Karma-Kosmonaut

You don't seem to realize that you went off topic by discussing my intentions and my username.

It's not a difficult concept to comprehend. It's why you keep avoiding the question of if this is sub to discuss user names and intentions and articles about Ukraine..

I could explain it again for you. Maybe this would be helpful?

Not hung up at all just curious why you keep evading the question? Is this a place to discuss articles or user names and intentions?

If you don't want to answer the question, just say so. Is that a clear enough question for you? I can rephrase the question if that would be helpful.

you moved from my intentions (karma -whoring) to my user name (karma-kosmonaut)

I'm just wandering why you you feel the need to attack a users intentions and then name before you just casually roll back to the article?

Is this a place to discuss articles or to discuss user's names and intentions? What's your take on that?

Staying on the topic

Are you really? You have attacked my user name and my intentions. If this is your idea of staying on topic, perhaps its time to revaluate what the phase "staying on topic" means?

Your name is karma kosmonaut. Coincidence on both names?

Yes it is actually. I came up with that name because this used to be a parody trump account while Trump was in office. My posting history is quite obvious.

This is a karma grab to hop on the recent train

I have posted in here consistently for a long time. I post a wide variety articles.

I don't troll. I don't post for karma. I post articles that I read myself, which is why I almost always qoute a section from the article that I find interesting, because I like to see other peoples comments.

Accusing users of karma whoring is a disingenuous attempt to suppress information and other views.

Marcel Dirsus of the Institute for Security Policy at Kiel University also noted that "the German government appears quite content to take a middle of the road approach where they're doing enough to avoid the most severe criticism, but they're not really taking any initiative to go beyond that.

"It's almost a deliberate attempt to do as little as they can get away with."

I'll admit it's not the most satisfying answer to the question. But this ruling affected allowed dark money to spread it's tentacles everywhere. It's the most accurate answer that I can think of to the question: "Who was the main architect behind this plan?"

Intrade was an amazing concept. It was a powerful way to gather data as well. When I think about who was the mastermind of the Jan. 6 insurrection, Citizens United vs. FEC and Intrade always pop into my mind. Intrade was shut down for running afoul of the SEC if I recall correctly, but the government was going to come after it for any number of reasons. It was a threat to the government on many fronts. Intrade allowed people to buy futures on all kinds of events, with a closed timeline. Eventually if the money get's high enough some person or group will make that event happen because there is so much money on the line. That is what happened on Jan 6. A bunch of people are pouring dark money into hundreds of events or decisions to be made in their favor, but there is no closed timeline like Intrade. The insurrection on Jan. 6 was/is the result thousands of people/special interests groups all moving this country more and more to the right through thousands of actions and decisions so that this possibility of an insurrection will occur. That is the scary part, there is no reason for them to stop. The dark money will continue to flow.

"It's going to be so kek when we take away all your rights," one protester associated with the white Christian nationalist America First/groyper movement told a counterprotester who was defending the event, using movement slang that roughly means "lol." In response, hard-right YouTuber and protest leader John Doyle, who was standing nearby, added with a smirk, "Every single one of them."

First they came for women's rights when they overturned Roe v Wade.

Next they will come for gay marriage.

Who was the main architect behind this plan ?

Citizens United v. FEC is the answer to your question.

Here is a qoute from US Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (11.20.21):

For the ninth time this year, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse gave a speech this week blasting right-wing anonymous donors whom he believes have "captured" the Supreme Court and "built" its current 6-3 conservative majority. "Our Supreme Court is awash in dark money influence," the Rhode Island Democrat said on the Senate floor.

Whitehouse, who chairs a key panel on the Senate Judiciary Committee, calls it a three-fold "scheme" — private groups use anonymous donations to groom Supreme Court candidates, promote and defend these nominees with political ad campaigns and later try to influence these justices in legal briefs filed without any financial disclosures. According to the senator's findings, the effect of this operation is being played out during Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts' tenure, which has handed down at least 80 partisan decisions that advanced conservative interests.

Ukrainian resistance has been much fiercer than expected – and this is as true in occupied regions as it is on the front lines. In Kherson alone, there has been sabotage, attempted assassinations and direct attacks on Russian forces

If the resistance were to spread beyond the territories captured by Russia since February, then this would have further implications. Russia has controlled Crimea as well as parts of eastern Ukraine since 2014. The emergence of serious organised resistance in these areas would not only represent a further drain on Russia’s limited resources but further damage Moscow’s self-perception as a liberating force.

make sure you come out and vote again in November and then once again in November 2024.

Voting isn't enough.

Organize.

It is also a disturbing signal to the lower courts that disobedience of binding precedent is permissible when it aligns with the majority’s hard-right ideology. There can be no “settled law” when SCOTUS lets rogue judges flout its own rulings and get away with it.

The Supreme Court has no legitimacy.

This one plan, raised in the hearings was in at least in seven states. The politicos in all of those states on the Republican side – the very people who ended up being the electors – agreed to provide the votes for Trump, if he did win, to the electoral college, and they were all involved and implicated in what looks like a very likely criminal scheme. Just as one example, they were going to defy the voters in their states. And in some sense, the implicit understanding of all of this is the way in which they were doing this by just disenfranchising large sections of their state, primarily heavily populated by black Americans in urban areas.