Corruption

#Corruption

Used to categorize content related to the abuse of power for personal gain or the manipulation of public resources for private interests. Discussions under this tag may encompass topics such as the causes and consequences of corruption, strategies for prevention and detection, and the impact of corruption on various aspects of society, such as economic development, governance, and public trust. The tag may also cover topics around the legal and ethical implications of corruption, such as the role of law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies, and the need for greater transparency and accountability in public and private institutions.

Total topics: 109


Our father is Bandera, our mother is Ukraine.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
21 5
Do you think a nuclear war is worth having a Ukraine that is aligned with the USA?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
3 2
Mayor of New York suddenly, and without warning, revokes New York's status as a "sanctuary city"

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
4 3
Exactly ZERO people will be released from Federal Prison due to Biden's recent pardon.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
5 4

Biden's used car pitch is formidable.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
2 1
They have banned several users and removed voting privileges and all sorts and not written any of it in the moderation logs for months.

What is the log for then?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
2 2
Pedo Peter tells on himself.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
29 7
Despite the lies spread by GOP supremacists, Biden is, in fact, an incredibly hard worker for the American people.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
28 8
I was completely illegitinately robbed of several free wins by Bsh1 because Ramshutu cried about me getting them from an alt of Type1.

This also led to a crackpot conspiracy theory later that me, the guy who kept telling the mods who Type1 was on his alts despite they and Ramshutu doubting and ridiculing me as they doubted it was Type1 the entire time, was actually in cohorts with him.

I had easily 7 if not more wins robbed from me.

Right now Novice is getting 12 or so free wins from Mall, whose elo is elevated because Wylted gave him a wrong win by a troll vote on a mutual FF where he gave Mall a win.

How the fuck is that better just because Mall is not a banned user, they are all letting Novice pick the debate topic and sides too?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
63 14
Believing American elections are free and fair or believing that you can vote your way out of an oligarchy?

Pick your poison!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
10 5

English academic schools Don Lemon on who really owes England for the lost lives stopping slavery.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
6 4
"This MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history."

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
82 12
TRUMP ORGANIZATION CFO PLEADS GUILTY in TAX EVASION CASE
By MICHAEL R. SISAK@AP NEWS

NEW YORK (AP) — A top executive at former President Donald Trump’s family business pleaded guilty Thursday to evading taxes in a deal with prosecutors that could potentially make him a star witness against the company at a trial this fall.

Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg pleaded guilty to all 15 of the charges he faced in the case.

In a low, somewhat hoarse voice, he admitted taking in over $1.7 million worth of untaxed perks -- including school tuition for his grandchildren, free rent for a Manhattan apartment and lease payments for a luxury car -- and explicitly keeping some of the plums off the books.

Judge Juan Manuel Merchan agreed to sentence Weisselberg to five months in New York City’s Rikers Island jail complex, although he will be eligible for release much earlier if he behaves well behind bars. The judge said Weisselberg will have to pay nearly $2 million in taxes, penalties and interest and complete five years of probation.

The plea bargain also requires Weisselberg to testify truthfully as a prosecution witness when the Trump Organization goes on trial in October on related charges.

The company is accused of helping Weisselberg and other executives avoid income taxes by failing to report their full compensation accurately to the government. Trump himself is not charged in the case.

Trump CFO’s plea deal could make him a prosecution witness

Weisselberg said nothing as he left court, offering no reply when a journalist asked whether he had any message for Trump.

Weisselberg’s lawyer Nicholas Gravante Jr.(*) said his client pleaded guilty “to put an end to this case and the years-long legal and personal nightmares it has caused for him and his family.”

“We are glad to have this behind him,” the lawyer added.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said in a statement that Weisselberg’s plea “directly implicates the Trump Organization in a wide range of criminal activity and requires Weisselberg to provide invaluable testimony in the upcoming trial against the corporation.”

“We look forward to proving our case in court against the Trump Organization,” he added.

Testimony by Weisselberg could potentially weaken the Trump Organization’s defense. If convicted, the company could face fines or potentially be placed on probation and be forced to change certain business practices.

The company praised Weisselberg on Thursday as a trusted, honorable veteran employee who has been “persecuted and threatened by law enforcement, particularly the Manhattan district attorney, in their never-ending, politically motivated quest to get President Trump.”

In a statement, the company accused prosecutors of trying to pressure Weisselberg to cast aspersions on Trump, and of stretching to make a criminal case out of familiar executive perks such as a company car.

The company said it has done nothing wrong, won’t plead guilty and looks forward “to having our day in court.”

Weisselberg, 75, is the only person to face criminal charges so far in the Manhattan district attorney’s long-running investigation of the company’s business practices.

Seen as one of Trump’s most loyal business associates, Weisselberg was arrested in July 2021. His lawyers have argued the Democrat-led district attorney’s office was punishing him because he wouldn’t offer information that would damage Trump.

The district attorney has also been investigating whether Trump or his company lied to banks or the government about the value of its properties to obtain loans or reduce tax bills.

Then-District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who started the investigation, last year directed his deputies to present evidence to a grand jury and seek an indictment of Trump, according to former prosecutor Mark Pomerantz, who previously led the probe.

But after Vance left office, his successor, Bragg, allowed the grand jury to disband without charges. Both prosecutors are Democrats. Bragg has said the investigation is continuing.

The Trump Organization is not involved in Weisselberg’s guilty plea Thursday and is scheduled to be tried in the alleged compensation scheme in October.
Prosecutors alleged that the company gave untaxed fringe benefits to senior executives, including Weisselberg, for 15 years. Weisselberg alone was accused of defrauding the federal government, state and city out of more than $900,000 in unpaid taxes and undeserved tax refunds.

Under state law, punishment for the most serious charge against Weisselberg, grand larceny, could carry a penalty as high as 15 years in prison. But the charge carries no mandatory minimum, and most first-time offenders in tax-related cases never end up behind bars.

His sentencing won’t happen until after the trial of the Trump Organization, which is facing tax fraud charges punishable by a fine of double the amount of unpaid taxes, or $250,000, whichever is larger.

Trump has decried the New York investigations as a “political witch hunt” and has said his company’s actions were standard practice in the real estate business and in no way a crime.

Last week, Trump sat for a deposition in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ parallel civil investigation into allegations that Trump’s company misled lenders and tax authorities about asset values. Trump invoked his Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination more than 400 times.

*son of Gambino Crime Family lawyer, Nicholas Gravante, Sr.


Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
20 7
“The war is not meant to be won; it is meant to be continuous.” — George Orwell, 1984

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
16 5

Zelensky has ratified Law 5371, which strips 70% of Ukrainian workers of collective bargaining rights, introduces zero-hours contracts, and allows the state to confiscate trade union property. The price of admission into the imperialist alliance is heavy.

From "creating an efficient market for private land” to "speeding privatization... in 3,300 state-owned enterprises", the plans of the RAND Corporation — the think tank of the US military — for Ukrainian post-war reconstruction are a recipe for total economic subjugation.


Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
8 5

Zelensky admits he let thousands of Ukrainians die to save the portfolios of his oligarch pals.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
11 4
CDC recently arbitrarily decided to end Covid restrictions following a suspicious decline in vaccine sales.

-Those exposed to the virus are no longer required to quarantine

-Unvaccinated people now have the same guidance as vaccinated people

-School children can remain in class after being exposed to the virus.

-It is no longer recommended to screen those without symptoms.


Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
9 6
Per Politico:


  1. It is my great honor to be speaking tonight at the nation’s most distinguished superspreader event. Did none of you learn anything from the Gridiron dinner? … The second someone offers you a free dinner you all turn into Joe Rogan.
  2. I’m not doing this just for the attention. All right? I’m a comedian, not Kyrsten Sinema. … By the way, give it up for Kyrsten Sinema. Whoever thought we’d see the day in American politics when a senator could be openly bisexual, but closeted Republican? That’s progress.
  3. We all saw what happened at the Oscars. I’ve actually been a bit worried about tonight. I’m not going to lie. What if I make a really mean joke about Kellyanne Conway, and her husband rushes up on the stage and thanks me?
  4. I’ve just got to say, this is so exciting. To be at this swanky party full of Washington’s most powerful people. It’s not as exciting as Madison Cawthorn made it sound, but it’s still very sexy.
  5. Trump said he won the election, but everyone was just able to look at the numbers and see that he was wrong. That’s why Ron DeSantis is one step ahead — first you ban the math textbooks, then nobody knows how to count the votes. Boom. My man!
  6. The great chef José Andrés is here tonight. … Whenever there’s a disaster anywhere in the world, chef José is there, which I guess is why he’s sitting at the CNN table tonight.
  7. The real reason that it’s such an honor to be here tonight is that we all get to be in the same room as the most powerful man in the United States. So let’s give it up for Joe Manchin, everybody.
  8. Even as first lady, Dr. Biden continued her teaching career. The first time a presidential spouse has done so, ever. Congratulations. Now, you might think it’s because she loves teaching so much, but it’s actually because she’s still paying off her student debt. I’m sorry about that, Jill. I guess you should’ve voted for Bernie.
  9. I think everyone will agree that it’s actually nice to once again have a president who’s not afraid to come to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, and hear jokes about himself. I’ll be honest, if you didn’t come, I totally would have understood because these people have been so hard on you, which I don’t get. I really don’t. And I think ever since you’ve come into office, things are really looking up. You know, gas is up, rent is up, food is up, everything.
  10. President Biden’s lack of a filter does get him into hot water sometimes. Last month, he caused a huge international incident saying that Vladimir Putin should be removed from power. It was very, very upsetting to Russia until someone explained to them that none of the stuff Biden wants actually gets done.
  11. What about Maggie Haberman? For four years, it was exclusives on the Russia investigation, corruption, the president doesn’t read his daily briefings, on and on. Now look at her. She spends all day fighting with random people on Twitter like a common POLITICO reporter. You’ve ruined her Mr. President.
  12. Jen [Psaki], it’s nice that you’re willing to come over here and risk getting Covid for like, what, the 10th time now? Let me ask, how do you keep getting Covid, Jen? Like your boss hooked us all up with free tests. Does he not have your address? What’s going on there?
  13. I’m really excited because the kings of cable are here. Fox News in the house … I know Fox has a bad reputation — I can even feel you tense up now when I talk about them. They really do crush it. You know, I think they get a bad rap. Because it’s a mixed bag. They actually have really good journalists, it just depends on when you watch. Fox News is sort of like a Waffle House. Yeah, it’s relatively normal in the afternoon, but as soon as the sun goes down, there’s a drunk lady named Jeanine threatening to fight every Mexican who comes in.
  14. Apparently, Jeff [Zucker] got fired after he tried to keep his workplace relationship secret, which is weird because if he really didn’t want anyone to know about it, he could have just made a show about it on CNN+. … It’s so sad. CNN+, gone but forgotten. You know who I blame? You know who I blame, CNN? John King … your magic wall can predict how every person in the country is going to vote in every county, but it couldn’t give you a heads up that nobody wanted more CNN?
  15. Please be careful leaving tonight, we all know this administration doesn’t handle evacuations well.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
8 8
AP FACT CHECK: NRA speakers distort gun and crime statistics
By AMANDA SEITZ

WASHINGTON (AP) — Speakers at the National Rifle Association annual meeting assailed a Chicago gun ban that doesn’t exist, ignored security upgrades at the Texas school where children were slaughtered and roundly distorted national gun and crime statistics as they pushed back against any tightening of gun laws.
A look at some of the claims:

TEXAS SEN. TED CRUZ: “Gun bans do not work. Look at Chicago. If they worked, Chicago wouldn’t be the murder hellhole that it has been for far too long.

THE FACTS: Chicago hasn’t had a ban on handguns for over a decade . And in 2014, a federal judge overturned the city’s ban on gun shops. Big supporters of the NRA, like Cruz, may well know this, given that it was the NRA that sued Chicago over its old handgun ban and argued the case before the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled the ban unconstitutional in 2010.
___
FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: “Classroom doors should be hardened to make them lockable from the inside and closed to intruders from the outside.”

THE FACTS: As commonsensical as that might sound, it could backfire in a horrific way, experts warn.  A lock on the classroom door is one of the most basic and widely recommended school safety measures. But in Uvalde, it kept victims in and police out.

Nearly 20 officers stood in a hallway outside of the classrooms school for more than 45 minutes before agents used a master key to open the classroom’s locked door.

And Trump’s proposal doesn’t take into account what would happen if class members were trapped behind a locked door and one of the students was the aggressor in future attacks.
___
CRUZ: “The rate of gun ownership hasn’t changed.

THE FACTS: This is misleading. The percentage of U.S. households with at least one gun in the home hasn’t significantly changed over the past 50 years. But the number of assault-type rifles, like the one used in the Uvalde school shooting and dozens of other school shootings, has skyrocketed since legislators let a 1994 ban on such weapons expire in 2004.

In the years leading up to and following that ban, an estimated 8.5 million AR-platform rifles were in circulation in the United States. Since the ban was lifted, the rifles — called “modern sporting rifles” by the industry — have surged in popularity. The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimated there were nearly 20 million in circulation in 2020.
___
CRUZ: “Had Uvalde gotten a grant to upgrade school security, they might have made changes that would have stopped the shooter and killed him there on the ground, before he hurt any of these innocent kids and teachers.”

THE FACTS: This claim overlooks the fact that Uvalde had doubled its school-security budget and spent years upgrading the protections for schoolchildren. None of that stopped the gunman who killed 19 pupils and two teachers.

Annual district budgets show the school system went from spending $204,000 in 2017 to $435,000 for this year . The district had developed a safety plan back in 2019 that included staffing the schools with four officers and four counselors. It had installed a fence and invested in a program that monitors social media for threats and purchased software to screen school visitors.

The grant that Cruz claims would have been life-saving was from a failed 2013 bill that planned to help schools hire more armed officers and install bulletproof doors. Uvalde’s school did have an officer but the person wasn’t on the campus at the time the shooter entered the building. And, Cruz’s call for bulletproof doors might not have worked in this case, given that police were unable to breech the locked door of the classroom where the shooter murdered children and teachers.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Current events
44 8
Opinion: The Republican blueprint to steal the 2024 election

Opinion by J. Michael Luttig
Wed April 27, 2022

Editor’s NoteJ. Michael Luttig, appointed by President George H. W. Bush, formerly served on the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for 15 years. He advised Vice President Mike Pence on January 6. 

Nearly a year and a half later, surprisingly few understand what January 6 was all about.

Fewer still understand why former President Donald Trump and Republicans persist in their long-disproven claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. Much less why they are obsessed about making the 2024 race a referendum on the “stolen” election of 2020, which even they know was not stolen.

January 6 was never about a stolen election or even about actual voting fraud. It was always and only about an election that Trump lost fair and square, under legislatively promulgated election rules in a handful of swing states that he and other Republicans contend were unlawfully changed by state election officials and state courts to expand the right and opportunity to vote, largely in response to the Covid pandemic.

The Republicans’ mystifying claim to this day that Trump did, or would have, received more votes than Joe Biden in 2020 were it not for actual voting fraud, is but the shiny object that Republicans have tauntingly and disingenuously dangled before the American public for almost a year and a half now to distract attention from their far more ambitious objective.

That objective is not somehow to rescind the 2020 election, as they would have us believe. That’s constitutionally impossible. Trump’s and the Republicans’ far more ambitious objective is to execute successfully in 2024 the very same plan they failed in executing in 2020 and to overturn the 2024 election if Trump or his anointed successor loses again in the next quadrennial contest.

The last presidential election was a dry run for the next.

From long before Election Day 2020, Trump and Republicans planned to overturn the presidential election by exploiting the Electors and Elections Clauses of the Constitution, the Electoral College, the Electoral Count Act of 1877, and the 12th Amendment, if Trump lost the popular and Electoral College vote.

The cornerstone of the plan was to have the Supreme Court embrace the little known “independent state legislature” doctrine, which, in turn, would pave the way for exploitation of the Electoral College process and the Electoral Count Act, and finally for Vice President Mike Pence to reject enough swing state electoral votes to overturn the election using Pence’s ceremonial power under the 12th Amendment and award the presidency to Donald Trump.

The independent state legislature doctrine says that, under the Elections and the Electors Clauses of the Constitution, state legislatures possess plenary and exclusive power over the conduct of federal presidential elections and the selection of state presidential electors. Not even a state supreme court, let alone other state elections officials, can alter the legislatively written election rules or interfere with the appointment of state electors by the legislatures, under this theory.

The Supreme Court has never decided whether to embrace the independent state legislature doctrine. But then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas in separate concurring opinions said they would embrace that doctrine in Bush v. Gore, 20 years earlier, and Republicans had every reason to believe there were at least five votes on the Supreme Court for the doctrine in November 2020, with Amy Coney Barrett having just been confirmed in the eleventh hour before the election.

Trump and the Republicans began executing this first stage of their plan months before November 3, by challenging as violative of the independent state legislature doctrine election rules relating to early- and late-voting, extensions of voting days and times, mail-in ballots, and other election law changes that Republicans contended had been unlawfully altered by state officials and state courts in swing states such as Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Michigan.

These cases eventually wound their way to the Supreme Court in the fall of 2020, and by December, the Supreme Court had decided all of these cases, but only by orders, either disallowing federal court intervention to change an election rule that had been promulgated by a state legislature, allowing legislatively promulgated rules to be changed by state officials and state courts, or deadlocking 4-4, because Justice Barrett was not sworn in until after those cases were briefed and ready for decision by the Court. In none of these cases did the Supreme Court decide the all-important independent state legislature doctrine.

Thwarted by the Supreme Court’s indecision on that doctrine, Trump and the Republicans turned their efforts to the second stage of their plan, exploitation of the Electoral College and the Electoral Count Act.

The Electoral College is the process by which Americans choose their presidents, a process that can lead to the election as president of a candidate who does not receive a majority of votes cast by the American voters. Republicans have grown increasingly wary of the Electoral College with the new census and political demographics of the nation’s shifting population.

The Electoral Count Act empowers Congress to decide the presidency in a host of circumstances where Congress determines that state electoral votes were not “regularly given” by electors who were “lawfully certified,” terms that are undefined and ambiguous. In this second stage of the plan, the Republicans needed to generate state-certified alternative slates of electors from swing states where Biden won the popular vote who would cast their electoral votes for Trump instead.

Congress would then count the votes of these alternative electoral slates on January 6, rather than the votes of the certified electoral slates for Biden, and Trump would be declared the reelected president.

The Republicans’ plan failed at this stage when they were unable to secure a single legitimate, alternative slate of electors from any state because the various state officials refused to officially certify these Trump-urged slates.

Thwarted by the Supreme Court in the first stage, foiled by their inability to come up with alternative state electoral slates in the second stage, and with time running out, Trump and the Republicans began executing the final option in their plan, which was to scare up illegitimate alternative electoral slates in various swing states to be transmitted to Congress. Whereupon, on January 6, Vice President Pence would count only the votes of the illegitimate electors from the swing states, and not the votes of the legitimate, certified electors that were cast for Biden, and declare Donald Trump’s reelection as President of the United States.

The entire house of cards collapsed at noon on January 6, when Pence refused to go along with the ill-conceived plan, correctly concluding that under the 12th Amendment he had no power to reject the votes that had been cast by the duly certified electors or to delay the count to give Republicans even more time to whip up alternative electoral slates.

Pence declared Joe Biden the 46th President of the United States at 3:40 a.m. on Thursday, January 7, roughly 14 hours after rioters stormed the US Capitol, disrupting the Joint Session and preventing Congress from counting the Electoral College votes for president until late that night and into the following day, after the statutorily designated day for counting those votes.

Trump and his allies and supporters in Congress and the states began readying their failed 2020 plan to overturn the 2024 presidential election later that very same day and they have been unabashedly readying that plan ever since, in plain view to the American public. Today, they are already a long way toward recapturing the White House in 2024, whether Trump or another Republican candidate wins the election or not.

Trump and Republicans are preparing to return to the Supreme Court, where this time they will likely win the independent state legislature doctrine, now that Amy Coney Barrett is on the Court and ready to vote. Barrett has not addressed the issue, but this turns on an originalist interpretation of the Constitution, and Barrett is firmly aligned on that method of constitutional interpretation with Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch, all three of whom have written that they believe the doctrine is correct.

Only last month, in a case from North Carolina the Court declined to hear, Moore v. Harper, four Justices (Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh) said that the independent state legislature question is of exceptional importance to our national elections, the issue will continue to recur and the Court should decide the issue sooner rather than later before the next presidential election. This case involved congressional redistricting, but the independent state legislature doctrine is as applicable to redistricting as it is to presidential elections.

The Republicans are also in the throes of electing Trump-endorsed candidates to state legislative offices in key swing states, installing into office their favored state election officials who deny that Biden won the 2020 election, such as secretaries of state, electing sympathetic state court judges onto the state benches and grooming their preferred potential electors for ultimate selection by the party, all so they will be positioned to generate and transmit alternative electoral slates to Congress, if need be.

Finally, they are furiously politicking to elect Trump supporters to the Senate and House, so they can overturn the election in Congress, as a last resort.

Forewarned is to be forearmed.

Trump and the Republicans can only be stopped from stealing the 2024 election at this point if the Supreme Court rejects the independent state legislature doctrine (thus allowing state court enforcement of state constitutional limitations on legislatively enacted election rules and elector appointments) and Congress amends the Electoral Count Act to constrain Congress’ own power to reject state electoral votes and decide the presidency.

Although the Vice President will be a Democrat in 2024, both parties also need to enact federal legislation that expressly limits the vice president’s power to be coextensive with the power accorded the vice president in the 12th Amendment and confirm that it is largely ceremonial, as Pence construed it to be on January 6.

Vice President Kamala Harris would preside over the Joint Session in 2024. Neither Democrats nor Republicans have any idea who will be presiding after that, however. Thus, both parties have the incentive to clarify the vice president’s ceremonial role now.

As it stands today, Trump, or his anointed successor, and the Republicans are poised, in their word, to “steal” from Democrats the presidential election in 2024 that they falsely claim the Democrats stole from them in 2020. But there is a difference between the falsely claimed “stolen” election of 2020 and what would be the stolen election of 2024. Unlike the Democrats’ theft claimed by Republicans, the Republicans’ theft would be in open defiance of the popular vote and thus the will of the American people: poetic, though tragic, irony for America’s democracy.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
94 9
When progressives say they are taxing the rich, they are really not taxing the rich when looking at income tax. They are taxing production. A person could make a lot in a single year and yet, not have a lot of accumulated wealth or assets. 

In order to truly tax the rich, all income taxes, including capital gains, would have to be abolished and replaced with wealth taxes.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
49 9
A second civil war may be looming due to the national divide over this same question. 

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
85 10
Except when science defines a woman.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
80 17
Banks are jumping on the chance to get other countries to pay off Ukraine's existing debt and encouraging Ukraine to take on more debt.

Rich people are making a ton of money off of the warfunding efforts.

Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
9 5

So the FDA which the government used as a basis to lock people away and deprive of liberty to supposedly save life and to mandate the injection of questionable chemicals and mutilation of human bodies has been actively trying to suppress the truth.

And this is why people don't trust the government.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
19 6
Why do all progressive movements regardless of the nation result in more central planning and more authority?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
17 6

Biden in a race to the bottom now has a majority of Americans declaring him the worst president ever after only one year. Next 3 years should be fun as hell.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
15 6
Zucker is now out for following natural desires like lying and sex.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
8 5
Pennsylvania suppressin mah vote yo!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
31 8

This user signed up January 16th and will be voting Airmax. I do not 100% know it but I can guess very effectively due to kfc image and you will fine that quite a few more accounts like this:


and others, which I won't reveal or specify yet so they are not sure what I have kept track or or am onto, are going to fradulently ruin the election by voting Airmax by signing up last minute.

On DMs, whiteflame told me this about Airmax's side doing it:

"As long as they're actual individuals and not instances of multi-accounting, they have the right to vote."

This is 100% in-context, on this topic, if need by I will screenshot.

On DMs, supadudz then warned me this:

"Just gonna let you know now if you are planning to recruit people from other sites to vote for Max, that's a violation of the rules and will get 3RU7AL disqualified"

This is sheer corruption and double-standard to the highest degree.

Do not worry though, I am not some dumb fool. I would never say shit as a candidate doing any of this and am aware both candidates are smart enough not to either. The question is about standards and fair play.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
99 12
CNN has a new official Biden replacement wishlist, declaring Biden dead before his 1st year.


* Kamala Harris: She's undoubtedly struggled as vice president but she's still the most likely Democrat not named Biden to wind up as the Democratic nominee in 2024.
* Pete Buttigieg: The most naturally talented candidate in the 2024 field, "Mayor Pete" has also been front and center selling Biden's infrastructure bill.
* Elizabeth Warren: The Massachusetts senator is still popular among liberals -- and wouldn't be splitting the vote with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders this time around like she did in 2020.
* Amy Klobuchar: Other than Buttigieg, the Minnesota senator was probably the best regarded of the losing candidates in 2020 -- and her Midwest roots are always a plus given the electoral map.
* Roy Cooper: Term-limited out of office in 2024, the North Carolina governor has ample time to consider his next step -- starting with his service as the vice chairman of the Democratic Governors Association.
* Mitch Landrieu: Being tasked with implementing the infrastructure bill is a big (and high-profile) job that the former New Orleans mayor has taken to with relish.
* Gina Raimondo: She made the leap from Rhode Island governor to Biden administration commerce secretary but doubts remain as to whether she is too moderate to win a Democratic primary in this moment.
* Gretchen Whitmer: The Michigan governor needs to win what could be a tough reelection race next year before she can turn to considering a national run in earnest.
* Phil Murphy: The record of New Jersey governors running for president isn't great of late (sorry, Chris Christie!) but Murphy could use the next few years of his governorship as a testing ground for some national policies for the party.
* J.B. Pritzker: Pritzker has two things going for him -- 1) He's the governor of a major Midwestern state (Illinois) and 2) he's very, very rich.
* Stacey Abrams: Abrams talked openly about running in 2020 before passing on the race; but she needs to win the Georgia governor's mansion in 2022 before thinking too much about 2024.

Who is your favorite horse?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
7 4

A huge setback for racebaiters all over the nation.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
12 4
Here is what confuses me about San Francisco.

We have the most liberal, left-wing government & population in the country. We have a $13B budget. And we have 8,000 people sleeping in the rain this week. Can someone please explain this to me?

What do progressives stand for, exactly? I thought it was about making things more fair. About standing up for the little guy. About human rights, equality (equity?), compassion. San Francisco (to me) looks like the least compassionate city on the planet.

The slums of Mumbai look cleaner than the streets of downtown SF. This isn't just the Tenderloin - it's SOMA, parts of the Mission, Dogpatch... We have thousands of people wandering around - looking like they are on the brink of death. This is why ppl use the term Zombie.

I've been a registered democrat for 18 years. I grew up in a Progressive family and went to a Progressive school, and have mostly Progressive friends. Yet what I see in SF - if this what Progressive stands for - I want the opposite.
The words used here: "harm reduction", "housing first", "criminal justice", "social justice", "equity" -- they don't align with what I'm seeing at all. Our strategy might as well be called "harm increased", "housing last", "victim injustice", "social injustice", "unfairness".

Where is our $13B going, exactly? How do we only have 3,000 shelter beds when 8,000 are unsheltered in the streets? How is this an American city.

I'm starting to develop a seriously dark view of the Progressive politicians in charge of our town. They have absolute power - act like a regime, and talk often of how "broken" the system is. Are the homeless their foot soldiers? Mascots? Mercenaries?
You have to wonder, with the funds we have as a city, state & nation - is this situation... on purpose? We saw what SF was capable of when pandemic hit. We had testing sites up in days. Hotels converted into shelter. Funds flowing. Yet here we are... Is this nefarious?

Progressives tend to blame Republicans for almost everything. Yet here we are - not a Republican in sight - and I think we may be the most deranged city on the planet. Nowhere is there such inequality. I have never seen destitution at this scale.

So here are my questions to Progressives -- + What do you stand for? + What do you believe? + What are your strengths as a political group? + Weaknesses? Why, after decades of Progressive rule in SF are 8,000 people in the streets? + Why do we have the highest overdose rate in the nation? + Why do we have the highest property crime rate? + Why do we have fewest children per capita? + What are the biggest "wins" of progressives in SF? + What are progressives most proud of here? + Who are the strongest public servants of the progressive party? + Why do you think we should continue on this path?

Recently I have been having flashbacks to Junior year when I ran for class representative and lost by five votes. My opponent promised candy vending machines, parties - all kinds of fun things. He won, and didn't do a darned thing all year.
Thought experiment -- what would San Francisco look like if Republicans were in charge? If moderates ran things? If we had two party rule instead of one?

Downtown is boarded up. The children of the Tenderloin are begging the Mayor to arrest drug dealers. Our school system is on the brink of state takeover. Our DA is completely over his skis and a defender at heart. We are in crisis. And - yes, we voted for this. We KNOW!
We probably have more "Black Lives Matter" signs up than any city in the nation. 40% of our homeless people are Black. Do their lives matter...? Or is this just about virtue signaling and moral grandstanding?

This past Thursday afternoon I dialed into the Board of Supervisors meeting about the emergency order to refund the police. Our board sat through 10 hours of debate & public comment. It was astonishing. Caller after caller saying "defund the police."
The #1 "advocate" for the homeless, Jennifer Friedenbach - called in to say "Vote no on black lives don't matter!" She is the head of @TheCoalitionSF -- and has for decades fought against shelters - saying they warehouse people. She is for "housing first". Well - here we are.

I would really like to know if @fbach4 stands by her advocacy. I personally believe she is the person most responsible for this tragedy unfolding in our streets. But we are all responsible. We are allowing this insanity.
I'd also like to know why the loudest voices right now against changing our approach are all white progressive women. We have Kate Chatfield from the DA's office, Jennifer Friedenbach from COH, Hilary Ronen of D8. All yelling about defunding the police. What is this about?

Meanwhile our Mayor, who grew up in the projects of SF - and our Chief of Police (@SFPDChief) - two of the most thoughtful, kind & pragmatic people in SF - are asking for funds & help. And they are getting shouted down as racists? This is nuts!
Many people in SF came here to "change the world". They start companies, fight for causes they believe in, recycle & compost, invest in "green" products. This is all wonderful, but what about the humanitarian crisis in our backyard?

I've been thinking a lot recently about the concept of "Civic Duty." What is our responsibility as a citizenry? What is "civil society"? What does it mean to "contribute" to your neighborhood, city, state, nation?
One of my friends recently woke up to find a homeless person sleeping on the front step of her multi-million dollar home. I asked her what she did. "We closed the blinds." I think this is such a metaphor for what's going on here. San Francisco is turning its head.

San Franciscans believe they are righteous because they pledge allegiance to the righteous tribe - Democrats. They believe they are moral because they believe in higher taxes. They believe they are virtuous because they believe in big Government.
I am just so confused. If Progressives believe in big government then why aren't they even doing the bare minimum - the minimum that even F.A. Hayek spoke of in "The Road to Serfdom" in 1944? He is a famous Libertarian, and believed in providing food, shelter & clothing.

I get messages almost daily from ppl who say they are afraid to speak up for fear of professional ramifications. Some say they are even afraid to like my tweets. I'm afraid to ask questions about the vaccine on Twitter... What kind of "freedom" do we stand for out here?
In college I studied totalitarian governments and how they came to power. The similarities I see to many elements of society today are harrowing. The cancel culture, the "wrongthink", the adulation of "experts", the cultishness towards "science", the blind support by party.

We're more worked up over gerrymandering than we are about people dying in our streets. My friends in SF read article after article about Trump - and don't even know who their supervisor is. Since when did local politics become so "pedestrian" so as to not warrant attention?
I've been critiqued for showcasing SF's problems - told that I'm "fueling" the "Fox News Narrative." Accused of using "Trump-like" messaging to rile people up. Am I traitorous for drawing attention to our issues? Is my critique of Progressives unwarranted?

I've been tweeting about SF for about two years now. For a long time people kept asking me what my "goal" was. That question died down a while ago. Perhaps it's become clear? In case it isn't - my goal is to inspire civic engagement & interest in local politics.
My goal is to draw attention to San Francisco's government, issues & policies - because I think we can do better. This is my hometown. I think it's a very special place. San Francisco used to mean something. It stood for something. I was proud to be from here.

But today I feel ashamed. I feel ashamed of our values. I feel ashamed of our group think. I feel ashamed of our lack of civic engagement. I feel ashamed of the inequality. Of our wasted budget. Of the corruption, the grift & the greed.
We have some of the most educated people in the world living here. We have some of the wealthiest most productive companies in human history. We have beautiful homes, views, nature, weather... This should be a beacon of liberalism. This should be a city on a hill...

I'm tweeting because I'm trying to understand how things went so wrong. How we earned ourselves the nickname "Gotham." How our downtown streets started to look like a scene out of a dystopian movie. How we labeled a class of destitute people "zombies."
I have a hunch it has something to do with political tribalism... Mark Twain wrote, "To lodge all power in one party and keep it there is to insure bad government and the sure and gradual deterioration of the public morals.” Is this what's happening here...?

I'm exploring these issues because I don't want to see the rest of our country look like SF. What's happening here should be a warning about what happens when people pick a side & hate-vote against others. I'm considering pivoting my company, to focus on "the middle path."
What does it look like to be "radically moderate"? What does it mean to put political tribalism aside & work together? Is it possible? What does it look like to study the other side? To challenge your beliefs?

Why have I never learned about the case for gun rights? Or about the values of Islam? What are the arguments against abortion? Why do so many people not want to take the vaccine? Why am I not allowed to ask these questions without being accused of "doing harm"?
This week I'm doing a lot of thinking, writing & reading. My friends are posting on Instagram from their luxury hotels in Mexico & ski resorts. I put them all on mute. Something called to me this week to hunker down. I've been driving in the rain and thinking...

I'm trying to figure out why I care so much about all this - and why I'm spending so much time on Twitter. I think it's because I am trying to work something out. Trying to figure out how this relates to my company. Trying to see if I can find a way to merge it all together.
I *think* it's something about moderate values or moderation. Perhaps it's about balance, or a "middle path". Civil society? Civic duty? Civilization? Free thinking? Contrarian thought? Discourse?

My mind is swirling a bit. Could use some help & insight. I'm clearly quite upset about what I'm seeing in my backyard - both here in SF - but also more broadly in our country. If you have any ideas, or you relate - please do share. 🙏

Thank you for reading.







Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
14 6
The GOV of California just proposed spending 300 million to support radical racist cops in California. The same cops that deny a person's right to resist arrest unless they are a black man.

Will the people revolt and call for a recall? Or will they descend into the history of being in one of the most racist states on the planet that gave 300 million to racist murderers?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
2 2
Biden vowed to defy a court order staying his OSHA mandates on various Constitutional grounds.

Should he be impeached for violating the separation of powers?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
62 14
Today’s verdict is a stain on the soul of America, & sends a dangerous message about who & what values our justice system was designed to protect.

-Cuomo


Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
59 7