The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!

[T.Lex]

Foreign vs. domestic issue aside, it seems odd that paying someone money to make a candidate look bad (falsely) could be okay, but paying someone money to keep a candidate from looking bad is not. Two sides of the same coin it would seem to me. If Hoffman was Trump's buddy and had done this to a Democrat candidate, I'm betting he would have been in Mueller's crosshairs by now, and I doubt that a simple apology would've been enough to let him off the hook. I guess we'll have to see what comes of it, if anything.

If I, unaffiliated with any campaign, talk about how bad Trump is during his election campaign, that's not a problem. Heck - many INGOers helped Trump's campaign. Nothing wrong with that - even if it involves blatant lies or coverups.

One of the keys to an investigation like that - from the Federal Election Commission perspective - is whether there was coordination with the campaign. If there was, and it wasn't reported as an in-kind campaign contribution, then laws were probably violated.

Presumably, the campaigning INGOers didn't have any coordination with the Trump campaign, so there's no problem.

Same for me. If I say all sort of bad things about Trump, even if they are false, without coordination from another campaign, there's no problem from the FEC perspective. There could be issues of defamation, but honestly - I don't even need to make up bad stuff about Trump because there's plenty of true bad stuff.

So for bazillionaire dude, if he wants to spend his money spreading manure about Roy Moore, he can kinda do that as long as it isn't connected to the campaign of Moore's opponent(s). Now, there's a ton of FEC rules about what organizations can do, and I'm not nearly familiar enough with all those to know whether bazillionaire dude ran afoul of them. But, an investigation should be able to figure that out.

I'm just describing the general parameters of how it works.

 

[nonobaddog]

The facts and legalities don't really matter. For the dems the ends justify the means. So if the means are going toward the left end then they are fine and nothing needs to be looked into. However if the means are going toward the conservative end then they need investigating. And if you look hard enough for a couple years, well maybe you can find something or make up something you can prosecute.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Group touted by Democrats for 'bombshell' Russia report was behind Alabama Senate race tricks
https://www.foxnews.com/us/cyber-gr...disinformation-efforts-in-alabama-senate-race

Fake news for me, but not for thee...

Russia, Russia, Russia is looking more like Democrats, Democrats, Democrats!

 

[T.Lex]

Group touted by Democrats for 'bombshell' Russia report was behind Alabama Senate race tricks

That would be a hilarious irony - if Mueller ended up indicting a bunch of Dem operatives for FEC violations.

 

[ghitch75]

That would be a hilarious irony - if Mueller ended up indicting a bunch of Dem operatives for FEC violations.

that is not going to happen....would be nice though....

 

[ghuns]

That would be a hilarious irony - if Mueller ended up indicting a bunch of Dem operatives for FEC violations.

 

[jamil]

If I, unaffiliated with any campaign, talk about how bad Trump is during his election campaign, that's not a problem. Heck - many INGOers helped Trump's campaign. Nothing wrong with that - even if it involves blatant lies or coverups.

One of the keys to an investigation like that - from the Federal Election Commission perspective - is whether there was coordination with the campaign. If there was, and it wasn't reported as an in-kind campaign contribution, then laws were probably violated.

Presumably, the campaigning INGOers didn't have any coordination with the Trump campaign, so there's no problem.

Same for me. If I say all sort of bad things about Trump, even if they are false, without coordination from another campaign, there's no problem from the FEC perspective. There could be issues of defamation, but honestly - I don't even need to make up bad stuff about Trump because there's plenty of true bad stuff.

So for bazillionaire dude, if he wants to spend his money spreading manure about Roy Moore, he can kinda do that as long as it isn't connected to the campaign of Moore's opponent(s). Now, there's a ton of FEC rules about what organizations can do, and I'm not nearly familiar enough with all those to know whether bazillionaire dude ran afoul of them. But, an investigation should be able to figure that out.

I'm just describing the general parameters of how it works.

They’re all connected.

 

[jamil]

The facts and legalities don't really matter. For the dems the ends justify the means. So if the means are going toward the left end then they are fine and nothing needs to be looked into. However if the means are going toward the conservative end then they need investigating. And if you look hard enough for a couple years, well maybe you can find something or make up something you can prosecute.

This seems to be true. It’s what happens when you’re so wrapped up in your own faux morality that you imagine you’re in some kind of resistance movement, where any means is justified.

 

[mmpsteve]

This seems to be true. It’s what happens when you’re so wrapped up in your own faux morality that you imagine you’re in some kind of resistance movement, where any means is justified.

Except, in current times, the resistance movement is not imagined. It's real, and alive and well.

.

 

[jamil]

Except, in current times, the resistance movement is not imagined. It's real, and alive and well.

.

#resist was astroturfed.

 

[mmpsteve]

#resist was astroturfed.

OK, so I let this lay for a day, and still don't understand. what is astroturfed., in the context of this thread?

p.s. I'm not as learned as you, so please be gentle.

.

 

[jamil]

OK, so I let this lay for a day, and still don't understand. what is astroturfed., in the context of this thread?

p.s. I'm not as learned as you, so please be gentle.

.

“Astroturfing” is faking a movement as grass-roots. In this context, the left has faked the need for a resistance to suck people into supporting it. It’s like the viral video of the delusional vaping store clerk. He thinks he’s actually #resisting Nazis. All that stuff is fake. The #resist movement is real in that people are #resisting, but is based on a lie. They think it’s a grassroots movement of the people fighting the fascist president who stole the whitehouse.

 

[bwframe]

Here you go NeverTrumpers...


[video=youtube;HzATTCt7gvs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzATTCt7gvs[/video]

 

[T.Lex]

For all the MSM ridicule that was deposited with regard to the GOP debate craziness with 12+ podiums on the dais, the Dem version is going to be ... interesting.

We'll get to watch the mirror-image devolution of the left like what happened with the right.

Now, what could get REALLY interesting is if a showbiz celebrity joined the chorus. Sounds like there could be a few in the running. That would provide a twist worthy of William Sydney Porter.

 

[mmpsteve]

For all the MSM ridicule that was deposited with regard to the GOP debate craziness with 12+ podiums on the dais, the Dem version is going to be ... interesting.

We'll get to watch the mirror-image devolution of the left like what happened with the right.

Now, what could get REALLY interesting is if a showbiz celebrity joined the chorus. Sounds like there could be a few in the running. That would provide a twist worthy of William Sydney Porter.

I'm guessing Oprah would be a shoe-in. Seriously.

.

 

[T.Lex]

I'm guessing Oprah would be a shoe-in. Seriously.

.

Yeah, that's one that immediately comes to mind.

 

[bwframe]

Oprah looks pretty shiny, but maybe not so much after the heathens running against her out all of her skeletons? Remember the Kavanagh hearing???

She also did not pull off a victory for that silly loon in Georgia that she campaigned for.

 

[Shollz]

No and No!!

Here you go NeverTrumpers...


[video=youtube;HzATTCt7gvs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzATTCt7gvs[/video]

 

[T.Lex]

I can't think of any skeletons that would compare to those in Trump's closet(s)... yet here we are.

If Trump has proven anything, it is that the electorate is willing to support shiny celebrities that lack political experience.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Oprah looks pretty shiny, but maybe not so much after the heathens running against her out all of her skeletons? Remember the Kavanagh hearing???

She also did not pull off a victory for that silly loon in Georgia that she campaigned for.

You're clear that we're talking about Georgia right? I honestly thought a black woman running for governor there, would be smashed. Absolutely-completely-obliterated. The result. 50.2/48.8... I found that result amazing. If I had been asked to make a prediction, I would've had it around 60/40 at best. If Oprah had a hand in that (which I think her influence, personally, was minor), then one should be absolutely shook at the idea of her running (which I doubt).