politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The board is not collectively punished for the actions of a corporation. Prosecutors have to prove which individuals (if any) are criminally responsible, and often that's more difficult than proving that the corporation is responsible.
Exactly. If you can't point to the EXACT person that's responsible for the committing of a crime, you can't do anything about the crime and have to let it go on without interruption. There's literally no other choice. /s
Yes, that's how prosecutions work.
When someone is murdered, they don't put three people on trial and say "One of these must be the killer, but we can't figure out who. So we'll have to send them all to prison".
But in this case, they do have another choice: prosecute the corporation instead of individuals.
They should demand an immediate halt to the activity, if they don't, force the organization shuttered immediately. Stop the crime. You don't wait to figure out culpability to stop the crime in process. The justice department is law ENFORCEMENT, not assigning culpability. That's the judicial branch's job. It's not difficult.
They have already demanded a halt.
If they don't, they can stop the activity but it will require getting a judge to issue a restraining order or an injunction.
The DoJ generally can't stop someone unilaterally. Even when they arrest someone, that person is immediately brought before a judge (habeas corpus) who decides whether they can go free before trial.
It's so dumb that you're getting downvoted for telling people the truth that they don't want to hear. Of course you can't just "prosecute the board". Individually, they may or may not be complicit.
It does seem that Musk could be seen as obviously complicit, though, since he is the one out there making the pitch. DOJ should be able to go after him, criminally, if the activity continues, right?
I don't know.
If you posted on Lemmy, "Hey, America PAC is offering money to registered voters, go check it out!" then I think that would be protected speech. If so, it would be equally protected when Musk posts that on X.
America PAC is on the hook, not necessarily their shills.
You're probably right there. Looking up the onky quoted I've been able to find from Musk on the topic, I think he's been careful not to incriminate himself directly. Either that or he's been lucky in his phrasing...