Pinned toot

My main (and far out) hope with regard to the verdict is that it causes at least some people to notice that he and the media ecosystem around him have been lying to them about the trial this whole time.

For months they’ve been spouting that this is a case without merit, without evidence, without even charges. It’s a slam dunk: OF COURSE he’ll be let off.

Well, the guilty verdict is going to cause at least some people to wonder what went wrong, look into it, and notice they were told so wrong.

Maybe Trump will appeal and have the charges reversed. BUT he’d never be able to unring the bell of people noticing that he (and media figures) mislead them so, well, hugely.

Pinned toot

There’s an old idea of fairness that when cutting a cake between two people one person cuts and the other picks the piece they want.

This method aligns the interests of both parties, no matter how corruptible and human they may be.

I think it’s underappreciated how often the US government design has a similar method in its checks and balances: one group can reject an official, but they don’t get to choose the replacement.

See, for example, impeachment proceedings.

After all: “This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public.”

–Hamilton (maybe)

Pinned toot

To understand the state of , and US society more broadly, a person has to realize that the process against isn’t merely two camps who want the guy found innocent or guilty after a weighing of the evidence.

No, it is as if there was a murder trial where one side believed they were having beers with the purported victim as the trial was going on.

It’s not a matter of legal technicality or weighing preponderances of evidence or reasonable doubt; it’s a matter of the country being divided over fundamental fact, here whether a person is alive or not.

It’s not a political division. Sadly it’s a reality division.

Roberts wasn’t on the Court in 2000…

Anyway, no, that’s not what happened in Bush v Gore. The Court didn’t select anything, it simply told a state court to knock it off after the state court tried to interfere in the election.

SCOTUS pulled out of interference, it refused to have the courts selecting a winner.

In Bush v Gore Florida was allowed to choose its own winner without judicial interference.

BBC is reporting that are huddling to decide whether to ask to step aside as presumptive nominee.

The thing is, that’s not really up to Biden. The party sets its own rules, and it can nominate whomever it wants. They don’t need Biden’s permission.

The thing I find funniest, though, is that it’s like politely asking to leave the presidency after he lost the election.

No, that’s not how this works. We don’t ask; we tell. The Democratic Party will tell Biden if he’s the nominee, just as the EC process told Trump that he’s no longer going to be president.

It does come across as people hoping they don’t have to make tough decisions or take action, though. Or be held accountable for the result.

Much easier just to let the individual choose for himself.

@stylinstainless how do you figure?

From complaints over executive performance through legal issues, I don’t know how you can say that.

volkris boosted

Here’s a quip:
Maybe ’s debate performance sucked, but even worse is that his record in office required him to perform well in the debate to make up for it.

For goodness sake, can one of the parties please nominate someone worth voting for?

volkris boosted

Extremely dumb idea that would be hard to make work: A show presents itself as a fairly straightforward detective noir murder serial with 40s/50s vibes.

Something's off, though. The people are eccentric. The local politics isn't quite right. And the geometry of the city seems a bit alien. It's not science fiction (is it?) but technology seems a bit more advanced than the period would allow.

Then in the last scene of the first episode someone loses their temper and flames flair from their hands, char broiling the person we'd assumed was going to be our main character. Clicking their tongue they turn to look out a large window. That's when it hits, we haven't seen any windows or the sky for the last hour. We see them staring out at a neon-lit skyline on the ocean floor.

For anyone who cares about Elon , videos like this by Everyday Astronaut are critical to, well, criticize.

Notice how the host prompts Elon. The host puts out these ideas and asks Elon to confirm them.

That’s really how the mythology around Musk is built. He’s not asking for it, people are projecting it onto him. And so much stuff that people complain about Musk over come down to things that are being projected onto him. And for his sake, he’s rich enough to just take it.

And this is a lesson because it can also be applied .

Rightly or wrongly, these are public figures that are loved and hated based on what is being projected onto them, not their own stuff.

I think it’s really important to recognize this phenomenon, and it goes both ways: If you love Musk/Trump you need to realize that what you love might be a projection and not actually part of the person. If you hate them, same thing.

It’s academically really interesting. It’s practically really sad.

youtu.be/aFqjoCbZ4ik

“This case is not about whether States can disarm people who threaten others. States have a ready mechanism for disarming anyone who uses a firearm to threaten physical violence: criminal prosecution.” – Thomas

Folks saying voted to arm abusers miss that he emphasizes the exact opposite.

Instead, he voted to maintain the rights of the innocent, which is a pretty different story.

supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pd

All of these claims that the Supreme Court is delaying rulings on matters for political reasons don’t even make sense strategically.

Firstly, they’re based on misunderstandings about how the US government actually functions, but setting that aside:

If really wanted to delay trials as claimed they could simply issue rulings that would result in drawn out procedures. There’s NO reason they’d hold the ball and take all of this heat when they could pass it along to lower courts.

It’s unfortunate that so many people in the US, and on this social media platform, keep promoting those conspiracy theories.

If nothing else, they shield from accountability those who are actually responsible for the things we’re critical of.

volkris boosted

@tgpo @Alister @chad

Heres a clip of the #DeepFake #Crypto #scam posing as an official #SpaceX live feed on #YouTube. Pretty convincing.

* reported to YouTube
** definitely DO NOT scan that QR code! (I wasn’t able to blur it out)

volkris boosted

@jsbilsbrough for general design, full Affinity and never regretted it. For video, DaVinci Resolve. Digital art in Procreate and Affinity and for animation a mix of OpenToonz and Procreate Dreams. And some little apps here and there for some random tasks.

The dark side of

smeg  
The sad thing is that I personally probably align well with that community, and the only reason I even learned about the block was that I tried to ...

My main (and far out) hope with regard to the verdict is that it causes at least some people to notice that he and the media ecosystem around him have been lying to them about the trial this whole time.

For months they’ve been spouting that this is a case without merit, without evidence, without even charges. It’s a slam dunk: OF COURSE he’ll be let off.

Well, the guilty verdict is going to cause at least some people to wonder what went wrong, look into it, and notice they were told so wrong.

Maybe Trump will appeal and have the charges reversed. BUT he’d never be able to unring the bell of people noticing that he (and media figures) mislead them so, well, hugely.

Nonilex  
#TrumpTrial #JuryInstructions are on the NYcourts website: https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/People%20v.%20DJT%20Jury%20Instructions%2...
volkris boosted

"2 + 2 = 4"

"No it doesn't!"

"Why not?"

"2 + 3"

"What?"

"I am tired of your stupidity"

I think whenever I see a headline or a person making some claim about the first reaction needs to be, “Okay, section 230 of what? What do you think that refers to?”

So many people have no idea what section 230 actually says, or does, but at least this response would help weed out the most uninformed of the people spouting out about it.

Kind of an interesting behavior to see in the wild and wonder what’s behind it

Linux Is Best  
I do not understand why someone would boost (share) your post, only to quickly un-boost (un-share). I doubt it is by mistake as I notice a few w...

Media is promoting headlines that Democrats are bailing out Mike Johnson when in reality, that’s just how it’s supposed to work.

It’s not bailing out, it’s functioning as a chamber that has different representatives representing different districts.

This is really important to call out because this notion of Us versus them, team red versus team blue is really sensationalized, misleading, and just plain corrupting to the US system of government.

The Speaker of the House is the speaker of the entire House, Democrats and Republicans and independents.

There are majority leaders and minority leaders to represent the two major parties, and it’s just ignorance of basic civics to conflate the speaker with those other offices.

When Marjorie Taylor Greene hammers Johnson on the basis of his being “the Republican leader” she shows her own ignorance, but more importantly, she expresses a critical misunderstanding that’s pretty rife throughout the US population.

No, Johnson is not the Republican leader. As Speaker he’s the voice of the entire House, including Democrats, in contrast to Steve Scalise, who as Majority Leader is the actual Republican leader.

The reason this isn’t mere technicality is that Democrats absolutely have a say in the Speaker and can support or oppose the ouster of a speaker and choice of a new one.

is an idiot, though the public can be excused for not knowing this detail. Unfortunately, politicians take advantage of that, contributing to congressional dysfunction.

Show more
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.