• Zuckerbucks and the 2020 US Election

    From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 17 11:44:09 2022
    Non-US SED denizens probably have not heard of this, so I decided to
    mention it here.

    Something very interesting emerged when the various election-related
    groups had to file their declarations of expenditures under US law:

    It turned out that Mark Zuckerberg (founder of Facebook, worth USD 75
    billion) spent about one billion dollars on funding state and local
    election boards across the US, in many places giving the entities
    funded by Zuckerberg an inside seat in these government election
    boards and organization.

    This was perfectly legal at the time, but will soon be made illegal by
    many or most US states because no political organization should be
    able to penetrate a government election organization, as the conflict
    of interest is apparent, and deeply undermining.

    There was a Wall Street Journal editorial that summarizes the
    thinking: "Zuckerbucks Shouldn’t Pay for Elections -- It fans
    mistrust to let private donors fund official voting duties", 3 January
    2022. (Behind a paywall, sadly.)

    Google for "Zuckerbucks" for many independent takes on the story.


    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From David Brown@21:1/5 to Joe Gwinn on Fri Mar 18 10:35:19 2022
    On 17/03/2022 16:44, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    Non-US SED denizens probably have not heard of this, so I decided to
    mention it here.


    I thought most people were aware that the US has a strong tradition of legalised bribery in all levels of elected officials? That's what party
    and candidate campaign contributions, as well as lobbying, amounts to.

    (It is not unique to the USA - but like many things, the USA is the
    world leader here.)

    If there are new rules limiting this, then that /is/ new to me. (I know
    there are already /some/ rules, but your example shows how ineffective
    these are.)

    Something very interesting emerged when the various election-related
    groups had to file their declarations of expenditures under US law:

    It turned out that Mark Zuckerberg (founder of Facebook, worth USD 75 billion) spent about one billion dollars on funding state and local
    election boards across the US, in many places giving the entities
    funded by Zuckerberg an inside seat in these government election
    boards and organization.

    This was perfectly legal at the time, but will soon be made illegal by
    many or most US states because no political organization should be
    able to penetrate a government election organization, as the conflict
    of interest is apparent, and deeply undermining.

    There was a Wall Street Journal editorial that summarizes the
    thinking: "Zuckerbucks Shouldn’t Pay for Elections -- It fans
    mistrust to let private donors fund official voting duties", 3 January
    2022. (Behind a paywall, sadly.)

    Google for "Zuckerbucks" for many independent takes on the story.


    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Joe Gwinn@21:1/5 to david.brown@hesbynett.no on Fri Mar 18 13:49:57 2022
    On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 10:35:19 +0100, David Brown
    <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

    On 17/03/2022 16:44, Joe Gwinn wrote:
    Non-US SED denizens probably have not heard of this, so I decided to
    mention it here.


    I thought most people were aware that the US has a strong tradition of >legalised bribery in all levels of elected officials? That's what party
    and candidate campaign contributions, as well as lobbying, amounts to.

    It was actually called "legal graft" in the day. Largely outlawed
    these days, but keeps popping up anyway.


    (It is not unique to the USA - but like many things, the USA is the
    world leader here.)

    No, the UK (whose legal system we inherited) was our model, of course.


    If there are new rules limiting this, then that /is/ new to me. (I know >there are already /some/ rules, but your example shows how ineffective
    these are.)

    What's being debated is not the abolition of graft (the horror!), but governmental election organizations allowing accepting such help, or
    allowing such help to lead to inside access. I have not checked the
    status of these various laws, and Ukraine drove all of that out of the
    news for now.

    Joe Gwinn



    Something very interesting emerged when the various election-related
    groups had to file their declarations of expenditures under US law:

    It turned out that Mark Zuckerberg (founder of Facebook, worth USD 75
    billion) spent about one billion dollars on funding state and local
    election boards across the US, in many places giving the entities
    funded by Zuckerberg an inside seat in these government election
    boards and organization.

    This was perfectly legal at the time, but will soon be made illegal by
    many or most US states because no political organization should be
    able to penetrate a government election organization, as the conflict
    of interest is apparent, and deeply undermining.

    There was a Wall Street Journal editorial that summarizes the
    thinking: "Zuckerbucks Shouldn’t Pay for Elections -- It fans
    mistrust to let private donors fund official voting duties", 3 January
    2022. (Behind a paywall, sadly.)

    Google for "Zuckerbucks" for many independent takes on the story.




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Doe@21:1/5 to Joe Gwinn on Wed Mar 23 13:39:45 2022
    The Hunter Biden story...

    Donald Trump ambushed the Deep State in 2016.

    The Deep State pulled out all the stops in 2020, using its Big Tech
    mouthpieces to defeat Trump.

    I doubt Trump would have been better in the long run. Trump and his Space
    Force is undesirable. We should keep space NEUTRAL and invest in space exploration.

    Hopefully, however doubtful, the Hunter Biden thing will lead Republican majorities to actually clean up big Tech media. Democrats won't do it.

    Maybe there should be an uncensored separate section of the media for
    politics. Mutual blocking would help, let grown-ups decide for themselves
    who they communicate with.








    Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> wrote:

    Non-US SED denizens probably have not heard of this, so I decided to
    mention it here.

    Something very interesting emerged when the various election-related
    groups had to file their declarations of expenditures under US law:

    It turned out that Mark Zuckerberg (founder of Facebook, worth USD 75 billion) spent about one billion dollars on funding state and local
    election boards across the US, in many places giving the entities
    funded by Zuckerberg an inside seat in these government election
    boards and organization.

    This was perfectly legal at the time, but will soon be made illegal by
    many or most US states because no political organization should be
    able to penetrate a government election organization, as the conflict
    of interest is apparent, and deeply undermining.

    There was a Wall Street Journal editorial that summarizes the
    thinking: "Zuckerbucks Shouldn't Pay for Elections -- It fans
    mistrust to let private donors fund official voting duties", 3 January
    2022. (Behind a paywall, sadly.)

    Google for "Zuckerbucks" for many independent takes on the story.


    Joe Gwinn

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Anthony William Sloman@21:1/5 to John Doe on Wed Mar 23 08:48:49 2022
    On Thursday, March 24, 2022 at 12:39:52 AM UTC+11, John Doe wrote:
    Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:

    <snipped the Zuckerbucks story>

    The Hunter Biden story...

    Donald Trump ambushed the Deep State in 2016.

    He actually ambushed what was left of the Republican Party after the Koch brothers has astro-turfed with the Tea Party Faction.

    The creeps who were prepared to go along with the Koch brother's preferred nonsense, were even less attractive than Donald Trump.

    The Deep State pulled out all the stops in 2020, using its Big Tech mouthpieces to defeat Trump.

    That rather ignores Trumps own efforts to be the worst president that the USA has ever had. The Deep State - if it actually existed - wouldn't have had to do anything at all.

    I doubt Trump would have been better in the long run. Trump and his Space Force is undesirable. We should keep space NEUTRAL and invest in space exploration.

    Trump's delusions about trade wars being easy to win didn't do him, or the US, any favours.

    Hopefully, however doubtful, the Hunter Biden thing will lead Republican majorities to actually clean up big Tech media. Democrats won't do it.

    Nobody sane would do it. The Hunter Biden thing was a bit of moronic political propaganda, and only deluded idiots like John Doe and Flyguy take it seriously. When - in the middle of an election campaign - Rudy Giuliani shows up waving a laptop that he
    claims used to belong to Hunter Biden, which is full of e-mails which don't reflect well on the Bidens, sensible people will wonder how many of them got put there by the Trump election team (of which Rudy Giuliani was an unimpressive part).

    Maybe there should be an uncensored separate section of the media for politics. Mutual blocking would help, let grown-ups decide for themselves
    who they communicate with.

    And John Doe imagines that he is a grown-up.

    --
    Bill Sloman, Sydney

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John Doe@21:1/5 to All on Wed Mar 23 20:06:07 2022
    Bozo is a troll from Australia.


    Bozo Bill Sloman, the most frequent troll in this group, is an attention-craving chronic liar who cannot be reasoned with...

    "the Mueller investigation was about Trump only because Trump made it so"
    (Bozo paraphrased)

    "the concepts "male" and "female" are essentially social constructions"
    (Bill Sloman)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From whit3rd@21:1/5 to John Doe on Wed Mar 23 13:16:27 2022
    On Wednesday, March 23, 2022 at 6:39:52 AM UTC-7, John Doe wrote:
    The Hunter Biden story...

    Donald Trump ambushed the Deep State in 2016.

    That was his lame excuse for firing lots of inspectors general
    (who are internal investigators of complaints against government
    agencies). So, fewer complaints were... heard, or addressed.
    It fits in with the Donald's 'government cannot do anything right' imperative when government keeps doing things wrong...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)