Douglass Mackey case: USA criminalizes memes. Literally.
-
Libs are famously bad at memes. Can't keep up with the Right.
So what do USA libs do? Indict it, of course. Criminalize it.
Exhibit A: Douglass Mackey.
In 2016, Mackey mocked libs with memes suggesting they should vote by text.
All knew it was satire. Even if they thought it was poorly done, lacking technique.
The prosecution - which should never have happened - was unable to produce EVEN ONE voter affected.
But USA libs who do much the same thing except worse, aren't touched. Exhibit B: Kristina Wong.
If you still can't see that USA is an Evil Empire jailing dissidents, you're not bright.
And if you do see it except you like it - let me guess - you have child porn?
-
He wasn't convicted for posting a single meme or Twitter post. He was convicted for conspiring with a cadre of other online users to "destroy Hillary" by affecting the election with dirty tricks. They worked together to disseminate voluminous false and misleading posts and false information, even working very hard to use the same fonts as legitimate Hillary advertisements. According to the evidence presented during the trial, 4,900 unique phone numbers attempted to vote by text message to the numbers included in his fake political advertisements.
This is no different than groups in previous years being prosecuted for posting physical media, mailers, and signs directing people to wrong polling places or telling them to vote on the wrong day. He just did his rat-fucking digitally instead of analog.
-
Kristina Wong was not prosecuted because;
-
She isn't white
-
She's a woman
-
She's a Democrat
Which one applies?
My guess is all three.
-
-
@hubrys Once more you sound demented.
"He was convicted for conspiring with a cadre of other online users to 'destroy Hillary" - First, you are literally a conspiracy theorist.
You. Conspiracy theorist.
"Cadre"? Really? OK what about them? Why aren't they prosecuted? Did Russshhhia plant a hidden sleeper cell? LOL
Prosecution could not show EVEN ONE SINGLE voter whose legit ballot had been affected. Not one.
(The 4900, then, were probably curious people - or perhaps you libs trying to vote 2, 5, 10 times as many of you did in the Great Fraud of 2020.)
And what about Hillary herself? Who, by having her aides & her USA FBI buddies fund & spread the 100% phony Steele Dossier, did "conspire with a cadre of other online users to 'destroy Trump'" in a process far more destructive & costly to USA.
Are you blind? Can you only see one color? Only horizontal stripes?
Are you mentally or visually defective?
And what about Kristina Wong?
In the Soviet Union, East Germany, Nazi Germany, China, North Korea - Selective prosecution, selective misapplication of the laws, is how they did it.
So sad that USA no longer has anything different, special or "better" about it.
-
@blablarg18 said in Douglass Mackey case: USA criminalizes memes. Literally.:
First, you are literally a conspiracy theorist.
No, he was charged with criminal Conspiracy Against Rights. Wow, you are a monumental dumbass! He was literally charged with, and convicted of, C-O-N-S-P-I-R-A-C-Y!
I don't have to be a conspiracy theorist--he was convicted of it. No theory necessary.
"Cadre"? Really? OK what about them? Why aren't they prosecuted?
The criminal complaint listed four co-conspirators, but only by their Twitter ID# (long alpha-numerical string).
So far, journalists have been able to determine that co-conspirator #1 was an alt-right, neo-Nazi and QAnon botmaster only known by his Internet handle "Microchip."
Co-conspirator #2 is Anthime "Baked Alaska" Gionet; a white nationalist arrested for storming the Capitol on Jan.6 and known for having participated in the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, VA.
Co-conspirator #3 is a pro-Trump far-right activist and propogandist who goes by the Internet handle "Nia."
I don't think the fourth co-conspirator has been identified yet.
The fact that Mackey was successfully prosecuted for Conspiracy likely means that the co-conspirators will be prosecuted as well, since their trials will be easier after the first conviction.
If I had to guess, I'd guess that Gionet would be the next to be prosecuted because they know their identity. Who Microchip and Nia are offline may not yet be known by the government. I believe the government only knew who Mackey was because his real name was outed in a Gab post by white nationalist GOP candidate Paul Nehlen after they had a disagreement.
Prosecution could not show EVEN ONE SINGLE voter whose legit ballot had been affected. Not one.
First, he wasn't charged with altering or tampering with ballots; he was charged with Conspiracy Against Rights, meaning they were alleging his misinformation interfered with people exercising their right to vote. So, why would the prosecution need to present altered or tampered with ballots?
Second, the government could charge Mackey with Conspiracy even if his whole group had failed to achieve any results. Conspiracy does not require a completed or successful other crime in order to be prosecuted. You are being prosecuted for conspiring to commit the other criminal act, not the other criminal act itself. The actus reus that constitutes the crime is the conspiring with others.
Sorry @blablarg18 but Tucker Carlson can try to spin this (and you can continue to mindlessly parrot him) all he wants, but Carlson's just wrong on this one, as he is about a great many things.
-
USA 2nd Court of Appeals expedites Mackey's appeal & stays his prison sentence while it happens.
A hopeful sign!
@hubrys just saw your comment but I didn't miss anything - Everything you say is demented as ever.
Idea that a satirical meme is "misinformation" - Beyond ridiculous.
Idea that Dems do same meme exactly but aren't prosecuted - and you're fine with it - shows your destructiveness.
PS. Tucker Carlson doing great - has he passed 1 billion views yet? Bet that sticks in ur craw, LOL.
-
Mackey statement:
BREAKING NEWS: Second Circuit Court of Appeals grants bond pending appeal in the Douglass Mackey meme case
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals just overruled the District Court in granting our motion for bond pending appeal. This ruling is huge because it means that the appeals court decided that my appeal presents "substantial" and "debatable" issues of law that, if resolved in my favor, will result in my conviction being vacated. The prosecution, on the other hand, argued that my appeal was frivolous and that this was a typical election crime case like any other in U.S. history. This is a very encouraging step towards vindication.
Here is the full text of the court order:
Case Name: United States of America v. Mackey
Case Number: 23-7577
Docket Text:
MOTION ORDER, granting motion for release pending appeal, at docket entry 16 Mackey’s surrender date is stayed. The District Court is ordered to determine the appropriate terms of release, without prejudice to the government’s making a future request for detention, on behalf of Appellant Douglass Mackey, It is further ordered that this appeal is expedited. Mackey’s initial brief will be due on or before January 5, 2024. The government’s response will be due on or before February 5, 2024. Mackey’s reply brief will be due on or before February 20, 2024. The Clerk is directed to calendar this appeal as soon as practicable after February 20, 2024, GEL, MHP, OAW*, *Judge Omar A. Williams, of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation, FILED. [Entered: 12/04/2023 02:41 PM]
If we lose the appeal in the Second Circuit, we will swiftly file an appeal with the Supreme Court.
-
Why was a Trump supporter prosecuted, but a Trump hater was not?
That's clearly law-fare by liberals.
-
Scott Adams put this up on X / Twitter:
-
As far as I can tell, the arguments being made by Mackey's attorneys on appeal are related to venue (i.e. was the Eastern District the correct court within which to prosecute Mackey) and certain Brady violations (i.e., alleging that the government did not properly or timely turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to the Defense).
I suspect that the reason he's being granted bond pending appeal is because the court believes they could possibly be successful on the Brady violations, which might have resulted in a conviction for a period of time shorter than the sum of time already spent incarcerated and the length of the appeals process. I mean, even as convicted, he was only giving 7 months. Maybe the appeals court believes he would have only gotten a couple of months had the evidence been properly handed over to the Defense.
Bond pending appeal here doesn't necessarily mean the appeals court believes he didn't commit conspiracy with the Internet posts.
-
The fact that you didn't answer my post, I will take it that you admit it's law-fare by the DNC.
-
@raphjd said in Douglass Mackey case: USA criminalizes memes. Literally.:
Why was a Trump supporter prosecuted, but a Trump hater was not?
I imagine they didn't prosecute the liberal comedian because she wasn't part of multiple online propaganda groups full of witnesses willing to come forward and testify that she did not, in fact, intend the meme as only a joke, but, in fact, did intend to affect the election and deprive some voters of their franchise. You know, evidence like they had against Mackey.
-
So, it's law-fare.
2 people do the exact same thing, but Democrats only prosecute the one that might harm their vote count, but not the one that might harm Trump's vote count.
Like when Hillary destroyed 33,000+ emails that were under Congressional subpoena it was excused because she didn't have the "mens rea" (criminal mindset) according to the FBI. If a Repub tried that, they would be in prison for decades.
Eric Holder violated a Congressional subpeona and the FBI/DOJ did nothing.
-
@raphjd said in Douglass Mackey case: USA criminalizes memes. Literally.:
So, it's law-fare.
2 people do the exact same thingSo you can't read, apparently. They DIDN'T do the same thing.
One was a liberal comedian who posted a joke with no intent to violation anyone's right to vote.
The other was a conservative "comedian," who participated in sophisticated online groups coordinating efforts between themselves to have an actual effect on the election, with a stated goal within those groups being suppression of minority voter turnout.
Not the same thing. Prosecuting someone with both the necessary actus reus and mens rea isn't "lawfare."
@raphjd said in Douglass Mackey case: USA criminalizes memes. Literally.:
Like when Hillary destroyed 33,000+ emails that were under Congressional subpoena it was excused because she didn't have the "mens rea" (criminal mindset) according to the FBI. If a Repub tried that, they would be in prison for decades.
Oh, you mean like the approximately 5,000,000 missing official emails from the George W. Bush administration because government officials were using email servers owned and possessed by the Republican National Committee, which came to light during the US Attorney firing controversy.
Or are we still ignoring that and chanting "Lock her up! Lock her up!" even though Karl Rove was a MUCH worse offender than Clinton?
-
Both "comedians" posted the exact same thing. The only difference is the political parties involved.
I don't know about the GWB emails. Did he smash teh hard drives with hammers to destroy emails that were under Congressional subpoena, like Hillary did?
-
Here's Tucker interview of Mackey - for you @hubrys a double joy: https://rumble.com/v3ut7lg-tucker-on-x-episode-38-douglass-mackey-tucker-carlson.html
For sane people: Mackey was arrested 7 days after Biden "won" ie. 2020 stolen....... so FOUR YEARS after 2016.... by 4 USA FBI agents (plus 6 local makes 10 total)..... who gave no warning, banged down his door, cuffed him, refused even to state what he was arrested for.
Mackey did no murder, no drugs no guns no resistance no prior record..... just 1 twitter meme that libs also did.
Petty, vindictive stuff.........and classic Soviet, Nazi police state behavior.
But libs excuse it away - it's what libs want for everyone.
Another detail: They indicted a stranger 1000 miles away that Mackey had never talked to..... by pressure of same, got stranger to say he had "silent agreement" with Mackey to defraud voters........ "silent" meaning, remember, that they had NO messages, NO conversation....... NO evidence of any agreement, other than stranger uttered mere phrase "we had silent agreement" - under their pressure.
-
Harvard Law Review comes out for Mackey.
https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-137/united-states-v-mackey/
@hubrys enjoy!
-
@blablarg18 I'll read your Harvard Law Review article if you read mine; especially Part II, Subpart B about "Grooming Hysteria."
LINK: Drag Queens, The First Amendment, and Expressive Harms
-
@hubrys It's not "my" article. Also, in truth I don't care what you think; I just like to poke fun - while perhaps educate or encourage OTHERS a bit.
Taking the 2 things together, I have no interest to do deals with you. REally none.
-
@blablarg18 Your attempt to seem ambivalently, nonchalantly detached doesn't work when YOU'RE the one that summoned my attention back to this old post.
You clearly do care.
