
Maybe the its the second string working today.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.1.1 Zachinoff on 2023-04-03 15:28 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Even before that we had the weaponization of the Patriot Act

The resistance to the Patriot Act was primarily from the political left.

indyjonesouthere: Your J6 riots is only the latest weaponization.

But issues of jail conditions, pretrial detention, and Allen charges long predate any of that. The vast majority of people involved in the J6 riots were released before trial. Those that were held had bail hearings to show they were either a flight risk, a risk to the public, or a risk to the trial process. None of that is new. And jail conditions are actually better for the J6 rioters than for others in the DC jail system. Yet, now is when the political right is up in arms, after generations of poor treatment of largely poor and minority detainees.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 15:25 (Reply)

The third time in this thread Quibble-DickZ have repeated themselvez. Maybe they should go for 4.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.2.1 Zachinoff on 2023-04-03 15:44 (Reply)

Holder and Obama weaponized the Patriot Act by turning it inward rather that outward as most intelligence is done. The conservative treehouse blog covered this extremely well. Once of the first know breeches of the law was Admiral Rogers meeting with Trump secretly after which Trump moved all of his personnel and meetings to another location. The weaponized intelligence agencies were still spying on him and never quit spying on him. The FISA judges were drawn into the spying by accepting false information from the FBI. The intelligence agencies spying continues to this day. The left loves the new Patriot Act and it is why the republicans need to refuse reauthorization of the act and have nothing to do with the new Restrict Act. They are nothing more than war on the people.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.2.2 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 15:46 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Holder and Obama weaponized the Patriot Act by turning it inward rather that outward as most intelligence is done.

No. The Patriot Act of 2001 authorized an expansion of domestic surveillance. It was signed by President Bush long before Obama became president.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.2.3 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 15:51 (Reply)

The Patriot Act could only be used internally through the FISA courts. And the FBI lied to the FISA courts to continue spying on Trump and it was ALL done under Obama. Obama was using the Patriot act illegally to gain intelligence on what the republican party strategy plans were. They were aided and abetted by the SSCI which included anti Trump republicans.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.2.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 16:11 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: The Patriot Act

None of this has anything to do with Douglass Mackey's criminal actions. The law concerning Conspiracy Against Rights and Allen charges long predate the Patriot Act. But, suddenly, people on the political right are concerned. Glad to see your newfound concern for due process.

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.2.3.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 16:29 (Reply)

The Patriot Act has everything to do with the weaponization of the institutions. Your arrogance precedes you to think that a Trump supporter would not support due process. Did you learn this garbage in academia?

#1.1.3.2.1.1.1.2.3.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 17:00 (Reply)

You said that they had no idea of whether the voters were legal or not yet intent requires two or more showing intent to do what?
Deny illegal voters the right to vote? They show no proof that an actual legal voter was denied. They didn't show there were legal voters involved.

Its against the law to conspire and rob a bank even if it fails. But first you better prove that a bank exists for which they were accused of attempting to rob.

#1.1.3.2.2 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 14:59 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: intent to do what?

"with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured". See 18 U.S. Code § 241.

indyjonesouthere: But first you better prove that a bank exists for which they were accused of attempting to rob.

Voters exist. Mackey conspired to hinder the free exercise of a protected right.

You do realize there was a trial with witnesses and evidence and a jury made up of citizens with rules and procedures and a judge to adjudicate all this? One of the first things that happens is the court has a hearing on whether the allegations meet the definition of the crime, and whether there is probable cause to move forward. The defendant tried the First Amendment defense. That didn't work. Then they tried the just trolling defense. That didn't work either.

#1.1.3.2.3 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 15:17 (Reply)

Illegals can't vote so what right was infringed upon, and remember you said they never determined who supposedly voted.
You nor the judge have any idea if a voters right was infringed upon because you didn't determine the legality of the voter to actually vote.
You didn't determine the legitimacy of any of the so called voters. You are just picking crap out of thin air just as the judge and prosecutor did because they were too damned lazy to actually investigate who the so called "injured" voters were.

#1.1.3.2.3.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 15:54 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: you said they never determined who supposedly voted.

No. However, that is not required under the law. The bank may not have any cash on hand. The bank robbers don't even have to enter the bank. They just have to have the intent on robbing the bank and take action in furtherance of the conspiracy. In this case, as proven in court, they were intending to disenfranchise legal voters.

#1.1.3.2.3.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 16:26 (Reply)

It's not important to know that the bank even exists before charging someone with a "conspiracy" to rob the bank. Nice to know that reality isn't a necessity to establishing a crime. Is this the new 1984 thought crime amendment to NY law.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 17:08 (Reply)

You admitted they had no idea if any were legal voters. Fake crimes produced and directed by weaponized law.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.2 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 17:12 (Reply)

This case becomes ever more pathetic the more you learn about it.

https://www.revolver.news/2023/04/attorney-robert-barnes-reveals-how-us-government-weaponized-a-jury-in-mackey-meme-trial/

#1.1.3.2.3.2.3 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 19:21 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: It's not important to know that the bank even exists before charging someone with a "conspiracy" to rob the bank.

Voters exist, and it was proven at trial that voters were targeted by the conspiracy.

indyjonesouthere: This case becomes ever more pathetic the more you learn about it. . . {Jury instructions}

The intent standard for conspiracies has been law since the founding, even before then as part of common law.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.4 Zachriel on 2023-04-04 08:32 (Reply)

Voters exist but are they legal voters? Citizens exist in this country but are they legal citizens. Neither the prosecutor nor the judge had a clue.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.4.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-04 12:26 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: Voters exist but are they legal voters?

Yes, legal voters exist. Even legal Black voters exist, who were the primary target of the conspiracy.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.4.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-04 13:39 (Reply)

I want names of the legal voters that were denied voting because of this meme. If the court, prosecutor or you cannot provide that verified list then you're just pissing in the wind and practicing lawfare against anyone you disapprove.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.4.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-04 14:33 (Reply)

indyjonesouthere: I want names of the legal voters that were denied voting because of this meme.

That's nice. But what you want isn't a legal concept. Specific names are not required under the law. If a group were to conspire to attack voters as they show up at the polls, but are stopped before they do, then there would be no names, yet it is still a criminal conspiracy. It's rather silly to argue otherwise.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.4.2.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-04 14:41 (Reply)

You need specific names to know if they are even a legal voter otherwise this is nothing more than imaginary law to support imaginary voters in order to prosecute more institutional lawfare.
Pretend law for a pretend legal system.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.4.2.2.1 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-04 17:32 (Reply)

Ignoring the point is not an argument. Let us know when you are willing to actually engage the point.

#1.1.3.2.3.2.4.2.2.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-05 09:51 (Reply)

Clearly the intent is to negate the 1st amendment especially when it is used to criticize the left. They are doing this for a reason, it is part of the Nazification of the left.

#1.2 OneGuy on 2023-04-03 12:55 (Reply)

OneGuy: Clearly the intent is to negate the 1st amendment especially when it is used to criticize the left.

The conviction was not for criticizing the left, but for conspiring to mislead potential voters so they wouldn't cast their ballots.

#1.2.1 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 12:58 (Reply)

You sound just exactly like a "good" German citizen in 1933.

#1.2.1.1 OneGuy on 2023-04-03 15:56 (Reply)

OneGuy: You sound just exactly like a "good" German citizen in 1933.

Sure, because Nazis were very concerned about the sanctity of the ballot.

#1.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2023-04-04 08:18 (Reply)

Memes that won't get you investigated much less prosecuted.

Ah, the good memes

#1.3 Zachinoff on 2023-04-03 14:47 (Reply)

Is a cashless econonomy coming soon to the US?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/04/will_economic_freedom_end_this_july.html

#2 feeblemind on 2023-04-03 10:01 (Reply)

One wonders how our ruling masters would get their illicit kickbacks, sex and drugs without cash?

In my estimation, that is a huge obstacle to going cashless.

#2.1 feeblemind on 2023-04-03 19:57 (Reply)

Transgender 'Woman' Dylan Mulvaney Is Now the Face of Bud Light Because These Corporations Hate You – RedState

How in the world do they think this could possibly help sell beer?

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/04/02/transgender-woman-dylan-mulvaney-is-now-the-face-of-bud-light-because-these-corporations-hate-you-n725234

#3 feeblemind on 2023-04-03 10:04 (Reply)

My Dad introduced me to Sierra Nevada a while back. Glad he did.

#3.1 Maniac on 2023-04-03 10:09 (Reply)

If they are paracticing DEI they could as well put the Nashville shooter on the can. Maybe that's their next promotion campaign.

#3.2 indyjonesouthere on 2023-04-03 18:37 (Reply)

One fears that supposition isn't farfetched.

The LGBTWTF crowd already appears to be celebrating the shooter as the victim.

#3.2.1 feeblemind on 2023-04-03 20:00 (Reply)

QUOTE:

To Everyone Celebrating Trump’s Indictment. Politicized prosecutions never stop with one person or one party.

Except that most people who are celebrating consider the non-prosecution of Trump to be the politicization, with prosecution righting the scales of justice. Consider that Michael Cohen went to prison for actions at the behest of Individual 1 (Trump), and Trump's CFO went to prison for being paid under the table.

This doesn't even get to the possible indictments in Georgia or federal court.

#4 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 10:54 (Reply)

That's a little weak. You believe Cohen had done nothing but Trump persecuted him and forced the DA to prosecute. I think you left a lot out of your claim.

#4.1 JustMe on 2023-04-03 11:20 (Reply)

JustMe: You believe Cohen had done nothing but Trump persecuted him and forced the DA to prosecute.

Huh? Cohen committed a criminal act. He did so at the behest of Individual 1 (Trump).

#4.1.1 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 11:29 (Reply)

Says who? You are still leaving out a lot of facts.

#4.1.1.1 JustMe on 2023-04-03 12:52 (Reply)

JustMe: Says who?

The evidence, which was sufficient to send Cohen to prison.

#4.1.1.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 12:56 (Reply)

But for some strange reason you accuse Trump but cannot offer any proof that Trump did anything wrong. I would think, knowing your biases, that you would eagerly trot out any evidence that Trump did something wrong, and yet...

#4.1.1.2.1 JustMe on 2023-04-03 16:00 (Reply)

JustMe: But for some strange reason you accuse Trump but cannot offer any proof that Trump did anything wrong.

You said we "believe Cohen had done nothing." That is contrary to our view. Cohen committed a criminal act at the behest of Individual-1, an unnamed person in the legal filings, but someone who began his presidential campaign on June 16, 2015. Hmm. Wonder whom it could be?

#4.1.1.2.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 16:37 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Bragg brings murder charges against man who shot thief who shot him first

The charges were immediately dropped once police had a good understanding of how the event transpired.

#5 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 10:55 (Reply)

Yeah, immediately dropped.
Bullshit.

QUOTE:

[/]Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg will not prosecute the parking-garage attendant who shot a suspected thief after getting wounded himself, the DA's office told The Post on Sunday.
Moussa Diarra, 57, was shot twice by alleged thief Charles Rhodie, 59, early Saturday before turning the tables on the suspect and pumping a bullet into him with the accused criminal's handgun, authorities said.

Yet cops charged Diarra with attempted murder, assault and gun possession in the case, while Rhodie was slapped with those three raps as well as burglary.

But Bragg -- who is already under fire for indicting former President Donald Trump last week in a fraud-related case -- will dismiss the case against Diarra "pending further investigation," his office said.[/I]

#5.1 Zachinoff on 2023-04-03 15:35 (Reply)

That's interesting: A DA that brings charges against a citizen before conducting an investigation. Very interesting. And coincidentally, drop charges after the 'investigation' has wrapped up - and also, after the public outcry. Coincidental, I'm sure (that it isn't). Is there an Inspector General in the NY court system?

#5.2 Aggie on 2023-04-04 00:31 (Reply)

Aggie: A DA that brings charges against a citizen before conducting an investigation.

You have two people shot, a gun, no independent witnesses, and conflicting stories. You could release both of them to potentially disappear or commit more violent acts, or you could hold them both until there is time to collect more evidence and determine what actually transpired.

This has been standard procedure since the advent of policing, not some new left-wing "weaponization of the institutions." This is much like the discussion with indyjonesouthere. Ignorance is not an argument.

#5.2.1 Zachriel on 2023-04-04 08:27 (Reply)

Oh I see - so now, the DA that has forged a reputation for favoring criminals by letting them out with no-cash-bail, for letting hardened felons back onto the street in almost no time at all, with no cash bail, now this is our exemplary DA that follows, and has always followed the time-honored principles of 'standard procedure since the advent of policing'. This is the same one that charged the bodega worker that defended his own life after being knifed by a bandit, on the job - right?

Motte, meet Bailee.

#5.2.1.1 Aggie on 2023-04-04 09:06 (Reply)

Aggie: the DA that has forged a reputation for favoring criminals . . .

This was introduced as an example of the Manhattan District Attorney's bad policies, but the example doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as noted in the discussion with indyjonesouthere above.

Aggie: . . . now this is our exemplary DA that follows, and has always followed the time-honored principles of 'standard procedure since the advent of policing'.

We never made that claim.

#5.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2023-04-04 10:08 (Reply)

Aggie: Is there an Inspector General in the NY court system?

Yes.

#5.2.2 Zachriel on 2023-04-04 08:51 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Important New Report Explores The Futility Of Wind Power

No. The article actually shows that wind power can significantly reduce the use of fossil fuels, though it cannot currently replace them. There are diminishing returns.

QUOTE:

It is truly incredible that, with the vast amounts of government funding available in this area, nobody gets paid for the most important investigations, which are to look into whether the proposed energy system of the future might actually work, and at what cost.

That's just silly. There is a huge amount of research on how intermittent energy sources will affect the energy grid. Or do they think they just discovered curtailment?

#6 Zachriel on 2023-04-03 10:58 (Reply)

Joe told us that the suspicious activity report involving his family wasn't true (although I'm not sure what part of it was supposed to be untrue - there was no bank? It didn't issue a suspicious activity report? It had nothing to do with the Bidens? Tell us about how you beat up a gang of Negro thugs led by one Corn Pop, Joe.) and then Bragg indicted Trump and we heard no more about the suspicious activity report. Mission accomplished!

#7 Jerryskids on 2023-04-03 14:48 (Reply)

Your comment section would be much more interesting if zachriel was not allowed to comment. Or, at least, people were not allowed to respond to his comments.

#8 jack walter on 2023-04-03 18:50 (Reply)

yes, reluctantly bcs the world has Zachs in it Burnham's Law #6 ?, but it's the kind of stuff that give pseudonymity a bad name... newsflash: logos does not trump ethos.

#8.1 Jeff Allen on 2023-04-03 19:35 (Reply)

Maybe just a limit on the number of comments per person. When I see a comment string of 58, I know who's been spamming the thread and just skip reading the whole thing--which is a shame, because the comments are one of my favorite things here.

#9 Texan99 on 2023-04-04 10:20 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Monday, April 3. 2023

Monday morning links