The latest misinformation revirberating around the right wing sound chamber

That's the pity in me.

 

Soros is a naturalized US citizen, since 1961. Just saying.

 

Sure it would, even a minute long reflection would.
I do understand your point. I just disagree with how you worded it and claimed, 'democrats like bide', as if only democrats like biden benefit.

Does that reflection help your understanding. I could take a month and try to explain it. But I doubt it would make a difference.

 

Fair enough.

I don't think that changes the dynamics of my position though. I did not bring Soros into this conversation, I merely responded to his inclusion. My position is that I do not oppose him being able to express himself, certainly not from a legal perspective.

He is free to say whatever he wants, and people that dislike him are free to express their opinion as well. I support free speech, and that support has not one thing to do with a belief that free speech ( in the form of corporations or unions in this case) somehow benefits my side. It seems to me that whom it benefits is a toss up, and the true winner is the American public that remains free to express itself outside of government interference.

 

No, you didn't get my point. Maybe this will help you: ". . . many democrats (like Biden). . ." Now contrast that with what I was responding to.

 

Without spending any more time researching this, succinctly, the point is "free speech" is a Constitutional right of people. Citizens United gave corporations the right of free speech, part of that right being unrestrained corporate contributions.

 

Well, one thing is sure you contribute full value ... free == nothing.

 

Invoking Soros' name by using what is essentially a tangential connection to Bragg is one of the many ways Trump is trying to de-legitimize the investigation and indictment. Doing so helps him avoid denying the undeniable evidence regarding the hush money payment to Daniels and the apparent document fraud felonies.

 

Again democrats getting mad about the truth being told.

 

I don't need to. Soros gave money to a PAC, then the PAC gave the money to Bragg.

 

Corporations are made up of people, and those people have the right to free speech.

Citizens United overturned parts of Mcain/Feingold Campaign Finance Reform. What happened after Mcain Feingold was that all of that money simply transferred to 527 spending (Think Swiftboaters). After Citizens United that same amount of money no longer went to 527's and instead went to the candidates themselves as before Mcain Fengold. The difference is procedural. A technicality.

Mcain Feingold did not lessen money spent on campaigns, it merely switched the procedure required to spend that money. One can have the best of intentions, but the reality is that same amount of money is still going to have the same influence over politicians, the only question is how it is delivered. IN the big picture, if it goes to private issues advertising,private candidate advocacy or to the candidates themselves, it is the exact same end result. Money influences political opinion and it influences politicians. Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

Do you accept it is likely, given how Soros' money found its way to Bragg, that Bragg could have been completely unaware his campaign received money from Soros indirectly?

 

Yes, I seen that, democrats like biden, when the post you responded to said trump found how how great politics were due to how much he makes in donations.

How does democrats or biden relate to how trump figured out how lucrative donors can be?

 

PACs give money to all sorts of candidates.
It's how the bribe system works, for both parties.

 

Comparison.

 

Comparison would be most all politicians in both parties become enriched by politics, not just democrats, like biden.

 

Except, the post that I was responding to only mentioned ONE politician -- Trump (a Republican -- singular). My comparison highlighted the absurdity of his comment.

 

That post also mentioned trump benefitted from donations. Not just being a politician.
trump claims to be rich before being a politician.

 

I'm sure you have a point, but I neither get it, nor care to.

 

I know you don't. They are your posts.

 

Oh, ok.