• 6 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 2nd, 2023

help-circle







  • So when looking at the charges the claim is that the individuals have been part of a criminal organization since George floyd was killed by the police.

    In order for this to be the case all individuals would need to of had a meeting before george floyd was killed where they planned out the crime, then afterwards one member would need to take an action to commit the crime. A good way ive seen it explained is : I and two others plan to rob a bank, we can talk about how its done, the materials we need, and what everyone will be doing now this is all legal and nothing can be done until someone purchases the materials or enacts on a part of the plan as when that happens it becomes a criminal conspiracy.

    Big issue. These people don’t know eachother. Now this could mean that someone brought them into a conspiracy unknowingly but that would require knowing atleast one member of the original conspiracy or there would be links between people who were brought in to those who started the conspiracy that however from my knowledge the people being charged here are simply everyone arrested for peacefully protesting Cop City (trespassing, and property damage are commonly used to unlawfully arrest those who peacefully protest as its easy to claim that it happened and hard to prove that it didn’t)

    Reason that it could be politically motivated. Building Cop city is an extremely unpopular decision that fully ignores the promise made to the community its in which was to make the area a park. The governor has made it a terroristic action to question or protest the park in any way which has led to the arrests made for domestic terrorism (it essentially boils down to kemp declared “stop cop city” a terrorist organization, anyone who protests cop city is then labeled as part of that group as the only defining characteristic of the group is protesting cop city.)

    This is what i know from the top of my head so apologies if there is anything incorrect.




  • Its difficult personally to believe its a myth due to my memory of the Twitter buyout where I recall the main struggle being that the CEOs of Twitter couldn’t deny Elon purchasing Twitter due to the threat of lawsuit from their shareholders, and after announcing his plans to purchase Twitter for the inflated price Elon couldn’t back out due to the same threat however I am open to the idea that I could of been misled on that situation.

    As for the why of a myth like that circulating I doubt its due to malice and more due to misunderstanding as Ive always understood that any wording made on a legal case could be used as precedent. It could also fit well with people rationalizing why companies seek record profits while underpaying workers for their labor.

    If anyone could clarify the Twitter situation without sucking off elon it would be appreciated