Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.
pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7662
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby pjbogart » Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:03 pm

Cadfael wrote:
pjbogart wrote: The First Amendment does not protect your right to tell lies.


I was informed a few years ago that actually yes it does, as long as we are not costing anyone any money when we do it. I cannot remember the law I was quoted, but the beginning of the end was the Reagan administration and the rise of Fox News.


You're referring to The Fairness Doctrine, which required holders of FCC licenses to use their licenses responsibly and in a way that benefits the public. Remnants of the doctrine can still be seen today in news panels when they have a professor, a Democrat and a Republican commenting on something.

As for the First Amendment, it means whatever the courts say it means. And we've spent the last two centuries having those discussions. What does the Second Amendment mean? A complicated web of case law and statutes get molded into a "holding" which is considered "settled" and respected due to "stare decisis" until new facts emerge that make the old case law out-dated and it's "reversed."

Virtually all of the laws surrounding defamation are common law, not statutory, meaning that they're based upon judicial decisions as opposed to legislative acts. Common law/Case law can be changed almost at the drop of a hat, which is why political parties are so eager to pack the courts with like-minded judges.

As for the specifics of defamation, all that's needed is publication to a third party and damage. That can include something as minor as embarrassment. Unfortunately, case law has created a lot of tiers to libel and slander cases, including heightened requirements for public figures such as movie stars or politicians.

But there's nothing in the First Amendment that guarantees your right to tell lies.

Cadfael
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3733
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 11:46 am

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby Cadfael » Thu Oct 25, 2018 11:48 pm

pjbogart wrote:But there's nothing in the First Amendment that guarantees your right to tell lies.

There is also nothing in any amendment or on any law books that you CAN'T tell lies. If you lie without costing anyone money or while you're under oath, you haven't broken any laws.

That was the crux of that conversation. The Fairness Doctrine wasn't just a way to give the other side a chance, it was also a way to indirectly penalize lies by presenting the provable truth along with the lies. Now that it's gone there are no legal government-sanctioned consequences for telling lies.

We could create some and put them in place and I would be happy to help with that but I believe right now there are none. I would be happy to learn such mechanisms exist.

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7662
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby pjbogart » Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:49 am

Cadfael wrote:
pjbogart wrote:But there's nothing in the First Amendment that guarantees your right to tell lies.

There is also nothing in any amendment or on any law books that you CAN'T tell lies. If you lie without costing anyone money or while you're under oath, you haven't broken any laws.


I think you're confusing common law and statutory law. First of all, I'm not talking about criminal charges. And while there may be no specific statute preventing me from telling people that my neighbor worships Satan, that doesn't mean that he can't access the courts seeking redress. When you say, "you haven't broken any laws" you're implying that one must violate a specific statute in order to be taken to court. That's simply not the case. It would certainly help my neighbor's case if he could show some monetary damages such as loss of job or a promotion at work, but it's not required under case law. Simply being embarrassed and subjected to ridicule would be sufficient to prove damages.

I'm also suggesting the FCC has the right to revoke the licenses of companies that aren't acting in the public interest. You are not entitled to a broadcasting license. If the government decides that a broadcaster whose primary purpose is to collect donations for a religious organization violates Separation of Church and State, they could certainly enact those administrative rules, provided it doesn't violate their enabling statute. Administrative agencies are strange creatures of government, often having legislative, executive and judicial responsibilities. They write their own rules, execute them and in some cases preside over disputes within their own specialized courts. Parties can appeal the decisions of Administrative Agencies and their judges (ALJ's) by petitioning for Article III review, but such reviews are rarely granted.

So basically all you would need is for Congress to pass changes to the FCC's enabling statutes, which sounds a lot easier than it would be. First off, Republicans are not interested in reviving the Fairness Doctrine because its repeal has been so beneficial for them. So you would need Democrats in control of both Houses of Congress and the White House and then further hope that the USSC wouldn't strike down the provisions as violating The First Amendment, which has often been the critique in the past (and Republicans will likely control the USSC for the near future).

Probably the best route forward is to create political pressure by using the GOP's own propaganda machine against them. Conservatives have been trained to believe that all non-conservative news is basically, by default, lies. Convincing them that liars could have their FCC licenses revoked might give them the impression that the changes would benefit their cause. Who's going to oppose a requirement that NBC (finally) tell the truth? The likely result is that it would dramatically change the programming and tone of conservative news outlets, carefully skirting the truth in order to stay within the law, but that's still a better situation than we have now, where conservative news is essentially flat-out propaganda.

Meh... my coffee and my time is running out. Off to work...

Cadfael
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3733
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 11:46 am

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby Cadfael » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:43 am

pjbogart wrote: And while there may be no specific statute preventing me from telling people that my neighbor worships Satan, that doesn't mean that he can't access the courts seeking redress. When you say, "you haven't broken any laws" you're implying that one must violate a specific statute in order to be taken to court. That's simply not the case. It would certainly help my neighbor's case if he could show some monetary damages such as loss of job or a promotion at work, but it's not required under case law. Simply being embarrassed and subjected to ridicule would be sufficient to prove damages.

I'm glad to hear that if it's true but right now I don't believe it. It may be technically true but realistically unfeasible in court. Can you point me to such a case?

pjbogart wrote:So basically all you would need is for Congress to pass changes to the FCC's enabling statutes, which sounds a lot easier than it would be. First off, Republicans are not interested in reviving the Fairness Doctrine because its repeal has been so beneficial for them. So you would need Democrats in control of both Houses of Congress and the White House and then further hope that the USSC wouldn't strike down the provisions as violating The First Amendment, which has often been the critique in the past (and Republicans will likely control the USSC for the near future).

That was basically my point. There's no law right now (I'm going to hunt down some examples of "embarrassed and subjected to ridicule" cases but won't have time for another day or so) so we'd have to pass some, and then get them through a totally packed SC.

That's a pretty long shot in my estimation. And once we wrest control of the government from the enemies of democracy, we've got a LOT of other damage that's causing a lot of harm that needs to be fixed, which would have higher priority than trying to stop the extremely well funded lying liars from lying.

Right now we have nothing. Nothing. How many lawsuits has Fox shrugged off in the last ten years? (Sexual assault/harassment excluded. That's great but it's a different story.) How many times have they been forced to walk anything back? How has it affected their behavior?

gozer
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5881
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:35 pm
Location: everywhere
Contact:

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby gozer » Fri Oct 26, 2018 11:27 am

so if that is so, why haven't any of the folks who make a living out of shoah denial and the like been even inconvenienced in the united states? after all, in places such as canada, austria, france, germany &c people who do that and similar things can and do get a response from the government ranging from a fine of a €5 or so to several years in the pokey; there are laws on the books there for spreading group hatred and various countries specifically prescribe one penalty or another for denying the shoah in public with a view to harming inter-community relations, in some cases also other things of the same sort about what happened to armenians, pontic greeks, circassians, assyrians and others at the hand of much stronger neighbours.

"propaganda" comes from the same root word as "propagate" and it is simply an effort to drum up support, gain members and/or influence legislation . . . it most assuredly is protected speech it would seem . . . .

DCB
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5415
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby DCB » Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:45 pm

They have a suspect. There is some evidence that he is a Trump supporter.

massimo
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:52 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby massimo » Fri Oct 26, 2018 1:22 pm

I only see this as evidence that he is a plant by the Democrat Party, playing the role of Trump supporter. I mean, c'mon, none of the bombs detonated, right? A clear sign that the people sending these devices intended no REAL harm.

Zoti Bemba
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:34 pm
Contact:

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby Zoti Bemba » Fri Oct 26, 2018 2:27 pm

Don't you think the Democratic Party would have gotten its' own members' addresses right? Not to mention the correct spelling of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz! I mean, come on. They may be lousy at running campaigns, but sending out fundraising letters is their bread-and-butter business!

massimo
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:52 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby massimo » Fri Oct 26, 2018 2:31 pm

Intentional mistakes, intended to throw Trump off the trail. They can't outsmart him.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 27952
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby Henry Vilas » Fri Oct 26, 2018 3:15 pm

Right wing conspiracy theorists are now left with the story that the bomber was a sleeper agent of the Dems who was planted at an ersatz Trump supporter years ago and only recently activated.

That, and it was the media's fault.

Shorty
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4985
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 12:53 pm

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby Shorty » Fri Oct 26, 2018 3:48 pm

It was a Trump fanatic, as most of us thought, Cesar Sayoc. He sent them to Booker, Clapper, Harris, Steyer, former Vice President Biden, former CIA chief John Brennan, actor Robert De Niro, former President Barack Obama, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Attorney General Eric Holder, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and billionaire philanthropist George Soros.

His van was a good clue:
https://coed.com/2018/10/26/cesar-altie ... st-photos/

Image

massimo
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:52 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby massimo » Fri Oct 26, 2018 4:16 pm

Sheesh, this guy and his van are so loony they could have ONLY sprung forth from the minds of some dullard Democrat loonies. Right, if I were a criminal sending bombs to all these people, you think I'd drive such a conspicuous automobile? You wouldn't think I'd want to, you know, keep a lower profile? Almost like it was intentional that I be caught, right BEFORE the election.

gozer
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5881
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:35 pm
Location: everywhere
Contact:

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby gozer » Fri Oct 26, 2018 4:36 pm

isn't this maybe just a little too perfect, though, like the expletive-laced diatribe allegedly from a member of clowngress last april which we never heard any more about?

or maybe not -- trump does have former and never supporters on the radical right which have a problem with him vis à vis social issues including an apparent 23-month delay in building the wall and his erstwhile liking for pr0n people . . .

maybe it is like that fellow who sent letter bombs to the burgomeister of vienna and several members of parliament years ago -- that guy was just an extreme-right nutjob who hated everybody, not some "operative" of a political party or anything . . .

all i'm saying here is that the trump-operative hypothesis really is not consistent with occam's razor &c if it turns out he was working for trump, they would pretty much have to impeach trump . . .

gozer
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 5881
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 1:35 pm
Location: everywhere
Contact:

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby gozer » Fri Oct 26, 2018 4:45 pm

massimo wrote:Sheesh, this guy and his van are so loony they could have ONLY sprung forth from the minds of some dullard Democrat loonies. Right, if I were a criminal sending bombs to all these people, you think I'd drive such a conspicuous automobile? You wouldn't think I'd want to, you know, keep a lower profile? Almost like it was intentional that I be caught, right BEFORE the election.


every single square millimetre of the glass on that vehicle is covered with stickers and signs, whilst in 2007 i think it was mrs gozer was pulled over by a winnebago county, illinois sheriff's deputy for hanging a soglin sign, half of a yard sign, in the back passenger-side window with two paperclips, saying it was an obstruction to view. w t f?

Shorty
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 4985
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2003 12:53 pm

Re: Pipe Bombs sent to Dems

Postby Shorty » Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:43 pm

I haven't seen his rear window. May not have had stickers.

25 Brutal Memes Mocking the MAGABomber: http://bit.ly/2SrCuwq

He sounds like a model Republican.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/bomb-suspect ... itics.html

"His attorney in that 2002 case, Ronald Lowy, described Sayoc as "a confused man who had trouble controlling his emotions." A cousin of Sayoc, Lenny Altieri, used stronger terms. "I know the guy is a lunatic," Altieri told The Associated Press. "He has been a loner."

Altieri confirmed that Sayoc had been a stripper. On an online resume, Sayoc described himself as a booker and promoter for burlesque shows. Stacy Saccal, the general manager of the Ultra Gentlemen's Club in West Palm Beach, said Sayoc had worked there for about two months, first as a floor bouncer and for the past month as a disc jockey — most recently on Thursday night, hours before his arrest Friday morning."...

In the 2002 bomb threat case, he had lashed out at a Florida utility representative because his electricity service was about to be cut off. The arrest report said Sayoc threatened in a phone call to blow up the utility's offices and said that "It would be worse than September 11th." Sayoc was also convicted in 2014 for grand theft and in 2013 for battery. In 2004, he faced several felony charges for unlawful possession of a synthetic anabolic steroid often used to help build muscles. He also had several arrests going back to the 1990s for theft, obtaining fraudulent refunds and tampering with evidence...

Sayoc was born in New York City. His mother was Italian and his biological father was Filipino, and his parents separated when he was a young boy, Altieri said. After his parents separated, Sayoc was "kind of rejected" by his family. "When you get no love as a young kid, you get kind of out of whack," he said....

He had serious financial problems in recent years, including losing his home in foreclosure in 2009 and filling for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in 2012. In court records, Sayoc was described as having $4,175 in personal property and more than $21,000 in debts, mostly from unpaid credit cards. His monthly income at the time was $1,070. "Debtor lives with mother, owns no furniture," Sayoc's lawyer indicated in a property list. Sayoc's mother, Madeline, also filed for bankruptcy around the same time. She was not immediately available to respond to phone messages left with her by the AP...

Sayoc even seems to have stumbled across a Polish conspiracy news site, tweeting out a wildly false claim that Angela Merkel had been conceived using Adolf Hitler's frozen sperm. In June, he praised Trump in a birthday message saying, "Happy Birthday President Donald J. Trump the greatest result President ever."


Return to “Headlines”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests