PoliGAF 2015 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
Metaphoreus said:
The bolded is hardly more a rationalization than the inference that it was racially motivated (before we had the confession). He attacked a church. Everyone he killed was a Christian, in addition to being black. Inferring either as a potential motivation isn't "rationalizing" the shooting.
Click to expand...

Fox said this AFTER we already knew about the guy's White supremacist views.

And I don't think it's hard to believe that he didn't know about the confession when he spoke today. Again, I have time to follow the news, so I read about it. I don't know how much time he has to keep up with breaking news.
Click to expand...

Like I said, if he didn't know, fine. We'll see what he says in the coming days.
 
Metaphoreus said:
That, or he hadn't heard yet that the kid admitted to the police that it was racially motivated. I think I only learned about that this morning, and I'm not spending my days campaigning for the presidency.
Click to expand...

Making statements about situations like this is part of your job campaigning for the presidency. It's rather important for him to be informed on the issue. I wouldn't blame you for not knowing, but I would blame him.
 
thepotatoman said:
Making statements about situations like this is part of your job campaigning for the presidency. It's rather important for him to be informed on the issue. I wouldn't blame you for not knowing, but I would blame him.
Click to expand...

The TPM article was published at 10:44 AM EDT, meaning that Jeb had finished speaking before that time (presumably). The earliest article I found reporting on the confession was published at 7:41 AM EDT, meaning that no more than 3 hours passed between the first news articles disclosing his confession and the conclusion of Bush's speech.

I don't expect presidential candidates preparing for speeches in the morning to keep up with the most recent 3 hours of news reports.

EDIT:

Now I'm getting confused on the timing. This tweet was published at 8:01 AM EDT, less than twenty minutes after the article I linked to above. The HuffPo story cited by TPM was updated at 12:05 PM (not sure the time zone) with the quote in the TPM story. Looks like the HuffPo update might be based on an answer first reported (on Twitter) at 9:41 AM EDT. So, 2 hours.
 
Coriolanus said:
You've being overly harsh. Jeb's a cunt, but there's no proper meat in them there bones.
Click to expand...

Now this is just being disingenuous. He first said " I don't know what the background of it is, but it was an act of hatred" then he was asked again and basically said "I don't know, looks like it, but who am I to say?". Context is importent, which maybe makes the TPM headline disingenuous too, but it's pretty clear the most emphasised point in his statements are that he doesn't know for sure.

Metaphoreus said:
The TPM article was published at 10:44 AM EDT, meaning that Jeb had finished speaking before that time (presumably). The earliest article I found reporting on the confession was published at 7:41 AM EDT, meaning that no more than 3 hours passed between the first news articles disclosing his confession and the conclusion of Bush's speech.

I don't expect presidential candidates preparing for speeches in the morning to keep up with the most recent 3 hours of news reports.

EDIT:

Now I'm getting confused on the timing. This tweet was published at 8:01 AM EDT, less than twenty minutes after the article I linked to above. The HuffPo story cited by TPM was updated at 12:05 PM (not sure the time zone) with the quote in the TPM story. Looks like the HuffPo update might be based on an answer first reported (on Twitter) at 9:41 AM EDT. So, 2 hours.
Click to expand...

What about all the other evidence yesterday that was already showing this was clearly about race?

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4306537314001/a-bad-day-for-america-/?#sp=show-clips

http://abcnews.go.com/US/friend-accused-sc-shooter-claims-wanted-start-race/story?id=31874063
 
"As a people we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause."

- William T. Thompson, designer of the Confederate flag.
 
The former Texas governor was asked about the mass shooting at Emanuel AME church during an interview with the conservative NewsmaxTV. Perry, who is running for president again after a failed bid in 2012, said he didn’t know if the tragedy was an “act of terror”, but acknowledged it was “a crime of hate”.

But Perry then pivoted to what he called the “real issue to be talked about” – drugs.

“It seems to me – again, without having all the details about this one – that these individuals have been medicated. And there may be a real issue in this country, from the standpoint of these drugs, and how they’re used,” Perry said.
Click to expand...
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...leston-church-shooting-accident?CMP=edit_2221

Why is it so hard for these asshats to say "seems to me he's just a racist POS who committed a vile act."

I mean, how does this offend their base?

Look, fine you don't want to talk about guns...but this is about race, plain and simple.

The fact that these GOP contenders are afraid to say exactly what this guy is, a racist piece of shit, because they don't want to offend their base says so much about their base...
 
Black Mamba said:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...leston-church-shooting-accident?CMP=edit_2221

Why is it so hard for these asshats to say "seems to me he's just a racist POS who committed a vile act."

I mean, how does this offend their base?

Look, fine you don't want to talk about guns...but this is about race, plain and simple.

The fact that these GOP contenders are afraid to say exactly what this guy is, a racist piece of shit, because they don't want to offend their base says so much about their base...
Click to expand...

Drugs? For fucking real?
 
Black Mamba said:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...leston-church-shooting-accident?CMP=edit_2221

Why is it so hard for these asshats to say "seems to me he's just a racist POS who committed a vile act."

I mean, how does this offend their base?

Look, fine you don't want to talk about guns...but this is about race, plain and simple.

The fact that these GOP contenders are afraid to say exactly what this guy is, a racist piece of shit, because they don't want to offend their base says so much about their base...
Click to expand...

Because the next question is "where did these racial tensions come from", and they're worried the finger will be pointed their way?

The confederate flag is already becoming a large topic of discussion that I'm sure someone like Jeb would rather avoid having to have a position on either way. It's clearly a symbol of a racist past, but they know they'd be screwed with the south if they came out against it.
 
Jeb's gone full right on gay marriage, saying there should be a constitutional amendment.

I don't know why so many analysts and strategists think Republicans will moderate on this issue any time soon. Their base doesn't want to, the candidates don't want to. The media just really wants the GOP to moderate on a few social issues so they can pretend they aren't all batshit crazy people and could give Clinton a real fight.
 
BertramCooper said:
It should be noted that Kasich, while clearly more moderate than pretty much everyone else in the GOP field, isn't nearly as moderate on social issues as Huntsman. Don't expect Kasich to voice support for same-sex marriage any time soon.

So it's an apt comparison in some ways, but definitely not in others.
Click to expand...

He's also supportive of efforts to enact the strictest abortion bans in the United States here, with the bill's creators attempting to force a second Roe v. Wade and get abortion banned nationwide.

So yeah, he's fiscally moderate but much, much more in line with the rest of the GOP on social issues.
 
Black Mamba said:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...leston-church-shooting-accident?CMP=edit_2221

Why is it so hard for these asshats to say "seems to me he's just a racist POS who committed a vile act."
I mean, how does this offend their base?
Look, fine you don't want to talk about guns...but this is about race, plain and simple.
The fact that these GOP contenders are afraid to say exactly what this guy is, a racist piece of shit, because they don't want to offend their base says so much about their base...
Click to expand...

You kidding me? What he said is even better! Dude's legit trying to blame the shooting on people who seek medical treatment! That's amazing!

!
 
It's pretty clear the only time elected GOP officials acknowledge race is when they're blaming Obama for racial tension. Many are quite dedicated to the narrative that racism is dead, and the only way to revive it is to talk about it (ie "race card"). Apparently the WSJ has an editorial up right now claiming the shooting had nothing to do with race.
 
So thus far, according to GOP politicians, the reason for the killing spree was:

- Rick Perry: Not racism, it was the drugs making him crazy.

- Lindsey Graham: It was hate, but hate will always exist and there's nothing you can do about it. On an unrelated topic, there's nothing wrong with flying the Confederate flag at a state building.

- Ben Carson: It was racism, but racism only exists because we keep talking about race.

- Jeb Bush: Refuses to commit strongly on anything

Yep, I think PheonixDark has summed this one up pretty well.
 
PhoenixDark said:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/take-down-the-confederate-flag-now/396290/

Few things would please me more than for Obama to speak at the church during the inevitable memorial and call out the Confederate flag. Preferably with the governor in the audience. It's high time that this shit was addressed, and who better to force the issue than Obama.

If these idiots want to defend the flag, let them. On record for all to see.
Click to expand...

I have no faith in 2010 or 2011 Obama to do this, but 2015 Obama who likely went to that church during '08 and knows any Democrat winning a Confederate state that hasn't been taken over by government workers or New Yorkers and Hispanic's in the past 30 years is a pipe dream? I'm not completely dismissing it.
 
PhoenixDark said:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/take-down-the-confederate-flag-now/396290/

Few things would please me more than for Obama to speak at the church during the inevitable memorial and call out the Confederate flag. Preferably with the governor in the audience. It's high time that this shit was addressed, and who better to force the issue than Obama.

If these idiots want to defend the flag, let them. On record for all to see.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see that. The fact people can think it's ok to fly that flag today is disgusting. It literally stands for everything this country isn't.
 
Black Mamba said:
It's like looking at a Swatzika for Jews. It's amazing that this is tolerated at all.
Click to expand...

I honestly thought about referencing the way Germany treats their Nazi past and the way the South treats theirs, but it felt too on the nose. The fact we allow it at all is amazing in the worst way possible.
 
Black Mamba said:
It's like looking at a Swatzika for Jews. It's amazing that this is tolerated at all.
Click to expand...

The Confederate flag is to the US what the swastika is to Germany. At least Germany technically banned their banner of shame- something I somewhat have a problem with in and of itself, but you don't see swastika bumper stickers on cars throughout half the country. The Confederate flag represents and symbolizes the violent oppression of black people in the US, no ifs ands or buts, no debate to be had. It's disgraceful.

yeah yeah Godwin's law, shove it up yer ass.
 
PhoenixDark said:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/take-down-the-confederate-flag-now/396290/

Few things would please me more than for Obama to speak at the church during the inevitable memorial and call out the Confederate flag. Preferably with the governor in the audience. It's high time that this shit was addressed, and who better to force the issue than Obama.

If these idiots want to defend the flag, let them. On record for all to see.
Click to expand...
How would you call out the confederate flag with free speech and stuff?
 
PhoenixDark said:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/take-down-the-confederate-flag-now/396290/

Few things would please me more than for Obama to speak at the church during the inevitable memorial and call out the Confederate flag. Preferably with the governor in the audience. It's high time that this shit was addressed, and who better to force the issue than Obama.

If these idiots want to defend the flag, let them. On record for all to see.
Click to expand...

Good news:

“President Obama believes the Confederate flag ‘belongs in a museum,’ the White House said Friday amid calls for it to be taken down, following a mass shooting in South Carolina.”
Click to expand...

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/245579-obama-thinks-confederate-flag-belongs-in-a-museum
 
Black Mamba said:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...leston-church-shooting-accident?CMP=edit_2221

Why is it so hard for these asshats to say "seems to me he's just a racist POS who committed a vile act."

I mean, how does this offend their base?

Look, fine you don't want to talk about guns...but this is about race, plain and simple.

The fact that these GOP contenders are afraid to say exactly what this guy is, a racist piece of shit, because they don't want to offend their base says so much about their base...
Click to expand...

I think Ben Carson was the few if any that said it was a racial issue ( obviously ) .

It infuriates me , that some Republicans and some of the candidates are being a bunch of pussies with this. It is like if they admit it is full stop racism and nothing but racism it will destroy the very fabric of their being.

I'm sorry, but it seems this people suffer from major cognitive dissonance, if you going to all skittish with these issues like this then this people have no business being a president. It also very very stupid to not talk about and address this issue soon, because their stupid or non-comments are going ruin them in the future, especially with events like this.

This issue is one of a do or die situation I think, this is a perfect opportunity to show if they really are committed to getting minority or to show they have no chance in hell and/or further damages their reputation( Rick Perry ) .
 
Black Mamba said:
It's like looking at a Swatzika for Jews. It's amazing that this is tolerated at all.
Click to expand...

As I jew I agree but as I posted this morning this is what the leading conservative magazine says about that.

But with respect to Ms. Kendall, this hateful man’s use of a slogan is no proof that the slogan itself is hateful. Elected leaders make this distinction constantly when it comes to Islamic terrorism, after all: The teachings of Muhammad, the Koran, the black flag with the Shahada (the flag of ISIS) — they have been “hijacked” and “perverted.” Why hasn’t Dylann Roof merely “hijacked” or “perverted” the main symbol of the Confederacy?

To that the obvious answer would be, Because the flag in question is the symbol of a cause rooted in hatred and racial oppression. But it is exactly that point on which persons of good faith can — and do — disagree. One does not need to think the Civil War was the “War of Northern Aggression” to think that the “Blood-Stained Banner” represents something more than visceral racial hatred. Yet much of the reason the Confederate flag is so contentious is because objections to it are not raised in good faith. Many opponents of Confederate symbols demonstrate not to promote the reduction of racial tensions and the advancement of a shared good, but out of a desire to impose their own moral outlook on dissenters — because it suits their present-day interests. Racial identity and the interests of one’s own racial group are of outsize importance in leftwing politics. Those interests are furthered when history can be invoked in one’s favor; thus today’s “racial activists” are keen to cast the the Civil War as a simple contest of Good-versus-Evil — even though it is obvious that, pace Ta-Nehisi Coates, the American South was not analogous to Nazi Germany, and the Confederate flag is not the Third Reich’s swastika. Arguments to the contrary have in mind not a proper interpretation of past events, but the manipulation of those events to bolster a present-day agenda.
Click to expand...
Not all systems of genocide are equally bad I guess
 
RustyNails said:
How would you call out the confederate flag with free speech and stuff?
Click to expand...

I don't think Confederate flags should be banned, I just feel like the display of them should be criticized. Especially on state government property, like the flag on South Carolina's state capitol. The Confederate Flag is an anti-American symbol. It's the flag of an illegitimate "rogue country" if you will, that was created on the basis of white supremacy and slavery.

If people want to display it on their houses, cars, whatever that's fine. Just as if people want to display a swastika in those places they have the right. But don't fly that shit on capitol buildings.
 
PhoenixDark said:
I don't think Confederate flags should be banned, I just feel like the display of them should be criticized. Especially on state government property, like the flag on South Carolina's state capitol. The Confederate Flag is an anti-American symbol. It's the flag of an illegitimate "rogue country" if you will, that was created on the basis of white supremacy and slavery.

If people want to display it on their houses, cars, whatever that's fine. Just as if people want to display a swastika in those places they have the right. But don't fly that shit on capitol buildings.
Click to expand...

Not often I agree with PD these days, but he's right here.

Just like flag burning. It's free speech, you can do it. And if you have a confederate flag, I can call you an asshole and tell you to eat a bag of dicks.

But there's absolutely no place for it on government property (outside of a museum of course). For a gov't to endorse such a flag means it endorses what it means and that is a disgrace.
 
Oh snap:

The nine deaths at a black church in Charleston this week reignited a fierce debate about South Carolina’s embrace of the Confederate flag as a symbol of Southern heritage. Various state legislators have already gone on record defending the flag, its meaning, and its placement at the state capitol.

Well, one Republican state legislator confirmed to MSNBC’s Chris Hayes tonight that he’s introducing legislation before their next session to take down the flag at the capitol.

Brannon said, “I had a friend die Wednesday night for no reason other than he was a black man. Senator Pinckney was an incredible human being. I don’t want to talk politics, but I’m gonna introduce the bill for that reason.”
Click to expand...

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sc-republican-will-introduce-bill-to-take-down-confederate-flag/

Good on this guy.
 
Rick Perry: Charleston shooting was an "accident" caused by drugs....

..... i....don't even know what to say
fefc1da3d9.gif
 
ivysaur12 said:
I doubt it gets much traction, but he seemed so earnest when talking to Chris. Really heart breaking stuff :-\
Click to expand...

Oh it's totally gonna crash and burn. But the idea that a Republican legislator in any Southern state would even attempt to do such a thing is both shocking and heartening.
 
thepotatoman said:
What about all the other evidence yesterday that was already showing this was clearly about race?

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4306537314001/a-bad-day-for-america-/?#sp=show-clips

http://abcnews.go.com/US/friend-accused-sc-shooter-claims-wanted-start-race/story?id=31874063
Click to expand...

Well...

Coriolanus said:
Jebba the Jeb said:
looks to me it was
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Retromelon said:
Its shocking that a show of sincerity is now considered shocking..
Click to expand...

... from a politician?
 
Agreed about the Confederate flag stuff. It shouldn't be anywhere near government property and it's nothing more than a symbol of white supremacy and racism. Fuck anyone who defends that shit. Ever since I was a little kid I was baffled at how accepted that shit was. I have never seen it as any different than the Nazi flag. And the "southern heritage" thing never made sense to me. My family is German but I would never want to plaster Nazi imagery over all of my shit as some kind of "German heritage." If the way you express your southern heritage is through a symbol of slavery and racism, then you're valuing the wrong fucking parts of your heritage.

I live/grew up in northern Indiana, like 20 minutes south of Michigan, and my whole life I've seen confederate flag imagery everywhere. Just driving between my house and a friend who lives 3 or 4 minutes away I pass at least 3 houses flying the confederate flag on a pole in their front yard (also, like 6 houses down the road from me is a bona fide KKK member with a fenced property where I've heard meetings are held. Apparently he's the grandson of a former Grand Dragon or some shit). I see confederate bumper stickers, keychains, phone cases, etc. plastered everywhere. A common "high school prank" is for students to switch out the American flag with a Confederate flag on the school flagpole in the middle of the night. Obviously Indiana was a Union state, and like I said, I'm practically in Michigan, so that whole "southern heritage/pride" bullshit doesn't even have a leg to stand on. It's purely about advertising what a racist piece of shit you are.

It just pisses me off that I can't fucking drive around my neighborhood without being reminded of how it's filled to the brim with racist shits. I can't wait to move.

Also, yay! Benji is back! I missed reading your posts, dude.
 
PhoenixDark said:
If people want to display it on their houses, cars, whatever that's fine. Just as if people want to display a swastika in those places they have the right. But don't fly that shit on capitol buildings.
Click to expand...
Mississippi has a sad:
320px-Flag_of_Mississippi.svg.png




Unrelated to just your post PD but to the general conversation, as always I must be historically pedantic and insist on pointing out the fact that the "rebel flag" was never the "Confederate Flag" but the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia and later flag designs adopted it into them because of Lee's "success" making it popular.

For its first two years this was the Confederate States of America's Flag:
320px-Flag_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America_%281861-1863%29.svg.png


The primary reason it changed was that Confederate citizens considered it to look too much like the disgusting flag of those filthy Northerners. The use of the "rebel flag" on the battlefield was because originally it was too confusing to pick out between the CSA and USA flags, so they used something that looked entirely different.

And then national identities, fads, yadda yadda yadda.

The Texas capital actually flies the "real" CSA flag (along with Spanish/French/Mexican/Texas/USA flags and these six have seals on the building) and nobody much cares because they probably don't realize it's the "actual" CSA flag.

Now even more importantly, after this case can I no longer force Texas to place these former Texas Revolution flags on my Michigan license plates?
320px-Goliad_Flag.svg.png


320px-Texas_Flag_Come_and_Take_It.svg.png


I should probably look in the six page appendix the dissent provided to see if they're already available.

I'm more embarrassed about that dissent than I am about Confederate Pride or what have you, or gun culture, or mass race killings...
 
Actually, the swastika and flag talk reminds me of a local story about some drug bust at a house, every news story and stuff said there was a swastika/Nazi flag on the outside of the house.

It was in fact, a variant of the current State Flag of Germany:
320px-Flag_of_Germany_%28unoff%29.svg.png


So, if you're running a drug business or meth lab in your house, use more easily identifiable flags as decoration lest you be accused of neo-Nazism too.

Under no circumstances can I recommend use of the Flag of Amsterdam:
320px-Flag_of_Amsterdam.svg.png
 
Black Mamba said:
According to the Tax Foundation, tax cuts mean job growth, but education cuts don't mean anything.
Click to expand...
Yeah. Economic voodoo. He replaces the corporate tax with a VAT. He calls it a "business-activity" tax, but it's a VAT. That's going to shift the tax burden to consumers. And this spurs economic growth? Corporate profits are already at record highs. It's as bad as Bush's magical 4% scheme.
PhoenixDark said:
I don't think Confederate flags should be banned, I just feel like the display of them should be criticized. Especially on state government property, like the flag on South Carolina's state capitol. The Confederate Flag is an anti-American symbol. It's the flag of an illegitimate "rogue country" if you will, that was created on the basis of white supremacy and slavery.

If people want to display it on their houses, cars, whatever that's fine. Just as if people want to display a swastika in those places they have the right. But don't fly that shit on capitol buildings.
Click to expand...
I guess liberals can be intolerant too.
 
Alito, Roberts, Kennedy and Scalia warned us:

http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/19/government-stifles-speech
For the past two weeks, Reason, a magazine dedicated to "Free Minds and Free Markets," has been barred by an order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York from speaking publicly about a grand jury subpoena that court sent to Reason.com.

The subpoena demanded the records of six people who left hyperbolic comments at the website about the federal judge who oversaw the controversial conviction of Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht. Shortly after the subpoena was issued, the government issued a gag order prohibiting Reason not only from discussing the matter but even acknowledging the existence of the subpoena or the gag order itself.

...

On May 31, Nick Gillespie published a post at Reason.com's Hit & Run blog discussing Silk Road founder Ross Ulbricht's "haunting sentencing letter" to District Court Judge Katherine Forrest, and the judge's harsh response. Gillespie noted that Forrest "more than threw the book" at Ulbricht by giving him a life sentence, which was a punishment "beyond even what prosecutors...asked for."

In the comments section of the post, six readers published reactions that drew the investigative ire of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. In a federal grand jury subpoena dated June 2, the U.S. District Court commanded Reason.com to turn over "any and all identifying information" we had about the individuals posting those comments.

This is the first time Reason.com has received such a subpoena from any arm of government.

From press accounts of similar actions at other news publications and social media sites, we know that it is increasingly common for the federal government to demand user information from publications and websites while also stifling their speech rights with gag orders and letters requesting "voluntary" confidentiality. Exactly how common is anyone's guess; we are currently investigating just how widespread the practice may be.

...

U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara subpoenaed all of the identifying information we had about the authors of such comments as, "Its (sic) judges like these that should be taken out back and shot." And, "Why waste ammunition? Wood chippers get the message across clearly. Especially if you feed them in feet first." This last comment is a well-known Internet reference to the Coen brothers' movie Fargo.

The subpoena also covered such obviously harmless comments as: "I hope there is a special place in hell reserved for that horrible woman," and "I'd prefer a hellish place on Earth be reserved for her as well."

The comments are hyperbolic, in questionable taste–and fully within the norms of Internet commentary.

...

The original subpoena, received late on Tuesday, June 2, did not come with a gag order. However, it came with a letter from Bharara and Assistant U.S. Attorney Niketh Velamoor requesting that we refrain from informing any other parties about the subpoena so as to "preserve the confidentiality of the investigation," and that we notify his office in advance if we intended to do so, even though it also said that we were under "no obligation" to keep the subpoena confidential.

We had three options: We could 1) abide quietly with the subpoena, 2) attempt to quash it, and/or 3) alert the commenters named in the subpoena.

Option 1, quietly abiding, was a non-starter for us.

As for Option 2, our chances of prevailing in that sort of legal challenge—given the extremely wide-ranging authority of federal grand juries, and the precedents set in cases such as In re Grand Jury Subpoena No. 11116275, 846 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2012), involving an anonymous poster on Twitter—was in practical effect, virtually nil.

In the Twitter case, an anonymous poster moved to quash a grand jury subpoena to Twitter that arose from online postings of a sexual nature about then-congresswoman Michele Bachmann. In that case, Twitter received the subpoena and notified the anonymous poster about it, letting him know that the company would comply with the subpoena unless he filed a motion to quash. The court denied his motion, holding that the poster's First Amendment right to comment anonymously must yield to the government's "compelling interest" in knowing his identity.

So we decided, against the government's request but well within our legal rights, to choose Option 3: notify and share the full subpoena with the six targeted commenters so that they would have a chance to assert their First Amendment rights to anonymity and defend themselves legally against the order.

At about 10:30 am ET on Thursday, June 4, our attorney Gayle Sproul (of Levine, Sullivan, Koch, & Schulz) called Velamoor to discuss the subpoena. The call did not go well. Sproul asked Velamoor to consider scaling back the scope of the subpoena by omitting the more benign commenters. Velamoor said simply, "No." Then Sproul informed him that we would be notifying our commenters about the subpoena to give them the chance to defend their rights to remain anonymous, and that we would not comply with the subpoena as it related to any commenters who moved to quash the subpoena before our compliance deadline. Sproul explained to him that there is case law firmly establishing that these commenters have the right to speak anonymously, and that we would withhold the information of anyone fighting the subpoena. Velamoor disputed that any such free speech rights exist. He asked that we delay notifying the commenters so he could get a court order prohibiting us from disclosing the subpoena to them. We refused. Sproul pointed out that we were perfectly within our rights to share the subpoena given the law and the wording of his own letter. Velamoor then suggested that Reason was "coming close" to interfering with the grand jury investigation. The call ended abruptly.

...

Later that day, at approximately 5:35 pm ET, Velamoor sent Reason a gag order he had later secured blocking us from discussing the subpoena or the order itself with anyone outside of Reason, other than our attorney.

The gag order was accompanied by this email:

Mr. Alissi,

Regarding this subpoena, I spoke to someone who said she was an attorney representing Reason in connection with this subpoena. The attorney indicated that Reason intended to notify the individuals referenced therein about the subpoena. The attorney further refused to provide me any time to take steps to protect the confidentiality of the investigation.

I have obtained the attached Court Order prohibiting Reason from notifying any third party about the subpoena.

Please forward the Order to the attorney and any other individuals who should be aware of it.

Thank you

Niketh V. Velamoor
Assistant United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
One Saint Andrew's Plaza
New York, NY 10007
Click to expand...

...

Having already suggested that Reason might have interfered with a grand jury investigation, Velamoor contacted Sproul on the afternoon of Friday, June 5, in response to a letter from her explaining the commenters' constitutional rights and laying out the timeline of Reason's notification to them. Velamoor told her that he now had "preliminary information" suggesting that Reason was in violation of the court order. Sproul said we were not and asked for further information. Velamoor refused to give any specifics, saying simply that he was "looking into it further."
Click to expand...

Popehat coverage:
http://popehat.com/2015/06/08/depar...commenters-on-a-silk-road-post-at-reason-com/
http://popehat.com/2015/06/11/media-coverage-of-the-reason-debacle/

Libertarian garbage finally getting what's coming to them for their vicious crimes, throw Gillespie's hair and leather jacket in a dark hole somewhere and seal it off!

And get Welch some more ties!
 
benjipwns said:
Actually, the swastika and flag talk reminds me of a local story about some drug bust at a house, every news story and stuff said there was a swastika/Nazi flag on the outside of the house.

It was in fact, a variant of the current State Flag of Germany:
320px-Flag_of_Germany_%28unoff%29.svg.png


So, if you're running a drug business or meth lab in your house, use more easily identifiable flags as decoration lest you be accused of neo-Nazism too.

Under no circumstances can I recommend use of the Flag of Amsterdam:
320px-Flag_of_Amsterdam.svg.png
Click to expand...
I actually have t-shirts with variants of both of those flags and a keychain with that German flag lol.
I spent a summer in Europe after high school and bought a bunch of shit from tourist shops
 
Two "logo experts" weigh in...

Jeb Bush already a winner — when it comes to campaign logos
8vChZ5M.png
Click to expand...

The two experts largely agreed on which candidates have succeeded with their first important decision — the symbol of their campaign — and which should have stayed a little longer at the drawing board.

Winner: Jeb Bush

Sosa: “Jeb’s logo is the freshest and therefore the best — a strong, sophisticated serif typeface with an exclamation point. Short, sweet, to the point.”

Bentzin: “I ranked Jeb the highest for personality and simplicity.”
Click to expand...
Hillary Clinton, perhaps trying to avoid the dynasty tag, left out her name altogether. And the experts see that as a mistake.

Sosa: “Is she taking a page from Nike and Apple, big brands that substitute a graphic for the name? Or does she think she is so well known that there is no need to even mention her name?

“While I like the simplicity of Hillary’s logo, it works against her — the graphic reflects a hard, corporate and untouchable feel, which only reinforces her least desirable qualities.”

Bentzin: “Hillary is simple, but I didn’t rate it higher because it feels contrived, like it is trying too hard.”

The complicated logo for Rick Perry prompted a novel suggestion from Sosa.

“Perry’s logo would be much stronger if he had left out the silly P with the nerdy star and replaced it with a strong graphic of his face,” Sosa said. “After all, he’s not a bad-looking fellow.”
Click to expand...
 
Jeb's looks even more like a restaurant sign than Rubio's. I would totally eat at a Louisiana seafood restaurant called Jeb!.
 
I agree the Hillary logo is awful. What's up with the red arrow pointing right? It's terrible on multiple levels. It doesn't instill confidence in her campaign staff.
 
Holy crap, these are all terrible logos.

I like Hillary's okay, mainly because of what somebody on Vox noted about the Google doodle opportunities of the logo. The arrow's pointing forward, not right!
 
1208878740552513126.jpg


1208878740683906406.jpg


“Perry’s logo would be much stronger if he had left out the silly P with the nerdy star and replaced it with a strong graphic of his face,” Sosa said. “After all, he’s not a bad-looking fellow.”
Click to expand...
words aren't there any
 
oMtD1lz.gif

hmmm

More exclamation points! (Don't you feel better already?)
bFxXTyk.gif


Bob Dole's 1980 campaign wasn't a time for any kind of tom-foolery:
ZpV0uTP.gif


Ahhh, the good ol former Senator and his nowheresville 2000 bid:
q2IrCCN.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sports betting |OT|
7
10K
Hideous Snake replied
ItalianGAF |OT| - Italia
3
941
Azzurri replied
Food |OT| GAFeteria
2
77
17K
SLoWMoTIoN replied
  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
254K
firehawk12 replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom