|
|
|
|
|
|
by caseysoftware
717 days ago
|
|
|
> "they did not notice this obvious misuse" You presume incorrectly both my reasoning and my conclusion. I believe 100% that they see and understand how this can be misused. That's their intent. They likely believe this is a weapon they can use against their rivals while also believing it can never be turned against them. From working in DC for 10 years - through PATRIOT, McCain-Feingold, NDAA (various), and more both on the Hill and at Justice - I learned there are two political parties in DC but not the ones you suppose. It's really incumbents/establishment vs challengers. Prior to 2016, most of the other stuff was just noise. *Btw, you've been explaining judicial procedure to a number of lawyers on this thread. It's amusing but unproductive. |
|
|
Maybe you see that from the US point of view where politics is reduced to a pathetic childish power fight. But the fact that in US any single law has the potential to oppress people does not mean that in other places, normal laws cannot be a good thing. The problem is not in this law proposal, the problem is that in US the situation is very bad.
edit: also, are you really saying that they want to manipulate and lie to the citizen and that the best way they've found is to ... make lying to the citizen more difficult? They could push for plenty of laws with the excuse of security or helping the economy or ... that can be misuse to attack their opposition without being able to be used against them. Honestly, if indeed they are pushing this law because they will think it's easier for them to lie with this law than without, they probably not smart enough to use it properly and this law is, again, at worst harmless.