Comments by "" (@shamrock141) on "LegalEagle" channel.

  1. There's definitely a case to be made about transparency. Loads of schmucks will sit about and blame the deceased for this but I'd be willing to bet they don't know a tenth of the information of what they consume At the end of the day this kind of information should be accessible, either through labeling on the packaging, or a more accurate marketing campaign
    124
  2. As an Irishman living in the UK I've always had a fascination about border policy and how the EU works with it, as well as being around to see how Brexit panned out, and I really think any kind of secession would be catastrophic for the US Ordinary people, including myself, really don't see the mountains of legislative work that goes into territorial borders are enforced and the negotiations surrounding resources and people moving in and out The only result that would happen from California or Texas or any state with a land border in the US would be major economic turmoil, inflation and decreaed standards of living. The amount of expensive bureaucracy alone would be catastrophic
    22
  3. He also owns quite a bit of Tesla stock, funny that he's presiding over a case with Musk
    12
  4. You didn't check twitter then
    8
  5. Funny, I would say that claiming you have complete immunity while serving as POTUS is more akin to fascism
    5
  6. It's your duty to be honest in court, the plaintiff's lawyers requested anything to do with Sandyhook from his phone and it's his ethical responsibility to submit that to the court It's like telling the truth, loads of people don't do it, but it's the law and if you get caught lying you're in big trouble
    4
  7. Twitter is a privately owned corporation subject to the whims of Musk. The idea that he's creating the 21st century town square is beyond ridiculous when you consider that the fact that he's fine with race replacement theory videos, but will absolutely ban the word "cisgender" and journalists critical of him. He's no free speech absolutionist, it's just his speech that matters to him
    4
  8. They don't have the money to fight a lawsuit against the richest man in the world
    3
  9. Garm only told their members not to advertise, they fall under their umbrella of business operations and decisions. That's completely legal, it's the whole point GARM was set up
    3
  10.  @seanhartel5362  naw you see those tweets were sent out after riot already took place, I meant the ones claiming election fraud, culminating in his speech urging people to march on the Capitol
    3
  11. A non-profit disbands after a multi-billion dollar company drags them through expensive litigation, I'm shocked. It also seems like the first amendment doesn't matter to republicans when it's about people who don't want to do business with you
    3
  12. It's going to be, Musk announced it yesterday
    3
  13.  @CountKoski  and that smaller audience is less likely to wrought harassment and mockery on the victims' families Describing Alex Jones' attacks on the characters of these people as "inconsequential" is blatantly false, because as we've seen people will believe what he says and they will harass, stalk and threaten these poor families who have already lost their children and now have to suffer a madman's indignation at a state, with them as his scapegoat So while you may call this litigation "greed", I call it justice, and I'd do the same thing if some asshat had the nerve to frame me if my son or daughter had been murdered
    3
  14. I see your point but in the modern world do you not think it's more appropriate to discipline your children by withholding privileges. So much of what we grow up with now we're luxuries a generation ago, and it would be good to remind a disobedient child of that. I also think that withholding privileges will stem any sense of entitlement, as the child quickly comes to term with the fact that their luxuries are not guaranteed, and it can resemble real life, as in the real world the most common consequence for shitty behaviour is professional and social rejection and
    3
  15. It's a win for him, but Garm was a non-profit setup by the WFE to standardise ads between companies. Nothing about them will change, essentially Elon squashed a bug but it won't bring back any advertisers
    2
  16. That's your perception don't forget
    2
  17. What did they blackmail him with?
    2
  18.  @pafnutiytheartist  there is a vast difference between being served tea in a mug by a waiter at a restaurant and someone handing you a thin, cheap paper cup with extremely hot coffee through 2 windows. Take away cups are extremely flimsy and break apart easily
    2
  19. ​ @GM_Neo  if Fox was so sure of their innocence they wouldn't have settled, let alone paying out 785 million dollars This is very clear evidence that Fox doesn't believe their own story and is just pushing it to satiate its viewers. Whatever your opinions on MSM in general this is not good for Fox's transparency
    2
  20.  @Aisaaax  where do you recall Congress saying that? A company choosing not to pay for services from another company because they don't agree to their services being linked to messages of race replacement theory or pro-adolf, man I wonder how that's going to pan out in court. I find it astonishing that you want to force companies to do business with a social media company that flaunts its unwillingness to moderate extremism. The advertisers of Snickers have no interest in relating their product to political speech, it segregates them from another massive sect of the market, but Elon does, and he wants to force everyone to play by his rules.
    2
  21. Trump invited a deadly terrorist attack on the capitol after losing an election, it's no wonder he was banned when he used twitter to spread that message. He didn't even get a slap on the wrist, how is that in any way similar to what people like Navalny were treated by Putin
    2
  22. Doubtful, when there are documents in black and white writing stating companies being able to use his complete likeness for no cost and no signature from him, that's sketchy as all hell
    2
  23. Would a poorer defamer have the audience Jones has?
    2
  24. I don't think it's legal for a president to become vice president after his two terms
    2
  25. Yes because in America it is cheaper and more convenient to declare bankruptcy or settle than it is to fight a case against a mega corporation.
    2
  26. How is it an illegal trust?
    2
  27. They don't have to pay for your services, they aren't silencing your voice or restricting it, they just don't want to be associated with it and the so called "free speech absolutionist" has a problem with that lol
    2
  28. Advertisers don't want tweets supporting Hitler or the great race theory on their ads? Shocking
    2
  29. You have no idea what the current conditions are do you?
    2
  30.  @agw5425  you are removed from reality, all I see talking is spiteful bitterness You complain about how writers used to make residuals, saying no other jobs do that, when that is blatantly a lie. A salesman makes a base salary and a commission on top of that based on how many sales he makes, his final salary is partially dependent on his performance. A book writer makes base pay from a publisher when he releases a book, and makes royalties beyond that is based on how many books he sells, with the publisher expecting a certain threshold to be reached This is basic knowledge, many jobs offer bonuses or royalties based on performance and for a TV or movie writer it should be the same, any company making profit on showcasing a show or movie should be paying residuals, that's how cable has worked for decades, but not how streaming works Moreover it's utterly insulting to tell people who've invested years or decades into a career to just get another job, is that what you told minors who striked for better working conditions, to just quit if they didn't like it? Well if everyone had that sentiment we wouldn't have experienced career professionals, how would you like your toilet to be fixed by an apprentice who's only worked 5 months because he hasn't been sick of his job once in his life
    2
  31. Victims.
    1
  32. Offering someone money or gifts to vote or to register to vote is a federal crime. The lottery is connected to a petition that requires people to submit their voter registration number, that can be argued as incentivising people to register to vote for financial rewards
    1
  33.  @Thefinetime  there is, registered voters in certain swing states are offered money to sign the petition. The most lucrative is in Pennsylvania, where they are being offered $100 to sign the petition.
    1
  34. Yeah many countries allow it, it's still gross though
    1
  35.  @taiwanisacountry8221  it literally creates dysfunctional genes
    1
  36.  @taiwanisacountry8221  by that logic brother and sister could marry, and if you think incest like that is normal then jesus I don't what to tell you
    1
  37.  @taiwanisacountry8221  I notice you never actually rebutted my point, so I'll ask you again. Would you see it as normal for a brother and sister to marry and have sex
    1
  38. They blocked a guy who was voted out of office and proceeded to incite a riot on the capitol that ended up killing people and beating them, he used twitter to incite an act of terrorism, they were right to boot him
    1
  39. You mean like Diddy's good friend Trump
    1
  40.  @alekseyburrovets4747  that's not what blackmail means Aleksey. And yes a company that pays for a service has the right to ask for a set of conditions of how that service operates, Elon disagrees so they refuse the service. Now Elon is trying to use big government to force them, so much for the free speech absolutionist
    1
  41. Dude you sound paranoid. The police aren't out to get you
    1
  42. Paying people to register to vote is a federal crime
    1
  43. Garm told its members not to advertise on twitter, that was the whole point it existed. It was set up to standardise advertising conditions for WFE member companies. It's members created this company to tell them whether or not to advertise, and when they accepted its recommendation suddenly Musk is crying foul play
    1
  44. Trump was banned after he incited an act of terrorism on the capitol that ended up killing people after he was voted out of office, and used twitter to spread that message, they were right to ban his ass. Biden is the current POTUS and has noticeably not incited acts of terrorism on US soil
    1
  45. What you consider lies is not a federal crime
    1
  46. True however that information should be available on the cup, not by looking it up on a website, out of sight is so often out of mind
    1
  47.  @pirateadam3686  you are quite right, I feel though that irrespective of the outcome of this particular lawsuit that Panera will take a more cautious approach, after all they can't sell their products if people distrust them I feel for the family, but even if the lawsuit doesn't work at least everyone else will be better off if the regulations change or Panera changes their policies
    1
  48. ​ @andrenutbrown2284  yes it does, we all have eyes. You have to submit your contact details and voter registration to America PAC to sign the petition, which is staunchly pro-Trump, otherwise why would this offer only be in swing states
    1
  49. Hilarious, Elon is the big dollar corporation trying to shape the world in his own image. He's got a social media company that completely promotes his political views, two massive companies leveraging money from the government and convincing them to build his brand of infrastructure, he's trying to shape the world in his own image. GARM had jurisdiction over their members, and told their members not to advertise on twitter as it violated their guidelines on acceptable content to advertise. Elon took offense and sued
    1
  50. Garm was a voluntary non-profit, they had zero power over the 100 multi+million and multi-billion dollar companies that were members, but these companies chipped in because of course they don't want their ads associated with extremist rhetoric. Yeah Garm shut down because it's not worth a protracted legal battle with the wealthiest man on Earth, you think advertisers are going to flock back to twitter now that they're gone? No, they'll just create another non-profit with the same vision in mind if need be and stick to their guns
    1
  51. The candidate doesn't matter, paying or offering someone something to register to vote is a federal crime, and the petition requires you to be a registered voter. It's an obvious loophole
    1
  52. 2.5% profit each from a 300 billion dollar movie is not "little if any money"
    1
  53. What anti-trump stuff?
    1
  54.  @undeadarmy19  I reiterate I don't see any anti-trump allegations in this video, saying it's more prevalent in other videos doesn't make sense because are you commenting that here? Additionally even if he has distaste for trump why is that a problem? It's simply his opinion. You quite obviously have a distaste for Democrats and so be it, that's your opinion to have just like he has a right to his opinion
    1
  55.  @undeadarmy19  jesus... are you actually saying an off handed comment to a named individual was actually meant for trump? Dude you're just trying to dig up bias at this point Additionally why do you use the term "jumped on the bandwagon" you don't know if he had these opinions before he voiced them and I seriously doubt he's using those opinions to get clicks because politics always divides a viewer base Dude just don't get worked up over this it's not worth the time or stress
    1
  56.  @undeadarmy19  the point is what you consider to be anti-trump is so broad it's difficult not to find as well as the fact that law and politics go hand in hand it's unavoidable
    1
  57.  @pudgenet  well Musk announced his intention to do so back in March so it's been a while coming, but yeah it hasn't happened yet
    1
  58. Yes, voting for someone for the policies they are proposing after they get elected is not the same as being offered money to vote before they are elected.
    1
  59. Doesn't matter, paying people to vote is a federal crime
    1
  60.  @kylehendricks422  neither of us know what they offered, or how their relationship progressed, what we do know is Oher is in a conservatorship where his likeness was sold that bore him no reward whatsoever, where the Tuohys have legal authority to make whatever decisions they want on his behalf and that he is unhappy with the situation I understand wanting to wait for all the facts, but if you think he had all of the relevant facts relayed to him in a transparent, non biased manner when he was asked to sign legal documents, I would seriously doubt that
    1
  61. Garm was not an advertising conglomerate, it was a voluntary non-profit and what blackmail exactly? I take it you have evidence
    1
  62. His latest video is on Mr Beast and he has most certainly shit talked Logan Paul before
    1
  63.  @maciekskontakt  eliminate them how? What power does GARM have over X, and how is refusing to purchase X's services eliminating their freedom of expression
    1
  64.  @TBaggins87  advertisers have conditions about what kind of content they want to be associated with their ads, they are paying for a service and expect it to follow safe guidelines. Garm was set up to standardise those guidelines, standards Elon disagrees with so they left. That should be the end of it, they disagree on business so they don't do business, but instead Elon is trying to use a judge that owns stock in his company to force them to come back and pay him to advertise.
    1
  65. Not at all, the replacement theory states that the elite must be complicit in and encourage it, but the Irish emigrated out of necessity due to the famine and were treated with great suspicion and bigotry throughout much of the US for a time, including systematically.
    1
  66. You can't force anyone to advertise on a system that promotes highly controversial political rhetoric. If these advertiser's can prove that their ads were being shown next to pro-adolf and critical race theory tweets they absolutely have a right not to do business with twitter. Boycotting is not suppressing free speech, it is exercising your own
    1
  67. Paying or offering someone something to vote is a federal crime, regardless of the candidate
    1
  68. ​ @pointmaker8833 you have to be a registered voter to sign the petition, it's essentially just a loophole. In order to enter the giveaway you must register or be registered to vote and give America-PAC your contact details
    1
  69. Where?
    1
  70. Because you have to submit your contact details and voter registration to America PAC, which is staunchly pro-Trump
    1
  71. It's actually not. Paying or offering someone something to vote or register to vote, regardless of the candidate, is a federal crime
    1
  72.  @dratrav  the petition giveaways are only for registered voters, one can easily make the case that it induces voter registration. The petition asks for your contact details and voter registration number, which is sent to America PAC, if they're checking the numbers written on the petitions they can easily check the validity of a voter registration number and filter those signatories for prizes
    1
  73. Ironically if SBF had plead guilty they'd all be serving a just amount of time behind bars, but no the spectacle requires just one man to take the hit, hopefully coverage doesn't get quiet on the co-conspirators
    1
  74. Exactly, but they're not marketing it as a combined red bull and monster, they're marketing it like a fun, refreshing drink. Red Bull doesn't sell their cans in litre sizes, neither should Panera
    1
  75. He will, with those billions gone the people want their pound of flesh and the politicians will desperately want to distance themselves from him. The real issue is that no one is going to fight as hard to get that money back or get his co-conspirators imprisoned
    1