we wuz chadz n sheit

Who's your Soy Daddy?

. 5 0 C A L I B E R D A D
5
0
C
A
L
I
B
E
R
D
A
D

The losers would be anyone who had to watch.

Good I was worried about calculating the dollar to bitcoin to shekel exchange rate.

@Orwell & Goode Now that Wakanda is great again and since they are richer than the US will they take over paying reparations since they did nothing to fight slavery and colonization?

Semper Fi! Don't let them watch this @Chaos Marine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QvWJWy3LyM&t=148s

@RobertGrulerEsq - Missed the livestream today but I heard a question about what would happen in the case of impeachment. I would assume that it would come out after Biden was sworn in because of the time required for discovery. Here's my quick 2 cents:

Assuming before 2022, very unlikely unless there are Dem defections in the House which has to initiate impeachment. After midterms though, GOP is in excellent position to retake House (Historical records also suggest this outcome). In either case, the Senate would have to vote in favor (also more likely after 2022). As for outcome, it would be a joint impeachment of Biden & Harris because they ran as a ticket and there is no way to separate votes. In which case, House Speaker Pelosi would become POTUS which would be fantastic for Trump to run against in 2024. If the GOP controlled the House at the time, Speaker McCarthy (Minority Leader/presumptive Speaker) would be sworn in. McCarthy nominates Trump and if confirmed by vote of both House & Senate, Trump becomes VP and McCarthy resigns. In this situation, if less than ½ of the term is left, Trump could serve out and then run for a full term in 2024.

Note: While the 25th Amendment controls the process for a single vacancy of either the President or the VP, the Presidential Succession Act (3 USC § 19) would control in the event of a double vacancy/incapacity/removal. Since the 12A changed the method of selecting President & VP a corrupted/illegal vote cast for Biden is automatically corrupted/illegal vote cast for Harris.

@Maw saw this video the other day you might find it interesting, Scalia & Breyer discuss their interpretations of Constitution with passage of time and societal norms. https://youtu.be/jmv5Tz7w5pk

@Bey I agree with you. Could you imagine arguing with the bank claiming your mortgage was a living, breathing document that is open to evolving interpretation? Something tells me they wouldn't buy it.

Glad to support and contribute. Huge ConLaw, Privacy & IP nerd and I really appreciate an even handed approach that is willing to interrogate both sides of a legal argument

@RobertGrulerEsq and no hard feelings that censor my first name, I get keeping it fam friendly. 😆

@RobertGrulerEsq can you do a live stream from Bohemian Grove?

and invite Alex Jones?

@Bey Positive rights are rights that are created by statute/case law that impute an obligation on others for example, a right to health care, means that in order for you to exercise your right, you can impose on the state via taxes and or regulations that would require another person to provide health care to you whether they want to or not. A negative right i.e., freedom of speech is a right that requires no threat of force against another person in order to exercise. Another way to put it, you have the freedom to seek healthcare from any source you see fit = negative right vs. you have the right to obtain healthcare from a government approved source = a positive right.

@ImNotGas totally agree as far as the state is concerned, a marriage is nothing more than a contract between two consenting parties. If you can register a business Partnership with the Secretary of State, why not just make corporate laws for a Domestic Partnership. Leave "marriages" to spiritual organizations to define as they see fit?

@ImNotGas lol have you ever heard someone say the government should do __________ and then ask them to explain how to coordinate everything needed to make a pencil?

we should handle covid like sweden does.

everything else, let's do what Singapore does.

@Maw Hey Maw, I'll throw up a superchat but this is too long, wondering if you could clip this for discussion on the LS.

@Maw Incitement Question for Livestream

got it thanks

@FaithJoy Hi Faith! I'll throw up a superchat but this is too long, wondering if you could clip this for discussion on the LS.

@FaithJoy

Yeah, it does require a setup. Social Media can make legal analysis and questions difficult. Not as bad as IP law though. Set up for analyzing infringement claims is ridiculous.

@FaithJoy Thanks! Much appreciated!

@RobertGrulerEsq Ditto what @slidingedge said and thanks for both the content, even-handed presentation and being up-front about your priors. I think public discourse would be so much better if people were willing to state their biases and still steelman both sides of issues.

@Solsheldon the chart says 2017-2020, you're saying 226 in 2020. One of those representations is incorrect.

"People shot to death by U.S. police, by race 2020 | Statista
Sadly, the trend of fatal police shootings in the United States seems to only be increasing, with a total 999 civilians having been shot, 226 of whom were Black, in 2020. " The Chart header says 2017-2020. 226 in 4 years is a lot different that 226 in one year.

Make Myspace Great Again. #MMGA

@RobertGrulerEsq @FaithJoy Based Poland https://thepostmillennial.com/social-media-platforms-could-face-fines-in-poland-for-censoring-free-speech/

@RobertGrulerEsq @FaithJoy Based Idaho https://www.krem.com/article/news/local/idaho-internet-provider-blocks-facebook-and-twitter/293-867cc22b-fb90-4142-a296-8d800d2a03fb

@RobertGrulerEsq @FaithJoy Confirmed. Gohmert is an insurrectionist...until they realize he's quoting Oberst-Gruppenführer Pelosi
https://thefederalist.com/2021/01/13/media-are-accusing-a-republican-lawmaker-of-insurrection-for-quoting-nancy-pelosi/

@AntiFish03 Agreed. Marsh can apply if a public forum is established, good cases to look at: Knight v. Trump, Packingham and Pruneyard. Knight and Packingham both recognize digital public forums. Knight confirms that interactions between citizens and government accounts/officials are protected the same as the physical counterparts.

@AntiFish03 Packingham is cited in the Knight decision and recognizes social media writ large is the modern town square/public space. Pruneyard is similar to Marsh in that even within privately owned structures (a mall) if there are spaces set aside for public speech, viewpoint discrimination protections can be applied and enforced by the courts.

@AntiFish03 @FaithJoy Please also see Twitter's Prospectus filed with the SEC. While not a "contract" as such, it is a statement upon which investors can rely as a truthful and honest representation and which the SEC can cite in fines/investigations etc. "The mission we serve as Twitter, Inc. is to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly without barriers. Our business and revenue will always follow that mission in ways that improve–and do not detract from–a free and global conversation." P 97 https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/TwitterS1100313.pdf

@AntiFish03 @FaithJoy It's a solid start given that it's a sworn statement and representation to the federal government. They make the representation that they are a public forum: "Twitter is a global platform for public self-expression and conversation in real time. By developing a fundamentally new way for people to create, distribute and discover content, we have democratized content creation and distribution, enabling any voice to echo around the world instantly and unfiltered. Our platform is unique in its simplicity: Tweets are limited to 140 characters of text. This constraint makes it easy for anyone to quickly create, distribute and discover content that is consistent across our platform and optimized for mobile devices. As a result, Tweets drive a high velocity of information exchange that makes Twitter uniquely “live.” We aim to become an indispensable daily companion to live human experiences.
...
As a result, when events happen in the world, whether planned, like sporting events and television shows, or unplanned, like natural disasters and political revolutions, the digital experience of those events happens in real time on Twitter. People can communicate with each other during these events as they occur, creating powerful shared experiences."
P. 7

note: "global platform" "democratized content creation and distribution" "unfiltered" and "indispensable daily companion to live human experiences" 1. It shows intent to operate as a platform not publisher (see also Section 230) and 2. They represent themselves as the digital analog to the physical experience. The reasonable interpretation is that they are offering a "public forum" or "digital town-square" which exist in the physical world.

The one key piece that still need establishment that would come through discovery is the relationship between Twitter & Govt, how frequently their actions mirror policies and positions of government officials, how often they interact with users in a way the government could not do, but coordinate those actions or provide information to government agencies/agents as quasi-governmental actor or agent.

Alexander Hamilton: “…that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms.” (Federalist Paper #29)

George Mason: “I ask you sir, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people.” (Elliott, Debates, 425-426) Although rhetorically speaking, it was generally understood that membership in militias writ large was more or less the same as the expectation of serving in fire brigades, and serving as jurors. Often times, states and counties required by law militia membership in addition to other civil obligations.

In the 18th century, a “regular” army meant an army that had standard military equipment. So a “well regulated” army was simply one that was “well equipped” and organized. It does not refer to a professional army. Therefore, “a well regulated militia” only means a well equipped militia that was organized and maintained internal discipline. It does not imply the modern meaning of “regulated,” which means controlled or administered by some superior entity. Federal control over the militia comes from other parts of the Constitution, but not from the Second Amendment.

@Farmersdaughter
The Good American
First they came for the MAGA, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a MAGA.

Then they came for the Moderates, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Moderate.

Then they came for the Liberals, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Liberal.

Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak for me.”

– Inspired by Martin Niemöller

@AntiFish03 you should also check out DeShaney vs. Winnebago The Supreme Court has held that the government only has a duty to protect persons who are “in custody" not even the community as a whole. Which is why PD cannot be sued for "non-enforcement" of any particular law or infraction, nor can they be sued for "selective-enforcement".

@RobertGrulerEsq @FaithJoy Friday Funnies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlAoL2NPac8