Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[TillLindemann]

I have virtually no doubt that Ilhan Omar, AOC and the others long targets of vitriol from the cult leader would have been killed

Getting into the realm of pre crime.

"if only those Muslims had got past police, they would have..."
"if only those environmentalists had... "
"If only those CFMEU members had..."

We are all Dick Cheney now

# Je Suis Dick Cheney

 

[cochise]

Just doing some reading and apparently the senate only needs a majority to stop him from running for office again. That wouldn't be a conviction but would mean he won't be running in 2024.

Removal from office guarantees he is unable to run.

Yes it does but he won't be removed from office. He may get convicted after he is already out, but that carries a 75% majority vote where simply preventing him from running again appears possible with a majority vote.


A successful impeachment is not a conviction. They are simply removed from office. Obviously in this case the only thing would be stopping him from running.

A successful impeachment is a conviction, the senate votes to acquit or convict.

 

[TillLindemann]

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1348748206159654913

German Chancellor and Mexican President are fascist conspiracy theorists

 

[Tiger5150]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.

I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

 

[Tiger5150]

Just doing some reading and apparently the senate only needs a majority to stop him from running for office again. That wouldn't be a conviction but would mean he won't be running in 2024.

Removal from office guarantees he is unable to run.

Yes it does but he won't be removed from office. He may get convicted after he is already out, but that carries a 75% majority vote where simply preventing him from running again appears possible with a majority vote.


A successful impeachment is not a conviction. They are simply removed from office. Obviously in this case the only thing would be stopping him from running.

A successful impeachment is a conviction, the senate votes to acquit or convict.

IT is not a legal conviction, they do not get a criminal conviction, they are not tried legally, they are not tried by a judge, there is no penalty other than loss of office.

Legal conviction could possibly follow but it would be a separate and more difficult process.

 

[TillLindemann]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

You shouldn't have to preface your first sentence with 'I don't condone...'

it should be self-evident that this kind of mass de-platforming is a dark day for the internet.

But we're back to the days of "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists", and the vast majority of people are cheering it on.

Because anyone who opposes censorship is now a white supremacist seditious terrorist

 

[cochise]

Just doing some reading and apparently the senate only needs a majority to stop him from running for office again. That wouldn't be a conviction but would mean he won't be running in 2024.

Removal from office guarantees he is unable to run.

Yes it does but he won't be removed from office. He may get convicted after he is already out, but that carries a 75% majority vote where simply preventing him from running again appears possible with a majority vote.


A successful impeachment is not a conviction. They are simply removed from office. Obviously in this case the only thing would be stopping him from running.

A successful impeachment is a conviction, the senate votes to acquit or convict.


IT is not a legal conviction, they do not get a criminal conviction, they are not tried legally, they are not tried by a judge, there is no penalty other than loss of office.

Legal conviction could possibly follow but it would be a separate and more difficult process.

It is still classified as a conviction, that is the language used .

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

Given that the News Limited media do this on a daily basis (only afford a platform to those whom align with their agenda,) I am unsure as to why this is only an issue now. They are private companies that provides platforms to people that adhere to their policies. I will need to read more into why Parler was shut down (I have seen some charming screenshots of users calling for the families of politicians to be fed into woodchippers,) but I can 100% understand as to why Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was pumped from Twitter. He was stoking the fire on the day of the riots and left it too late to calm the waters.

 

[mike]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

You shouldn't have to preface your first sentence with 'I don't condone...'

it should be self-evident that this kind of mass de-platforming is a dark day for the internet.

But we're back to the days of "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists", and the vast majority of people are cheering it on.

Because anyone who opposes censorship is now a white supremacist seditious terrorist

Getting upset with censorship on the platforms is way too funny. The platforms have been practising censorship from day one. It’s right there in their terms and conditions and always has been, it’s nothing new.

 

[TillLindemann]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

You shouldn't have to preface your first sentence with 'I don't condone...'

it should be self-evident that this kind of mass de-platforming is a dark day for the internet.

But we're back to the days of "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists", and the vast majority of people are cheering it on.

Because anyone who opposes censorship is now a white supremacist seditious terrorist

Getting upset with censorship on the platforms is way too funny. The platforms have been practising censorship from day one. It’s right there in their terms and conditions and always has been, it’s nothing new.

I thought your beef with the likes of parler was the opposite, that they allowed too much?

 

[TillLindemann]

Clear sedition and incitement to violence, but all good

https://twitter.com/rezaaslan/status/1307107507131875330?lang=en

 

[Tiger5150]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

Given that the News Limited media do this on a daily basis (only afford a platform to those whom align with their agenda,) I am unsure as to why this is only an issue now. They are private companies that provides platforms to people that adhere to their policies. I will need to read more into why Parler was shut down (I have seen some charming screenshots of users calling for the families of politicians to be fed into woodchippers,) but I can 100% understand as to why Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was pumped from Twitter. He was stoking the fire on the day of the riots and left it too late to calm the waters.

That is a great example CB.

News Limited are publishers, they edit what they publish and clearly publish it accordingly. They are also subject to defamation/slander laws and are responsible for what they publish.

Twitter screams from the rooftops that they are not publishers but "platforms" despite the fact they routinely censor and curate what is published. Twitter have a section of humans deciding what is permissible and what is not to be allowed to be published.

My understanding is that Parler was attempting to do exactly what Twitter claims to do, be simply a platform (Illegal acts are illegal acts such as inciting violence).

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

Given that the News Limited media do this on a daily basis (only afford a platform to those whom align with their agenda,) I am unsure as to why this is only an issue now. They are private companies that provides platforms to people that adhere to their policies. I will need to read more into why Parler was shut down (I have seen some charming screenshots of users calling for the families of politicians to be fed into woodchippers,) but I can 100% understand as to why Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was pumped from Twitter. He was stoking the fire on the day of the riots and left it too late to calm the waters.


That is a great example CB.

News Limited are publishers, they edit what they publish and clearly publish it accordingly. They are also subject to defamation/slander laws and are responsible for what they publish.

Twitter screams from the rooftops that they are not publishers but "platforms" despite the fact they routinely censor and curate what is published. Twitter have a section of humans deciding what is permissible and what is not to be allowed to be published.

My understanding is that Parler was attempting to do exactly what Twitter claims to do, be simply a platform (Illegal acts are illegal acts such as inciting violence).

Maybe the moderate user on Parler was an exception to the rule rather than the other way around. Like I said I don't know enough about it, apart from a few screenshots of some serious violence being advocated for by a few users on politicians from both the Dems and what they believe to be RINO's.

 

[mike]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

You shouldn't have to preface your first sentence with 'I don't condone...'

it should be self-evident that this kind of mass de-platforming is a dark day for the internet.

But we're back to the days of "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists", and the vast majority of people are cheering it on.

Because anyone who opposes censorship is now a white supremacist seditious terrorist

Getting upset with censorship on the platforms is way too funny. The platforms have been practising censorship from day one. It’s right there in their terms and conditions and always has been, it’s nothing new.

I thought your beef with the likes of parler was the opposite, that they allowed too much?

Not at all. My beef was people claiming foul after they breached T&Cs and then got upset with the consequences.

 

[TillLindemann]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

Given that the News Limited media do this on a daily basis (only afford a platform to those whom align with their agenda,) I am unsure as to why this is only an issue now. They are private companies that provides platforms to people that adhere to their policies. I will need to read more into why Parler was shut down (I have seen some charming screenshots of users calling for the families of politicians to be fed into woodchippers,) but I can 100% understand as to why Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was pumped from Twitter. He was stoking the fire on the day of the riots and left it too late to calm the waters.

I have ranted about News Limited for years. The whole appeal of a free and open internet is it allows ordinary people to bypass the big conglomerates like News Limited. If the tech conglomerates want to be curators and publishers, then they need to accept the restrictions that come with that. They can't have it both ways.

if someone calls for politician's families to be fed into woodchoppers, in your example above, then that person should be scrutinised. You don't just ban a whole internet platform.

By that same logic, Twitter should be removed from the internet - because Twitter allowed the Iranian Surpreme leader (for instance) to tweet calling for the destruction of Israel. And the charming Ayatollah is still allowed on Twitter.

 

[Tiger5150]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

Given that the News Limited media do this on a daily basis (only afford a platform to those whom align with their agenda,) I am unsure as to why this is only an issue now. They are private companies that provides platforms to people that adhere to their policies. I will need to read more into why Parler was shut down (I have seen some charming screenshots of users calling for the families of politicians to be fed into woodchippers,) but I can 100% understand as to why Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was pumped from Twitter. He was stoking the fire on the day of the riots and left it too late to calm the waters.


That is a great example CB.

News Limited are publishers, they edit what they publish and clearly publish it accordingly. They are also subject to defamation/slander laws and are responsible for what they publish.

Twitter screams from the rooftops that they are not publishers but "platforms" despite the fact they routinely censor and curate what is published. Twitter have a section of humans deciding what is permissible and what is not to be allowed to be published.

My understanding is that Parler was attempting to do exactly what Twitter claims to do, be simply a platform (Illegal acts are illegal acts such as inciting violence).

Maybe the moderate user on Parler was an exception to the rule rather than the other way around. Like I said I don't know enough about it, apart from a few screenshots of some serious violence being advocated for by a few users on politicians from both the Dems and what they believe to be RINO's.

Im not defending or praising Parler ( I have never been there) but who decides? You? Me? Mike? Formerguest? Rupert? Zuckerberg? If there is no illegality, who decides its not fit for others to hear?

Are they publishers or a platform?

 

[Tiger5150]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

You shouldn't have to preface your first sentence with 'I don't condone...'

it should be self-evident that this kind of mass de-platforming is a dark day for the internet.

But we're back to the days of "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists", and the vast majority of people are cheering it on.

Because anyone who opposes censorship is now a white supremacist seditious terrorist

Getting upset with censorship on the platforms is way too funny. The platforms have been practising censorship from day one. It’s right there in their terms and conditions and always has been, it’s nothing new.

I thought your beef with the likes of parler was the opposite, that they allowed too much?

Not at all. My beef was people claiming foul after they breached T&Cs and then got upset with the consequences.

Twitter ban all the time outside the T&C's.

Bret Weinsteins Unity project was booted off Twitter without explanation and they were trying to form a presidential candidate with one REpublican and one Democrat.

This site simply lists peer reviewed scientific studies with no narrative and they were booted from Twitter with no explanation.

https://c19ivermectin.com/faq.html

As listed before the CCP can publish a fake photo of an Australian soldier slitting a kids throat...no problem, the Ayatollah calling for the extinction of Israel, nothing to see.

ITs dangerous for society.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Parler has only 10 million users, compared to Twitter which has 330 million. Not much of an audience for Donald Duck if that’s the road he decides to take. God, imagine how he must feel right now. On the verge of a second impeachment, and no vehicle to lash out on. Loser.

It doesn't have any users currently, now that it's been effectively booted off the net. And those who were users have had all their private details hacked as of last night.


I dont condone inciting violence, or racism but am I the only one seeing a problem with Parler being "cancelled" by big tech?

Im genuinely surprised by everyone cheering this on. Do none of you see an issue with big tech determining who can say what where?

*warning this is an obvious trap* Can someone explain to me the difference between Twitter and Parler?

Given that the News Limited media do this on a daily basis (only afford a platform to those whom align with their agenda,) I am unsure as to why this is only an issue now. They are private companies that provides platforms to people that adhere to their policies. I will need to read more into why Parler was shut down (I have seen some charming screenshots of users calling for the families of politicians to be fed into woodchippers,) but I can 100% understand as to why Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon was pumped from Twitter. He was stoking the fire on the day of the riots and left it too late to calm the waters.


That is a great example CB.

News Limited are publishers, they edit what they publish and clearly publish it accordingly. They are also subject to defamation/slander laws and are responsible for what they publish.

Twitter screams from the rooftops that they are not publishers but "platforms" despite the fact they routinely censor and curate what is published. Twitter have a section of humans deciding what is permissible and what is not to be allowed to be published.

My understanding is that Parler was attempting to do exactly what Twitter claims to do, be simply a platform (Illegal acts are illegal acts such as inciting violence).

Maybe the moderate user on Parler was an exception to the rule rather than the other way around. Like I said I don't know enough about it, apart from a few screenshots of some serious violence being advocated for by a few users on politicians from both the Dems and what they believe to be RINO's.


Im not defending or praising Parler ( I have never been there) but who decides? You? Me? Mike? Formerguest? Rupert? Zuckerberg? If there is no illegality, who decides its not fit for others to hear?

Are they publishers or a platform?

Yeah I don't have the answer mate. I guess as a private company they set their guidelines/T&C's and they enact them as they see fit. Even if they don't follow their own guidelines, I guess it is up to someone to legally challenge it.

Going back to News Limited as well, they push the boundaries all the time even as a publisher. They often make front page claims they know are wrong and they will be forced to retract which they do a week later on page 7. The BLM rally in Melbourne they said caused the Melbourne outbreak is one such scenario. The damage was done and narrative was well circulated by the time they were forced to apologise for it.

On Iran's stance toward Israel, yeah it's probably something that censured. I know it is part of Iran's political platform and generally posturing but all you need is one group to do act on it and do something serious and you have a situation not unlike what occurred in Washington where a head of state was agitating for violence.

 

[TillLindemann]

If any individual is planning or instigating terrorism or sedition on the internet, then security agencies already have the capability to track down and prosecute that person.

Have people so soon forgotten all the previous laws we've had forced down our throats to "Stop Them Terrorists!" ? The metadata laws rushed through parliament - supported by both Liberal and Labor, with only a few courageous politicians like Scott Ludlam and Andrew Wilkie dissenting?

With laws like that in place, you think if I'm posting on the net calling to kill politicians or overthrow the government, that security agencies can't track me down and prosecute me? Of course they can! You target the individual making the threats or breaking the law, you don't remove whole platforms and further tighten what is considered acceptable political speech.

 

[Tim Sheens]

I have virtually no doubt that Ilhan Omar, AOC and the others long targets of vitriol from the cult leader would have been killed

Getting into the realm of pre crime.

"if only those Muslims had got past police, they would have..."
"if only those environmentalists had... "
"If only those CFMEU members had..."

We are all Dick Cheney now

# Je Suis Dick Cheney

Okay, based on what you have seen and no doubt knowing that these type of people have been threatening the above mentioned, do you think their lives were at grave risk or not, yes or no?