this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
140 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19101 readers
4615 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] just_another_person@lemmy.world 18 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Why aren't these people in jail for acting as unregistered foreign agents?

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

AG Garland is an ineffectual punk ass bitch?

[–] nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Because they're busy making animal rights activists get legally processed like domestic terrorists. So when it comes to animal agriculture you can pick your poison between foreign misinfo, domestic misinfo, and terrorism.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

I remember, pre-9/11, that the hard right thought leaders were trying to convince everyone that ALF and ELF were no different than infamous terrorist outlets. They spent a lot of effort to build equivalency with domestic terrorists like McVeigh. Then 9/11 happened, and this kind of talk seemed to go away - at least for a while.

But, even on the "war on terror", I did notice that apparently vegan potluck groups were something to be suspicious of...

Alas, Wikipedia has a good explanation on this point, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_agent#United_States

in 1980, the court ruled that receiving "bona fide subsidy" from a foreign source does not render the recipient as a foreign agent unless the foreign direction or control is established.
the grants which it received were linked to specific programs it should have carried out, thus, it fell under "request".
appellate court found that even the identical leadership and the financial connection were not sufficient to grant summary judgement and a full trial was required since mere provision of funds was insufficient

If that's right, then it seems the question here then whether Russia was just giving money to keep afloat influencers who would have gone with this nonsense anyways, or if Russia had more direct control via request making.

I suspect it's the second one, but it seems a full trial would be needed to prove it, and I can imagine the handlers being really good at making sure there was never any paperwork to use as evidence that "requests" were made.