User

Of course, you forget that you ran away from this discussion... I am the one quoting the actual ruling in this discussion and you are quoting a biased article about it...

So... you have no evidence it was a bribe, but want to call it a bribe. That is not how the legal system works, where you just get to presume guilt. You have to prove guilt. I don't have to prove anything. There is no evidence it was a bribe. This case is about it being an illegal gratuity. He was not found guilty for taking a bribe. They tried to use the bribery statute wrongly, all the SCOTUS said here was you can't do that. The law doesn't say that.

Resist what? You have yet to define any of this subjugation you keep asserting existed.

This thread makes perfect sense. The same posters who can't be bothered to read the Bush v Gore decision didn't read this one either. Just pure ignorance and lies.

No, it is not. They judged the law as it was written, they did not say officials could engage in a little corruption. Why do I need to re-read the article? I am reading the SCOTUS ruling on the law. This is your problem, read what the law says and what SCOTUS actually said. READ THE LAW AND THE RULING for crying out loud. "Statutory structure reinforces that §666 is a bribery statute, not a two-for-one bribery-and-gratuities statute as the Government posits. The Government identifies no other provision in the U. S. Code that prohibits bribes and gratuities in the same provision. And §201 does not do so. That is because bribery and gratuities are “two separate crimes” with “two different sets of elements.” United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of Cal., 526 U. S. 398, 404. P. 9. (4) For federal officials, Congress has separated bribery and gratuities into two distinct provisions of §201 for good reason: The Cite as: 603 U. S. ____ (2024) 3 Syllabus crimes receive different punishments that “reflect their relative seriousness.” Sun-Diamond, 526 U. S., at 405. For example, accepting a bribe as a federal official is punishable by up to 15 years in prison, while accepting an illegal gratuity as a federal official is punishable by up to only 2 years. If the Government were correct that §666 also covered gratuities, Congress would have inexplicably authorized punishing gratuities to state and local officials five times more severely than gratuities to federal officials—10 years for state and local officials compared to 2 years for federal officials. The Government cannot explain why Congress would have created such substantial sentencing disparities. Pp. 9–10." That is only part of their reasoning. My understanding is what the SCOTUS said. That is the point here. I am not interested in what your biased article says, read the actual law. Except, this was not negotiated in advance... the SCOTUS ruling clearly explains all this in the difference between a Bribe and Gratuity in needing the mens rea.

Page 4, several days later... you finally get around to the point to state the obvious. Gee, thanks.

LOL, you realize how bad your arguments are and can't defend them anymore.

This is the clown show of obfuscation you guys have to turn these threads into... anything to avoid dealing with the perverted participants at these Drag shows using children to get their sexual jollies off of... prancing around with breasts exposed in G-strings with money hanging out of them like strippers.

How are they obsessing? They certainly notice... but noticing the unusual is not obsessing. Who is this us you think are not being realistic?

You are conflating "conflict" before Israels existence with the subjugation you keep claiming Israel engaged in. I am saying that nothing before the 7th justified what happened on the 7th, and very especially to you... that you can't explain what this so called subjugation from Israel was that started all this. On day one it was the Palestinians who went to war against Israel. There was no subjugation. Are you now claiming October 7th was justified?!

Try reading. Try being honest for once in your life here. The law makes distinctions between bribes and gratuities, and in this case, the law did not make a gratuity illegal. It's that simple.

Yes, very quite. You titled this thread: "The Supreme Court rules that state officials can engage in a little corruption, as a treat" Nothing they said ruled like that. It was dumb and dishonest. You are still ignoring that the law defines bribes and gratuities differently. The question was did the statute cited in the prosecution actually make gratuities illegal... and it did not. No, the way the law as currently written defined what was illegal made one illegal and the other not. The SCOTUS pointed this out.

No, you are either ignorant or lying: "In an email the day before the town hall to senior Clinton staffers, Brazile wrote: “From time to time I get the questions in advance” and included the text of a question about the death penalty. An email later obtained by POLITICO showed that the text of the question Brazile sent to the Clinton campaign was identical to a proposed question Martin had offered CNN. (A similar, though not identical question, was ultimately posed to Clinton at the town hall)." https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donna-brazile-wikileaks-fallout-230553#:~:text=In an email the day,question about the death penalty.

What war crimes? Name the top 1-3 war crimes you think they are guilty of committing. You keep pushing this stupid lie about not responding for 10 hours. It is a lie. No one just sat around doing nothing for 10 hours. Various forces did in fact respond as they could and as they knew what was going on. It took time to figure out where all Hamas forces were attacking and held up to go fight them. Hamas was not just one fighting force moving against military targets... they were spread out trying to kill as many Israelis as they could all along the border. What you are doing is blaming the rape victim. It is sick, disgusting, and a lie.

So which is it... do you support fighting Hamas, or no? The idea that they are getting "exactly" what they want is absurd. They clearly don't want the vast majority of their men and warfighting capability to be destroyed, all their tunnels and infrastructure to be found and destroyed, for senior leaders to be killed... to lose the power they have over Gaza as they are about to lose. It is arguable they wanted folks on the left like you and others to whine and cry about how Israel kills people because Hamas hides behind them... sure, they are getting what they want and you are the ones giving it to them.

This is an awful idea... this is some kind of 8D chess a person in an insane asylum would play that makes no sense.

No more so than saying kids are being told what to believe here... Except when it comes to sex/gender for you... How is hanging this up on a wall "promoting any mythology as fact?" Neither is the straight pride flag, Christian flag, or Pro-Life flag... I am glad you support those being in school too now.

You are just quoting what someone else said... and it also said gratuities. Not bribes. Try reading the actual ruling. It was nothing more than a reading of the existing law to show that it did not cover gratuities. It said nothing about being able to accept bribes, nor did it say Congress or lawmakers couldn't pass new laws or amend existing laws.

How? As soon as they declared themselves a state the Palestinians went to war against them. Started "it" being the war... do try to follow along. There was no subjugation. Palestinians had their own land, how is it you are this ignorant of history? It is almost as if you are just lying to justify your support of Hamas.

That isn’t what this ruling said…

The law in question here was not specific to gratuity. It was that simple. The Supreme Court did not stop or say the State could not pass a law against gratuity like this, only that this law didn't cover that. Nothing was weakened.

Then when did this alleged subjugation begin you claim happened? And yes... when it comes to Israel... the Palestinians were the ones who started it. There was no occupation when Israel was founded and the Palestinians went to war against them.

What a dumb and dishonest thread this is. The Supreme Court literally read the law as written here. They never said the state can't make gratuities illegal, just that this statute did not cover them. You guys want the Supreme Court to write law here or to do what you think is right... not what is lawful.

Still making subjective comments about me instead of being "objective" on the subject you claim to be "objective" on here. This has nothing to do with your claim about Israel's subjugation... Israel did not even exist at this point. You are just grasping at straws and throwing mud at the wall because the facts are that Israel coming into existence did not subjugate the Palestinians.

The local school puts up posters for all sorts of stuff... you read them or you don't. No one there is telling kids they have to believe what they say... It is called the LGBTQ Pride Flag... it is exclusive to all others. It is the same reason you refuse to say you support the straight pride flag... or the Christian Flag... or the Pro-Life Flag...