Royal Approval for 23 Gambling Activities, Including Bull Races and Mahjong

[Yagoda]

21 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Vox got it's facts straight. 

And it takes a major league ignoramus to not know that Sullivan is a core free speech first amendment case.

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)

New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that First Amendment freedom of speech protections limit the ability of public officials to sue for defamation. 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/new_york_times_v_sullivan_(1964)#:~:text=Sullivan (1964) is a landmark,officials to sue for defamation.

 

 

OK legal-expert-who-isnt-even-an-American, tell us how overuling or modifying Sullivan (which is an ongoing legal discussion) affects the Democrat/Harris regimes' blatant documented obvious everyoneknowsabout efforts to control speech?

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

OK legal-expert-who-isnt-even-an-American, tell us how overuling or modifying Sullivan (which is an ongoing legal discussion) affects the Democrat/Harris regimes' blatant documented obvious everyoneknowsabout efforts to control speech?

Whether or not I'm an American is irreleant. It's the facts that are relevant. That said, given your lack of basic understanding of the First Amendment, if anyone's American citizenship should be questioned, it's yours.

 

And  just to make clear how ignorant you are here's what you wrote.

"You don't even know the issues surrounding NY Times vs Sullivan well enough to differentiate them from First Amendment Litigation. Study up, Ill wait for you at the big boy table."

 

What follows is taken from the text of the Supreme Court decision:

 

Held: A State cannot, under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, award damages to a public official for defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves "actual malice" -- that the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it was true or false. Pp. 376 U. S. 265-292.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/254/

 

 

[Will B Good]

 

 

 

This free speech thing really needs to be stopped.......wannabe dictators just can't cope with it.......

 

 

 

 

 

Trump baselessly claims CBS committed a crime with Kamala Harris interview - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-cbs-60-minutes-interview-b2626525.html 

[Yagoda]

26 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Whether or not I'm an American is irreleant. It's the facts that are relevant. That said, given your lack of basic understanding of the First Amendment, if anyone's American citizenship should be questioned, it's yours.

 

And  just to make clear how ignorant you are here's what you wrote.

"You don't even know the issues surrounding NY Times vs Sullivan well enough to differentiate them from First Amendment Litigation. Study up, Ill wait for you at the big boy table."

 

What follows is taken from the text of the Supreme Court decision:

 

Held: A State cannot, under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, award damages to a public official for defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves "actual malice" -- that the statement was made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it was true or false. Pp. 376 U. S. 265-292.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/254/

 

 

Well at least you got the holding right LOL, although its usually marked for you.

 

Again, tell us how any intellectual dispute as to the actual malice standards imposed on a common law State Defamation is relevant to the continual issue of Government stifling dissent protected by the First Amendment.

 

By the way, do we need to go into the religious discrimination perpetrated by the Harris regime?

[Yagoda]

30 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

 

This free speech thing really needs to be stopped.......wannabe dictators just can't cope with it.......

 

 

 

 

 

Trump baselessly claims CBS committed a crime with Kamala Harris interview - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-cbs-60-minutes-interview-b2626525.html 

Your link is broken so folks cant read the nonsense you post. The picture is nice, looks like your Avatar, glad you want to be like Trump

[Will B Good]

2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Your link is broken so folks cant read the nonsense you post. The picture is nice, looks like your Avatar, glad you want to be like Trump

Trump baselessly claims CBS committed a crime with Kamala Harris interview - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-cbs-60-minutes-interview-b2626525.html

[b17]

On 10/5/2024 at 10:34 AM, Yagoda said:

https://reason.com/2024/10/03/judge-stops-california-law-targeting-election-misinformation/

 

Those who support Kamala Harris obviously will support laws limiting speech. Democrats are for censorship, and every member of their party should be voted out.

If Democrats are for censorship, what are the Republicans for? I'll wait, but here are a few clues...alternative facts, gerrymandering, authoritarian leadership, destruction of democratic norms, locking up political opponents, denial of climate change, control of women's reproductive rights, ....ad infin. 

[Yagoda]

20 minutes ago, b17 said:

If Democrats are for censorship, what are the Republicans for? I'll wait, but here are a few clues...alternative facts, gerrymandering, authoritarian leadership, destruction of democratic norms, locking up political opponents, denial of climate change, control of women's reproductive rights, ....ad infin. 

Well lets see:

Gerrymandering? Dems dont do?

Destruction of Democratic Norms: Censorship regime, end the filibuster, pack the Supreme Court, Ignore Court Orders, Engage in Lawfare? Sounds like the Harris Regime.

Authoritorian Leadership: Harris regime executive orders

Denial of Climate Change: Use of weather variations as an excuse for Government control, thanks John Kerry

 

And so on, ad infinitum ad nauseum

[placeholder]

On 10/10/2024 at 11:24 AM, Yagoda said:

Well at least you got the holding right LOL, although its usually marked for you.

 

Again, tell us how any intellectual dispute as to the actual malice standards imposed on a common law State Defamation is relevant to the continual issue of Government stifling dissent protected by the First Amendment.

 

By the way, do we need to go into the religious discrimination perpetrated by the Harris regime?

Given your recourse to another insult questioning my mastery of the subject, i guess it's time to remind you once again of your utter cluelessness and shamelessness. How can you not be embarrassed by your previous display of ignorance? Here, once again is the quote from you:

 

"You don't even know the issues surrounding NY Times vs Sullivan well enough to differentiate them from First Amendment Litigation. Study up, Ill wait for you at the big boy table."

So, let me remind you once again. The 1st Amendment lies at the heart of NY Times vs. Sullivan. That you think it's not a first amendment issue, says a lot about you.

 

Desanitis wants to gut the NY Times vs Sullivan. In other words, he wants to empower politicians to quell dissent via defamation lawsuits.

 

And, of course, you have no answer for the fact that, unlike in California, in Florida Desantis is threatening to criminalize free speech. His regime is actually threatening to prosecute people.

 

 

[Yagoda]

10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Given your recourse to another insult questioning my mastery of the subject, i guess it's time to remind you once again of your utter cluelessness and shamelessness. How can you not be embarrassed by your previous display of ignorance? Here, once again is the quote from you:

 

"You don't even know the issues surrounding NY Times vs Sullivan well enough to differentiate them from First Amendment Litigation. Study up, Ill wait for you at the big boy table."

So, let me remind you once again. The 1st Amendment lies at the heart of NY Times vs. Sullivan. That you think it's not a first amendment issue, says a lot about you.

 

Desanitis wants to gut the NY Times vs Sullivan. In other words, he wants to empower politicians to quell dissent via defamation lawsuits.

 

And, of course, you have no answer for the fact that, unlike in California, in Florida Desantis is threatening to criminalize free speech. His regime is actually threatening to prosecute people.

 

 

Mastery of the subject? It would be like giving an infant a set of blocks and then proudly stating he is an architect.

[placeholder]

On 10/10/2024 at 12:03 PM, Yagoda said:

Well lets see:

Gerrymandering? Dems dont do?

Destruction of Democratic Norms: Censorship regime, end the filibuster, pack the Supreme Court, Ignore Court Orders, Engage in Lawfare? Sounds like the Harris Regime.

Authoritorian Leadership: Harris regime executive orders

Denial of Climate Change: Use of weather variations as an excuse for Government control, thanks John Kerry

 

And so on, ad infinitum ad nauseum

Gerrymandering is ovewhelmingly a Republican practice. In states like Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas. As you clearly don't know, the Florida legislature had a plan to gerrymander congressional districts. But it wasn't extreme enough for Desantis who altered it to be even more extreme. In Ohio, the legislature has actually violated the state constitution to commit gerrymandering and continues to do so despite court orders.  In Arizona Republicans actually fought to overturn a referendum passed by voters that authorized non-partisan creation of Congressional districts.

 

Whereas in New Jersey, progressive Democratic legislators allied with Republicans to stop an attempt to gerrymander by the Democratic leadership. 

 

As for packing the courts by Democrats? What planet do you live on? What was Trump engaged in during his term. The 5th Circuit Court apppointees are so extreme that even the extreme right wing Supreme Court has repeatedly overturned their decisions.

 

I have no idea what you're on about climate change. We do know that under Trump  references to human caused climate change was eliminated from EPA documents and that findings by scientists were censored. Not surprising given that he appointed a coal industry lobbyist to be head of the EPA>.

 

[Yagoda]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Gerrymandering is ovewhelmingly a Republican practice. In states like Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas. As you clearly don't know, the Florida legislature had a plan to gerrymander congressional districts. But it wasn't extreme enough for Desantis who altered it to be even more extreme. In Ohio, the legislature has actually violated the state constitution to commit gerrymandering and continues to do so despite court orders.  In Arizona Republicans actually fought to overturn a referendum passed by voters that authorized non-partisan creation of Congressional districts.

 

Whereas in New Jersey, progressive Democratic legislators allied with Republicans to stop an attempt to gerrymander by the Democratic leadership. 

 

As for packing the courts by Democrats? What planet do you live on? What was Trump engaged in during his term. The 5th Circuit Court apppointees are so extreme that even the extreme right wing Supreme Court has repeatedly overturned their decisions.

 

I have no idea what you're on about climate change. We do know that under Trump  references to human caused climate change was eliminated from EPA documents and that findings by scientists were censored. Not surprising given that he appointed a coal industry lobbyist to be head of the EPA>.

 

Dude you are embarrassing yourself with your ignorant statements.

 

Gerrymandering. If you lived or understood the USA, you would know all about Gerrymandering, which can be lawful, is a technique of both parties, and has been around since 1812 in the USA. In fact, here is one of the Democrat propaganda mouthpieces bragging out how wonderful their Gerrymander efforts have been.

https://www.vox.com/22961590/redistricting-gerrymandering-house-2022-midterms

 

Yeah I know, you will give us the old, well we are Democrats, we are moral and principled, but......

 

So there is your first lie.

 

So, you admit you dont know what Court packing is by talking about Trumps constitutional duty to fill judicial vacancies. Want me to explain what Court packing is for you? And how is the 5th Circuit record of reversals relevant? Because they are right leaning? Look at the 9th since 2007 (California).

https://ballotpedia.org/SCOTUS_case_reversal_rates_(2007_-_Present)

 

Note your second mistatements.

 

Finally, if you have no idea about Harris"climate change" policies, then why are you even arguing about it.

 

Study up foreigner, before you argue with those who follow this stuff regularly. Oh here is a read for you bragging about election antics...by the Democrats written by a Dem propagandist.

 

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

 

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Dude you are embarrassing yourself with your ignorant statements.

 

Gerrymandering. If you lived or understood the USA, you would know all about Gerrymandering, which can be lawful, is a technique of both parties, and has been around since 1812 in the USA. In fact, here is one of the Democrat propaganda mouthpieces bragging out how wonderful their Gerrymander efforts have been.

https://www.vox.com/22961590/redistricting-gerrymandering-house-2022-midterms

 

Yeah I know, you will give us the old, well we are Democrats, we are moral and principled, but......

 

So there is your first lie.

 

So, you admit you dont know what Court packing is by talking about Trumps constitutional duty to fill judicial vacancies. Want me to explain what Court packing is for you? And how is the 5th Circuit record of reversals relevant? Because they are right leaning? Look at the 9th since 2007 (California).

https://ballotpedia.org/SCOTUS_case_reversal_rates_(2007_-_Present)

 

Note your second mistatements.

 

Finally, if you have no idea about Harris"climate change" policies, then why are you even arguing about it.

 

Study up foreigner, before you argue with those who follow this stuff regularly. Oh here is a read for you bragging about election antics...by the Democrats written by a Dem propagandist.

 

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

 

https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/

Clearly, reading is a challenge for you. I never wrote that Democrats don't gerrymander. Just the republicans do it a lot more. And that they're even willing to violate the law in Ohio to do it.

 

You're the one who raised the issue of court packing. If it's not a real thing, why did you raise it? And if it's not a real thing, then why does it have a definition:

the act or practice of packing (see pack entry 3 sense 1) a court and especially the United States Supreme Court by increasing the number of judges or justices in an attempt to change the ideological makeup of the court

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/court-packing

And given the right wing nature of the current supreme court, it's not surprising that it would disagree with the 9th. But what is shocking is that the justices on the 5th court are so incompetent that even the right wing Supreme Court consistently shoots their arguments down.

 

As for climate change...you unloaded a bunch of phrases with no coherent connections. I assume you are referring to some right wing characterization of Harris' program. That kind of code may make sense to you but for those of us who don't engage in the conspiracy theory sources and such that you resort to, they make no sense. Such characterizations don't count as evidence. Evidence is about facts, not about characterizations. And  I still get a laugh out of your claim that total FEMA aid to those afflicted by the latest disasters was limited to $750.

 

As for me being a foreigner, by which I guess you mean a non-citizen of the US, it's not me who clearly lacks a basic understanding of the First Amendment to the Constitution. That would be you. No genuine American citizen could possibly be so ignorant.

[Yagoda]

Just now, placeholder said:

Clearly, reading is a challenge for you. I never wrote that Democrats don't gerrymander. Just the republicans do it a lot more. And that they're even willing to violate the law in Ohio to do it.

 

You're the one who raised the issue of court packing. If it's not a real thing, why did you raise it? And if it's not a real thing, then why does it have a definition:

the act or practice of packing (see pack entry 3 sense 1) a court and especially the United States Supreme Court by increasing the number of judges or justices in an attempt to change the ideological makeup of the court

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/court-packing

And given the right wing nature of the current supreme court, it's not surprising that it would disagree with the 9th. But what is shocking is that the justices on the 5th court are so incompetent that even the right wing Supreme Court consistently shoots their arguments down.

 

As for climate change...you unloaded a bunch of phrases with no coherent connections. I assume you are referring to some right wing characterization of Harris' program. That kind of code may make sense to you but for those of us who don't engage in the conspiracy theory sources and such that you resort to, they make no sense. Such characterizations don't count as evidence. Evidence is about facts, not about characterizations. And  I still get a laugh out of your claim that total FEMA aid to those afflicted by the latest disasters was limited to $750.

 

As for me being a foreigner, by which I guess you mean a non-citizen of the US, it's not me who clearly lacks a basic understanding of the First Amendment to the Constitution. That would be you. No genuine American citizen could possibly be so ignorant.

Give up. And you still havent aswered the question of what Sullivan has to do with the Harris efforts to gut the First Amendment.

 

But you will just copy and paste.

[placeholder]

15 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Give up. And you still havent aswered the question of what Sullivan has to do with the Harris efforts to gut the First Amendment.

 

But you will just copy and paste.

Actually, neither Harris nor Trump has a good record on free speech. Unless you believe that Trump's call to take away the licenses of various broadcasters was done in the defense of free speech.

"Trump likewise champions freedom of speech for himself and his allies while attacking it when it protects his critics and political opponents. If Trump had his way, flag burners would be jailed, purveyors of “fake news” would lose their broadcast licenses, and news outlets would have to pay him damages when their coverage strikes him as unfair.

Only “stupid people,” Trump averred in July, think flag burning is a form of constitutionally protected expression, as the Supreme Court has twice ruled. Those “stupid people” include the late Justice Antonin Scalia, whom Trump described as “a great judge” and the model for his Supreme Court appointments."

https://www.ocregister.com/2024/10/10/neither-harris-nor-trump-is-a-friend-of-free-speech/

 

Anyway, why does an obvious non-American like you take such an interest in American politics?

 

[Yagoda]

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Actually, neither Harris nor Trump has a good record on free speech. Unless you believe that Trump's call to take away the licenses of various broadcasters was done in the defense of free speech.

"Trump likewise champions freedom of speech for himself and his allies while attacking it when it protects his critics and political opponents. If Trump had his way, flag burners would be jailed, purveyors of “fake news” would lose their broadcast licenses, and news outlets would have to pay him damages when their coverage strikes him as unfair.

Only “stupid people,” Trump averred in July, think flag burning is a form of constitutionally protected expression, as the Supreme Court has twice ruled. Those “stupid people” include the late Justice Antonin Scalia, whom Trump described as “a great judge” and the model for his Supreme Court appointments."

https://www.ocregister.com/2024/10/10/neither-harris-nor-trump-is-a-friend-of-free-speech/

 

Anyway, why does an obvious non-American like you take such an interest in American politics?

 

Obvious non American? LOL, wanna put your money where your mouth is? Got some posters here I know personally and would be happy to have them hold the cash. $1000 USD?

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Obvious non American? LOL, wanna put your money where your mouth is? Got some posters here I know personally and would be happy to have them hold the cash. $1000 USD?

Anyone you know personally...that's a great recommendation.

[Yagoda]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Anyone you know personally...that's a great recommendation.

So another words you got called out and ran away. 

 

So you lost.

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, Yagoda said:

So another words you got called out and ran away. 

 

So you lost.

Says the self-appointed referee.

[Yagoda]

14 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Says the self-appointed referee.

Says reality. You got caught in your own BS.

 

You backed out. Put on your coxcomb, then make comments about Trump chickening out of a debate.

 

Perfect demonstration of Leftist philosophy: hypocrisy

 

 

Edited 42 minutes ago by Yagoda