This is not correcting your comment just as a “grammar nazi” type move. When we start actually putting these people on trial in court for very real crimes, we will have to name the crimes correctly. Getting the word out on the differences and understanding them will be important.
Thanks commie google ai. Getting ahead of what is coming it seems
AI Overview
…
Sedition is the act of inciting rebellion or violence against the established order, often through speech or organization. It can also include attempting to subvert a constitution or incite discontent against the government.
Sedition laws are considered archaic and are often criticized for being used to suppress free speech. Some common criticisms of sedition laws include:
Vague and overbroad
Sedition laws are often vague and overbroad, allowing them to be misused to suppress free speech.
No evidence of violence
Most sedition laws do not require evidence that the speech would likely incite violence.
Chilling effect on debate
The criminal penalties associated with sedition laws can undermine democratic processes and have a chilling effect on political debate.
In the United States, the federal government criminalizes seditious conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 2384. For example, Stewart Rhodes, the founder and leader of a group, was convicted of seditious conspiracy for conspiring to oppose the transfer of presidential power by force.
“How can you commit sedition, when enforcing sedition laws would undermine bringing all nations in the world under control of the Nazi World Order?
They’re archaic. Ignore them. They’re also against free speech and free association.
Obviously, once the Nazi World Order is in power, any attempt at regaining sovereignty would be sedition, and you wouldn’t be allowed to speak about regaining that sovereignty, or associate with people in sovereign manners.
We only value your values when your values can be used to subvert the preservation of your values. We hate both them and you at all other times.”
It’s possible that it’s espionage and not sedition. Both seem plausible. As to which would be more likely to hold up in court… ?
Election interference is probably a hard charge to get to stick on a foreign national without an extradition agreement, which might be going away with maritime law. I don’t know where that law’s legal basis comes from.
Sedition, not treason.
https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2021/01/treason-sedition-and-insurrection-whats-the-difference/
This is not correcting your comment just as a “grammar nazi” type move. When we start actually putting these people on trial in court for very real crimes, we will have to name the crimes correctly. Getting the word out on the differences and understanding them will be important.
Your assessment of her character stands.
Thanks commie google ai. Getting ahead of what is coming it seems
AI Overview
…
Sedition is the act of inciting rebellion or violence against the established order, often through speech or organization. It can also include attempting to subvert a constitution or incite discontent against the government.
Sedition laws are considered archaic and are often criticized for being used to suppress free speech. Some common criticisms of sedition laws include: Vague and overbroad
Sedition laws are often vague and overbroad, allowing them to be misused to suppress free speech.
No evidence of violence
Most sedition laws do not require evidence that the speech would likely incite violence.
Chilling effect on debate
The criminal penalties associated with sedition laws can undermine democratic processes and have a chilling effect on political debate.
In the United States, the federal government criminalizes seditious conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 2384. For example, Stewart Rhodes, the founder and leader of a group, was convicted of seditious conspiracy for conspiring to oppose the transfer of presidential power by force.
“How can you commit sedition, when enforcing sedition laws would undermine bringing all nations in the world under control of the Nazi World Order?
They’re archaic. Ignore them. They’re also against free speech and free association.
Obviously, once the Nazi World Order is in power, any attempt at regaining sovereignty would be sedition, and you wouldn’t be allowed to speak about regaining that sovereignty, or associate with people in sovereign manners.
We only value your values when your values can be used to subvert the preservation of your values. We hate both them and you at all other times.”
It’s possible that it’s espionage and not sedition. Both seem plausible. As to which would be more likely to hold up in court… ?
Election interference is probably a hard charge to get to stick on a foreign national without an extradition agreement, which might be going away with maritime law. I don’t know where that law’s legal basis comes from.
They would be saboteurs. Trying to sabotage our election.
They’ll find out.