101–110 of 229 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reason is not slanted. It's a very libertarian site and a lot of people come from the left.
All news media has a bias, it's literally impossible to serve a finite news set and not exert some editorial control. However, if you describe a news site as (very political ideology) I think it's fair to consider it slanted.
I'm not sure if the US - or the world - has any of those. But the generic "there is a slant" point is useless. What matters is what the slant leads people to do, what information the slant is omitting and whether said slant is a good one on balance. If calling a media organisations "slanted" doesn't imply "slanted [in a way I think is potentially bad and relevant]" then the word is useless and shouldn't be used.
Well he should be acquitted on all counts to do with the founding of the site. If he laundered money, that isn't good.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And how is it money laundering if it turned out the money wasn't proceeds of crime.
You could receive money legitimately (let's say, donations to your synagogue) and funnel it to politically disfavoured causes (for example, anti-war protesters in the Middle East). It doesn't fit the metaphor of money laundering, of turning dirty money into clean, but it's usually prosecuted under the same statutes.
money laundering - the federal crime - relies, absolutely relies on their being an illicit origin. it cannot be charged independently and relies on discovering there was an illicit origin and moving to prosecute that.
think harder about it and successful money laundering is impossible to be convicted of as an illicit origin is never discovered and probable cause is never established to get the subpoenas.
seems that nobody ever imagined that the jury convicts someone on the money laundering charge and the judge acquits on the illicit origin charge amongst others. this does seem to require an appeal to rectify and everyone agrees he has a big chance of this getting dropped on appeal too, since its just dangling disconnected from its requirements.
the other things you’re talking about would be prosecuted under different laws.
Good. Prostitution should be legal and regulated to begin with. People are getting HIV at an alarming rate because the whole system is unregulated.
apparently sex workers like decriminalized, because non-compliance with the regulated regimes have so far been a parallel illegal system
but I cant think of any industry we would listen to who answered “how about just a completely hands off decriminalized approach” if asked to choose between illegal, unregulated, legal and regulated
I don’t think decriminalized comes with adequate consumer protection, and the problems with legalized systems can be addressed by fixing how non-compliance is penalized, and by providing incentives to join the regulated system instead of just penalties for not
regarding trafficking, well keep prosecuting that. as labor trafficking. make more avenues of support for the laborer which is far easier with labor rights. what people find hardest to reconcile is the idea of giving up on preventing trafficking, nothing they support right now is doing that or capable of doing that while burdening everyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We have a very high bar for guilt in criminal trials. If we do, then my suggestion should be easy to implement and will only impact a tiny minority of cases. Of course, in this case it's pretty clear that the prosecution made up a bunch of charges that they knew they'd lose on to try to drain the resources of the people they were charging, as well as punish them pre-emptively. The prosecution also clearly broke the…
Sounds like a false dichotomy between "cases that will always result in guilty verdicts" and "cases that the prosecution knew they'd lose but brought anyway to drain resources". You don't seem to recognize that there are many, many cases that could go either way, based on how judges rule about evidentiary matters, what the composition of the jury is, etc. As someone who was a lawyer for years, and who has served on a…
Good. Prostitution should be legal and regulated to begin with. People are getting HIV at an alarming rate because the whole system is unregulated.
Raising HIV against prostitution is like bringing up animal cruelty for veganism: it's not really the most important of many overlapping concerns surrounding the issue. Anti-prostitution and anti-abortion laws in the US exist because evangelical Christian white supremacists are able to tell heathens what they can't do with their bodies and pass laws to force their views on other people. These come with the burdens of…
Good. Prostitution should be legal and regulated to begin with. People are getting HIV at an alarming rate because the whole system is unregulated.
Raising HIV against prostitution is like bringing up animal cruelty for veganism: it's not really the most important of many overlapping concerns surrounding the issue. Anti-prostitution and anti-abortion laws in the US exist because evangelical Christian white supremacists are able to tell heathens what they can't do with their bodies and pass laws to force their views on other people. These come with the burdens of…