And former Biden spokeshole Circle-Back Psaki nods approvingly...

https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1650184688508583936?s=20

On 4/23/2023 10:28 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> And former Biden spokeshole Circle-Back Psaki nods approvingly...
>
> https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1650184688508583936?s=20

At least she's not targeting journalists...

On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 02:28:14 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:

>And former Biden spokeshole Circle-Back Psaki nods approvingly...
>
>https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1650184688508583936?s=20
>

Two comments:
1) If she truly believes Tucker Carlson is inciting violence doesn't
that leave him open to criminal charges?

2) This kind of regulation seems great when your people are in charge
but remember your people won't always be in charge.

On Apr 23, 2023 at 8:24:53 PM PDT, "shawn" <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 02:28:14 +0000, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> And former Biden spokeshole Circle-Back Psaki nods approvingly...
>>
>> https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1650184688508583936?s=20
>
> Two comments:
> 1) If she truly believes Tucker Carlson is inciting violence doesn't
> that leave him open to criminal charges?
>
Yes. Which is why he's not actually doing that. She's lying.

> 2) This kind of regulation seems great when your people are in charge
> but remember your people won't always be in charge.

Exactly. Something that always seems to be lost on the censorious asshats of
the world.

On Sun, 23 Apr 2023 23:24:53 -0400, shawn
<nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:

>Two comments:
>1) If she truly believes Tucker Carlson is inciting violence doesn't
>that leave him open to criminal charges?
>
>2) This kind of regulation seems great when your people are in charge
>but remember your people won't always be in charge.

As a minimum she would have to convince the head of prosecutions that
there was a likelihood of conviction. Heads of prosecutions don't get
to that position without being pretty good at filtering out ridiculous
or politically motivated cases that if prosecuted are likely to be
discharged on trial or appeal. That's not 100% - people do get
acquitted, but the ones where prosecuted get eviscerated in open court
by judges seldom get to trial.

On 4/23/23 10:28 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> And former Biden spokeshole Circle-Back Psaki nods approvingly...
>
> https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1650184688508583936?s=20
>
>

Calling a "L'il Jimmy Alert" here.
Thanny posted a link to his "source", which picks up up midway through
AOC's sentence beginning with the words "federal regulation"

"I believe that when it comes to broadcast television, like Fox News,
these are subject to federal law, federal regulation in terms of what’s
allowed on air and what isn’t..." -AOC

No, AOC isn't calling for the repeal of the 1st Amendment.
No, AOC isn't calling for the installment of Federal News Censors.
No, AOC isn't calling on the government to ban Tucker Carlson and other
Fox hosts.

None of that happened... but Thanny, (by presenting a deceptively
*edited* clip that picks up HALFWAY through a goddamn sentence), doesn't
want you to know that.

You see, it isn't AOC who wants to put journalists in jail - that's
Trump and his Merrie Band of MAGA's:

"So, go to the reporter & ask him/her who it was. If not given the
answer, put whoever in jail until the answer is given," he posted to his
social media site, Truth Social. "You might add the publisher and editor
to the list." -DJT

But, you never heard Thanny say anything about that, now did you? It
didn't bother him when Vladimir Puddin' (Ron DeSantis, Trump's
"Hair/Herr" Apparent) tried to loosen free speech laws in The People's
Republic of DeSantistan.

Nope, nothing bothers Thanny, until his manhood is challenged by one of
the little ladies. Then he feels the need to lie about it.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ecc3m9gpel9buqy/ThannyWasMyLawyer.jpg?dl=0

Nut up, you fucking snowflake...

--
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

And since I trashed all my social media accounts over a year ago, the
only time I check in here is when I boot up to check out my external SSD
backup drive.

So you shouldn't expect I'll see any replies... but feel free to knock
yourself out!

On Mon, 24 Apr 2023 05:16:23 -0400, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:

>"So, go to the reporter & ask him/her who it was. If not given the
>answer, put whoever in jail until the answer is given," he posted to his
>social media site, Truth Social. "You might add the publisher and editor
>to the list." -DJT

If a person is called as a witness and fails to testify not offering
any legal reason for not doing so ("I plead the fifth!") he/she could
reasonably expect to be sent to jail overnight to reconsider the next
morning.

If there's a safety reason why not then courts have been reasonably
flexible with how a witness's identity is protected up to the full
meal deal witness protection programs.

But people who have been admitted into these programs (which is
something you only get into if you request it and the state agrees)
don't THEN get to say that they don't wish to testify and still retain
their protection.

But there are very few cases where a witness gets to not testify at
all when called.