Everyone is making fun but MTG is just using RICO the way 75% of y’all motherfuckers do to mean “BAD!!!1!”
He gets a New York charge, he gets a Florida charge
He gets a DC charge, he gets a Georgia charge
He enters the pleas that remind him of the good times
He enters the pleas that remind him of the better times
nostr:npub15qwuf8njm934yju6pcxns9g9gjsmjlu94dkt3w54wpjjgz9zmjds3n3p2z
Oof.
My point is purely that there are professions, and here's an important one directly related to rights advocacy, that are effectively regulated without impinging on people's rights.
Also, in absolutely no way am I suggesting censoring in terms of stopping these people attempting to spread their lies - I'm just suggesting that it should be possible to distinguish the ones being held to a basic standard from those just *knowingly* spouting crap - just as I or anyone else can express my opinion and give my lower-case-a advice on legal matters so long as I'm clear that it isn't "Legal Advice" from a "Lawyer", or call myself a healer or something and make homeopathy so long as I don't call it a "cure" or myself a "doctor".
nostr:npub1hfrs89x003snwywnm0206hhnfwwvn8afkeq36judq0xqdrdyjlzsk6td5x Yes, but those are professions that are fundamentally different than journalists and their function does not implicate the First Amendment.
Also, you’re coming into this apparently thinking it’s a new idea, apparently not knowing of the history of journalist licensing across the world and its connection with totalitarianism and censorship.
nostr:npub1zcmdlkneu2tyfg3dvhmcpgthvdzec8cplt3rlyu3k09n92kjtycq5esn55 nostr:npub15qwuf8njm934yju6pcxns9g9gjsmjlu94dkt3w54wpjjgz9zmjds3n3p2z You didn't read the article all the way through.
nostr:npub1cpyveqlcc7fwmuvjvghf0hkgjtuuefdxhk0t7mveg70mjd94x6asyjlyn7 nostr:npub1zcmdlkneu2tyfg3dvhmcpgthvdzec8cplt3rlyu3k09n92kjtycq5esn55 I did and the buried-late-in-the-article qualification is incomplete, misleading, and basically useless.
nostr:npub15ygl3ke5j44xktrmss7v5pmur28983f3pe0tf0ffvurjxmgetk3qs0wtqm Hi Ho The RICO the Chesebro stands alone
nostr:npub15qwuf8njm934yju6pcxns9g9gjsmjlu94dkt3w54wpjjgz9zmjds3n3p2z if you want a break from Trump, there's an interesting defamation case where a Harvard prof who appears to have been caught red-handed in fraud is now attempting to sue the academic bloggers who ruined her reputation.
Is a Harvard prof a limited-purpose public figure regarding their academic publications? And if so, won't the bloggers be able to defend themselves against actual malice by pointing to their fact-based analysis of her papers?
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.259933/gov.uscourts.mad.259933.1.0.pdf
nostr:npub13p6a8ekul04mazv93kr8nm7ynj7tdsrvv4p6vq02e363q9wf66escffeyr We’re already looking into it, thanks.