Re: 'If it's good enough for you, it's good enough for us...'
I think that's the point. By doing this, foreign state actors can attack us back creating two results:
1) Creating a (cyber) wartime president and indie and swing voters tend to favor Republicans in all things national defense.
2) An excuse to annul/question the legitimacy of the elections. If Trump can prove that the election was "hacked," he can have legitimate results overturn, call for a new election, etc. It's a way to undermine the results of an election, especially if you're losing.
Fair, but these sorts of antics also eat up time, which is what they really want to do. They rely on judges and rules desire for fairness and justice, to allow them to appeal, correct mistakes, etc.
They don't want the book to come out at all, but they care a lot less after the election.
Well, for elected judges, they would not be re-elected. For lifetime appointments, they can be impeached. The problem is that can be used by both sides to impeach a judge they don't think is following "established law." Sadly, this would mean impeaching a judge like ginsberg because voting for gay or abortion rights is clearly not "established law" in the eyes of conservatives.
My guess is that they're intentionally going to argue these in serial, rather than parallel, appeal each decision, etc. in order to delay publication until after the election.
Nunes loses: Liberal, activist judges are undermining the judiciary! Technology platforms are biased against conservatives views. Send Trump and I money to fight these communists and Antifa.
They also 'forget' to switch on their cameras, cover them up, etc.
Re: 30 days. Cops are given enormous amounts of time to prepare to respond to allegations of misconduct. Investigators often aren't allowed to talk to them for 48-72 hours (even with counsel present) so that they can process the "trauma" of their (alleged) misconduct. In this interim period, some police departments give the cops access to the video footage of the cops on scene, etc. Obviously, its all intended to allow the cops to get their story straight.
Re: Re: To do or not to do, depends on who's pockets we're filli
ISP's sweat assets like nobody's business. A large part of their estate is LDOS/EOX and they just bully the hardware/software providers to support.
A large part of their business model is to get government subsidies to increase and expand access and do the bare minimum to not get in trouble (which is nothing in the world of Pai).
This is sort of what they already say, but I like the idea. I think these companies should be leaning on "freedom loving" lawmakers that they are a private business, not the government, etc. Hit back at this sort of stuff with the same infantile argument. "Ted Cruz talks about freedom, but he wants us to only posts things that he personally agrees with. Ted Cruz, wrong for Texas, wrong for America."
I know this is half-joking (I think), but the idea is that the right are more brazen and have more resources do just that- just sue the sh*t out of any platform's politics or policies they don't like. Add a bunch of Republican (not conservative) judges and they're happy to engage in this war, because in the long run, they'll come out as victors.
He knows exactly what he's doing. Through highly publicized litigation he's reinforcing the narrative that FB, Google, etc. are all anti-conservative (when the opposite is true). It doesn't matter what the truth is (see the IRS "scandal," Benghazi, Trump/Ukraine, etc. The GOP knows this and they get a win-win-win. Either they pass laws that further curtail "factual" moderation, they use them as a boogeyman for fundraising and votes, and/or they scare these platforms into allowing this false content to remain, further reinforcing the idea that it's true.
Because nobody was fired for making a school "too" safe, even to the detriment of the students. Add to that the fear of school shootings, insurance costs, and dash of systemic racism, and you have a the current situation.
...or someone who is trained in de-escalation, etc. but can be physical (in a measured way), if absolutely, positively, needed. I just worry that once school starts up, we're one school shooting away from cops being back in schools.
So strange that folks that support cops like this have no problem saying this PoC or that PoC is "one of the good ones" and yet we're ask to assume that all cops are good, until they prove otherwise.
It's an instructive comment, but it assumes that the folks suing these sites/platforms just don't know any better. They know exactly what they're doing and why. It's a win-win for them. If they win the case, well...they win. If they lose, they can complain that it's liberal judges, etc. and they still win. This litigation is done more for the optics than the actual results.
I think that's part of the calculus. Garbage district judge issues garbage opinion. Garbage judges on Court of Appeals affirm decision. Even if that decision is patently wrong, SCOTUS doesn't have time to accept all garbage decisions by the Courts of Appeals. So, using your raw sewage analogy, even a center-right SCOTUS and reasonable Courts of Appeals can't remove all the sewage from the system.
Exactly: people pretend that the current government still functions under rule of law. Barr currently operates with impunity and no amount of public shaming will do much good. However, if you have an automatic cut in DOJs budget if they don't produce the required materials, give updates, etc. perhaps that will encourage them to do more.
They often use bundles to prop up their TV numbers (e.g. if it's another $10 a month to get TV, why not?), but all the fees and rental charges will eventually cause people to move to broadband only. Given the apples to apples comparison, people will force them to compete on price, if there's meaningful competition.
That's where their content monopoly kicks in- they'll force bundles for their popular TV channels, essentially bringing us full circle to cable bundles.
Apologies- you're right. He hasn't filed yet. I guess I was grouping this with all the other frivolous lawsuits (and threats of lawsuits), that are done not because they will win, but to rally the base.
On the post: The Trump Administration Has Given The CIA Free Rein To Engage In A Cyberwar
Re: 'If it's good enough for you, it's good enough for us...'
I think that's the point. By doing this, foreign state actors can attack us back creating two results:
1) Creating a (cyber) wartime president and indie and swing voters tend to favor Republicans in all things national defense.
2) An excuse to annul/question the legitimacy of the elections. If Trump can prove that the election was "hacked," he can have legitimate results overturn, call for a new election, etc. It's a way to undermine the results of an election, especially if you're losing.
On the post: That Was Quick: Appellate Court Says Simon & Schuster Not Subject To Prior Restraint Order Over Mary Trump's Book; But Fight's Not Over Yet
Re:
Fair, but these sorts of antics also eat up time, which is what they really want to do. They rely on judges and rules desire for fairness and justice, to allow them to appeal, correct mistakes, etc.
They don't want the book to come out at all, but they care a lot less after the election.
On the post: NY Judge Apparently Unaware Of The Supreme Court's Ban On Prior Restraint: Puts Temporary Restraining Order On Trump's Niece's Book
Re: There really should be a penalty.
Well, for elected judges, they would not be re-elected. For lifetime appointments, they can be impeached. The problem is that can be used by both sides to impeach a judge they don't think is following "established law." Sadly, this would mean impeaching a judge like ginsberg because voting for gay or abortion rights is clearly not "established law" in the eyes of conservatives.
On the post: NY Judge Apparently Unaware Of The Supreme Court's Ban On Prior Restraint: Puts Temporary Restraining Order On Trump's Niece's Book
Re: Prior Restraint Is Not the Sole Issue
My guess is that they're intentionally going to argue these in serial, rather than parallel, appeal each decision, etc. in order to delay publication until after the election.
On the post: Judge Sides With Twitter Over Devin Nunes In Case Over Satirical Internet Cow: Section 230 Removes Twitter From Frivolous Case
These are win-win suits
Nunes Wins: Well, he wins
Nunes loses: Liberal, activist judges are undermining the judiciary! Technology platforms are biased against conservatives views. Send Trump and I money to fight these communists and Antifa.
On the post: More NYPD Reforms: Super-Violent Plainclothes Units Disbanded, Body Cam Footage Given A 30-Day Release Mandate
Re:
They also 'forget' to switch on their cameras, cover them up, etc.
Re: 30 days. Cops are given enormous amounts of time to prepare to respond to allegations of misconduct. Investigators often aren't allowed to talk to them for 48-72 hours (even with counsel present) so that they can process the "trauma" of their (alleged) misconduct. In this interim period, some police departments give the cops access to the video footage of the cops on scene, etc. Obviously, its all intended to allow the cops to get their story straight.
On the post: The Fastest ISP In America Is Community Owned And Operated
Re: Re: if only there were a law...
Counterpoint:https://transition.fec.gov/law/litigation/cu_sc08_opinion.pdf
On the post: The Fastest ISP In America Is Community Owned And Operated
Re: Re: To do or not to do, depends on who's pockets we're filli
ISP's sweat assets like nobody's business. A large part of their estate is LDOS/EOX and they just bully the hardware/software providers to support.
A large part of their business model is to get government subsidies to increase and expand access and do the bare minimum to not get in trouble (which is nothing in the world of Pai).
On the post: Justice Department Releases Its Own Preposterous Recommendations On Updating Section 230
Re: Simple Solution?
This is sort of what they already say, but I like the idea. I think these companies should be leaning on "freedom loving" lawmakers that they are a private business, not the government, etc. Hit back at this sort of stuff with the same infantile argument. "Ted Cruz talks about freedom, but he wants us to only posts things that he personally agrees with. Ted Cruz, wrong for Texas, wrong for America."
On the post: Senator Hawley's Section 230 Reform Even Dumber Than We Expected; Would Launch A Ton Of Vexatious Lawsuits
Re:
I know this is half-joking (I think), but the idea is that the right are more brazen and have more resources do just that- just sue the sh*t out of any platform's politics or policies they don't like. Add a bunch of Republican (not conservative) judges and they're happy to engage in this war, because in the long run, they'll come out as victors.
On the post: Devin Nunes' Lawyer Tells Judge To Ignore Section 230, Because Twitter Is Anti-Devin Nunes
Re: Re:
He knows exactly what he's doing. Through highly publicized litigation he's reinforcing the narrative that FB, Google, etc. are all anti-conservative (when the opposite is true). It doesn't matter what the truth is (see the IRS "scandal," Benghazi, Trump/Ukraine, etc. The GOP knows this and they get a win-win-win. Either they pass laws that further curtail "factual" moderation, they use them as a boogeyman for fundraising and votes, and/or they scare these platforms into allowing this false content to remain, further reinforcing the idea that it's true.
On the post: More Schools Are Ending Contracts With Cops Following Protests Over The Killing Of George Floyd
Re: Administrators Failing To Make Decisions
Because nobody was fired for making a school "too" safe, even to the detriment of the students. Add to that the fear of school shootings, insurance costs, and dash of systemic racism, and you have a the current situation.
On the post: More Schools Are Ending Contracts With Cops Following Protests Over The Killing Of George Floyd
Re: A matter of proportional response
...or someone who is trained in de-escalation, etc. but can be physical (in a measured way), if absolutely, positively, needed. I just worry that once school starts up, we're one school shooting away from cops being back in schools.
On the post: Let. The Motherfucker. Burn.
Re:
So strange that folks that support cops like this have no problem saying this PoC or that PoC is "one of the good ones" and yet we're ask to assume that all cops are good, until they prove otherwise.
On the post: DC Appeals Court Dumps Lawsuit Claiming Multiple Tech Companies Are Engaged In An Anti-Conservative Conspiracy
Re: The Public Square in the Digital Age
It's an instructive comment, but it assumes that the folks suing these sites/platforms just don't know any better. They know exactly what they're doing and why. It's a win-win for them. If they win the case, well...they win. If they lose, they can complain that it's liberal judges, etc. and they still win. This litigation is done more for the optics than the actual results.
On the post: DC Appeals Court Dumps Lawsuit Claiming Multiple Tech Companies Are Engaged In An Anti-Conservative Conspiracy
Re: SCOTUS Takes So Many Cases
I think that's part of the calculus. Garbage district judge issues garbage opinion. Garbage judges on Court of Appeals affirm decision. Even if that decision is patently wrong, SCOTUS doesn't have time to accept all garbage decisions by the Courts of Appeals. So, using your raw sewage analogy, even a center-right SCOTUS and reasonable Courts of Appeals can't remove all the sewage from the system.
On the post: Uh Oh: FBI Serves Search Warrant On Senator Richard Burr, Seizes His Phone
Retribution
This is absolutely retribution for correctly submitting a report that Russia interfered in the election for the benefit of Trump.
On the post: Senator Wyden And Others Introduce Bill Calling The DOJ's Bluff Regarding Its Attempt To Destroy Section 230 & Encryption
Re: Is it enough?
Exactly: people pretend that the current government still functions under rule of law. Barr currently operates with impunity and no amount of public shaming will do much good. However, if you have an automatic cut in DOJs budget if they don't produce the required materials, give updates, etc. perhaps that will encourage them to do more.
On the post: US Cable Companies Lost 5 Million Paying Customers Last Year Alone
Monopolies
They often use bundles to prop up their TV numbers (e.g. if it's another $10 a month to get TV, why not?), but all the fees and rental charges will eventually cause people to move to broadband only. Given the apples to apples comparison, people will force them to compete on price, if there's meaningful competition.
That's where their content monopoly kicks in- they'll force bundles for their popular TV channels, essentially bringing us full circle to cable bundles.
On the post: Lt. Governor Of Texas Gets Offended By An Anti-Police Shirt, Decides He Needs To Start Violating The First Amendment
Re: Re: Winning isn't the Point
Apologies- you're right. He hasn't filed yet. I guess I was grouping this with all the other frivolous lawsuits (and threats of lawsuits), that are done not because they will win, but to rally the base.
Next >>