Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:We had electorial fraud during the DNC primarie (Score 3, Informative) 531

I love how people hide stuff like this at -1 because they don't want to hear it...

The fraud was related to evading campaign finance laws, not Bernie: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-leak-clinton-team-deflected-state-cash-concerns-226191

What they did to Bernie wasn't fraud, at least not in the legal sense, just a slap in the face to those in the dem voter base who thought their party's candidate would be determined by a fair and democratic process. Of course the DNC, as a private entity, is free to hand-pick their candidate and skip the entire primary process - as they used to long ago - but decades of at least the illusion of democracy has led people to expect something vastly different.

Comment It's the WaPo again... (Score 5, Informative) 531

The Washington Post has a bit of bias in this, so take it with a grain of salt. When will the Washington Post start investigating themselves for holding illicit fundraisers with the DNC? Or is it Russia's fault they did this? Those damned Russians, how dare they expose our corruption!

Source: https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699

Re: WaPo Party

  From:kaplanj@dnc.org
  To: RangappaA@dnc.org
  Date: 2015-09-22 13:29
  Subject: Re: WaPo Party

  Great - we were never going to list since the lawyers told us we cannot do it.

  We are waiting

  Jordan Kaplan
  National Finance Director
  Democratic National Committee
  (202) 488-5002 (o) | (312) 339-0224 (c)
  kaplanj@dnc.org

  > On Sep 22, 2015, at 11:25 AM, Rangappa, Anu wrote:
  >
  > They aren't going to give us a price per ticket and do not want their party to be listed in any package we are selling to donors. If we let them know we have donors in town who will be at the debate, we can add them to the list for the party.

Comment Re:What about perjury? (Score 2) 77

Yes, but it doesn't help much. Here's why.

Suppose for a moment that I own the copyright to Mickey Mouse and I issue a takedown for Itchy & Scratchy, claiming it infringes upon Mickey Mouse. That's bogus... but all I had to swear under penalty of perjury is that I either own or represent the people who actually own Mickey Mouse. The fact that the other work is simply not infringing doesn't even enter into it. Conversely, if I falsely claim to own a copyright and use that as the basis of a takedown request, for example by claiming to own or represent the owners of Mickey Mouse, then I have committed perjury.

So yeah, the law doesn't have much in the way of penalties for people who file utterly bogus takedown requests. In theory, if you drag them to court, they might get in trouble with a judge for lacking a good faith belief in the merits of their request, but you're most likely not going to get very much out of this so it really isn't worth it and it doesn't get punished like it should.

This isn't the first or the last bogus request to be filed. They're sending piles of nonsense out every day and we only notice the hilariously bad ones.

Comment Unsettlng relationship between the media and DNC? (Score 3, Interesting) 271

When will they explore the unsettling relationship between the media and the DNC? Or is it normal to hold clandestine fundraisers that their own lawyers forbid?

Source: https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699

Re: WaPo Party

From:kaplanj@dnc.org
To: RangappaA@dnc.org
Date: 2015-09-22 13:29
Subject: Re: WaPo Party

Great - we were never going to list since the lawyers told us we cannot do it.

We are waiting

Jordan Kaplan
National Finance Director
Democratic National Committee
(202) 488-5002 (o) | (312) 339-0224 (c)
kaplanj@dnc.org

> On Sep 22, 2015, at 11:25 AM, Rangappa, Anu wrote:
>
> They aren't going to give us a price per ticket and do not want their party to be listed in any package we are selling to donors. If we let them know we have donors in town who will be at the debate, we can add them to the list for the party.

Comment Re:But she wasn't indicted (Score 1) 117

And you can't really trust the news to expose things. People like the Washington Post were too busy holding illicit fundraisers with the DNC.

But you don't have to take my word for it.

Source: https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/2699

Re: WaPo Party

From:kaplanj@dnc.org
To: RangappaA@dnc.org
Date: 2015-09-22 13:29
Subject: Re: WaPo Party

Great - we were never going to list since the lawyers told us we cannot do it.

We are waiting

Jordan Kaplan
National Finance Director
Democratic National Committee
(202) 488-5002 (o) | (312) 339-0224 (c)
kaplanj@dnc.org

> On Sep 22, 2015, at 11:25 AM, Rangappa, Anu wrote:
>
> They aren't going to give us a price per ticket and do not want their party to be listed in any package we are selling to donors. If we let them know we have donors in town who will be at the debate, we can add them to the list for the party.

Comment Dangerously wrong. Stay bad orders, don't ignore! (Score 4, Informative) 242

This is wrong. Dangerously wrong.

If a judge gives a bad order that will hurt you, you file for a stay of that order pending appeal. Ignoring the order leads to punishment, as happened here! The Supreme Court has limited jurisdiction, they are simply going to ignore almost all of the petitions for a writ of certiorari sent to them. And it you will still get punished for just ignoring the order even if you were right! You can't just wait for orders from a higher court to comply. If the judge refuses to stay their order while you appeal it, you have to comply. Period. If they were wrong, well, you'll have to convince the courts of that on appeal. You don't get to just ignore everyone but the Supreme Court because you don't like an adverse ruling, it simply does not and hasn't ever worked that way.

I can't believe people modded this up, because it displays utter ignorance of legal process. Seriously, at least a few of you should have read Groklaw. You can go back and find that even SCO knew better than to flat-out ignore a court order like that. You can find many times where they asked for stays, plenty of times where they sent surreplies and dug in their heels at every opportunity to avoid complying, but not so much where they simply ignored the order.

So let that sink in for a moment: Gawker sunk below SCO's level here.

I tend to blame the client here, because I have to believe anyone could have made it through law school if they were giving advice that bad. If not, they're free to explore a legal malpractice claim against their own lawyers. Because what they did is so mind-bendingly stupid that you have to be willfully ignorant of legal process to think it makes any kind of sense that you can ignore anyone lower than the Supreme Court.

Comment It hasn't even been truly investigated yet... (Score 2) 706

The Snopes story confirms that he was shot for essentially no reason. We might know more if we had info from his girlfriend or the ambulance team, but nobody has made any public statements. I understand that it's way too early to go around pinning it on somebody, but it's hard to say it's "debunked" when basically no investigation has actually been done yet.

Comment Re: No chance they'll be indicted (Score 1) 424

Tortuous? Nazi stands for National Socialist. It's not some strange accident that it's right there in the name. I mean, I'm sure we'll hear that it wasn't "true" socialism, but I'm not sure how we're supposed to recognize true Socialism as opposed to what people calling themselves that have actually done. Don't get me wrong, some of the Nordic states have managed a more peaceful version of it, funded by the oil wealth of their country, prudently invested for the good of the nation, but it's kind of hard to ignore that some of the worst mass-murderers in history flew the flags of Socialism or Communism, or that the Communists considered Socialism a means to move society towards their ideals.

See, the Nazis loved to talk about taking down the rich, like the rich Jewish bankers they demonized and blamed for all of the German workers' problems. And they pretty much did so to everyone they hated, robbing them of everything and then disposing of them.

Of course you might say that what they believed is all nonsense--and it is--but this is what they were doing and why they believed they were doing it. They believed that they were taking society back from a rich, corrupt elite. Sure, anyone can find anything they want to compare any group they dislike to Nazis, but it's hard to ignore that the flag they flew under.

And don't get me wrong, there are, as I've noted, more peaceful varieties thereof. But we can't just ignore facts when they become inconvenient, now, can we?

Or perhaps you haven't gotten that far in history class yet?

Comment Re:Um, (Score 3, Insightful) 424

You didn't read them, did you?

Half of the recent protests/panics/etc. were staged by DNC staffers, which one might note is how they get away with being racists without media rebuke. They held a clandestine fundraiser with the Washington Post that their own lawyers disagreed with. They funneled all the DNC money straight to Hillary and it never mattered what the voters wanted. They'll call your CEO and demand apologies from any media type that dares call them on any of their BS.

But no, go on, rant about irrelevant nonsense and just ignore the fact that they are effectively above the law at this point.

Slashdot Top Deals

Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side, and a dark side, and it holds the universe together ... -- Carl Zwanzig

Working...