Douglass Mackey (aka "Ricky Vaughn") indicted, CONVICTED for political memes

[Anti Federalist]

Facing 10 years in prison...for writing what amounts to political cartoons.


Pro-Trump Meme Maker “Ricky Vaughn” Indicted For Using Twitter to ‘Spread Election Disinformation’ to Hillary Clinton Voters in 2016 – Faces 10 Years in Prison

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...-hillary-clinton-voters-face-10-years-prison/

By Cristina Laila

Published January 27, 2021 at 3:56pm

Twitter avatar used by “Ricky Vaughn”

A pro-Trump meme maker and Twitter troll was indicted Wednesday by the feds for using the social media platform to ‘spread election disinformation’ to Hillary Clinton voters in 2016.

“Ricky Vaughn” AKA, Douglass Mackey, used Twitter to post memes and troll Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential election cycle.

31-year-old Mackey was arrested in West Palm Beach on one charge of conspiracy against rights and faces up to 10 years in prison.

According to the unsealed indictment, Mackey conspired with others on Twitter to encourage black people to cast their votes via text message.

The Eastern District of New York said in its indictment that one week before the 2016 election, Mackey tweeted an image of a black woman in front of an “African Americans for President Hillary” sign.

Emblazoned on the picture was the message: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home. Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925. Vote for Hillary and be a part of history”

 

[dannno]

https://twitter.com/MarkDice/status/1354592776176824321

 

[jmdrake]

A) Did anybody actually fall for this tweet and try to vote for Hillary by text?

B) Babylon Bee should be afraid.

C) I agree with [MENTION=10908]dannno[/MENTION] that someone should do a direct presentment to a grand jury to indict Ms. Kristina Wong for the same thing. Direct presentment is a way a private citizen can get someone indicted without the aid of a prosecutor. You don't even have to be an attorney or use an attorney.

 

[Anti Globalist]

Fucking crazy. This is the kind of shit that happens in the UK.

 

[Anti Federalist]

C) I agree with [MENTION=10908]dannno[/MENTION] that someone should do a direct presentment to a grand jury to indict Ms. Kristina Wong for the same thing. Direct presentment is a way a private citizen can get someone indicted without the aid of a prosecutor. You don't even have to be an attorney or use an attorney.

I am intrigued by your ideas, and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Seriously though, what's this all about...tell me more...

 

[jmdrake]

I am intrigued by your ideas, and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Seriously though, what's this all about...tell me more...

It's a way to get around "prosecutoral discretion." Prosecutoral discretion is the idea that a prosecutor has the right not to prosecute. Witnesses could see a bank robbery happening in broad daylight and technically the DA doesn't have to prosecute. Supposedly political pressure would force the DA to prosecute all cases with merit because they could get voted out of office. But that doesn't always happen.

Here is the Tennessee statute: https://law.justia.com/codes/tennessee/2014/title-40/chapter-3/part-1/section-40-3-102/

In some states, such as Tennessee, any citizen can present information to a grand jury and the grand jury is required to look at it to see if a crime has been committed. The grand jury is made up of regular people just like the petite jury (what you normally see in courtroom dramas). This information is supposed to be posted in all court clerk's offices in Tennessee. A friend of mine who is a Ron Paul supporter, and believe it or not a democrat, used this to try to get an indictment against some politically powerful but corrupt individuals. The corrupt DAs office found a way around this by sending the rest of the grand jury home. My friend was fighting by himself and he didn't get far with it, but he at least forced the clerks office to post the information about direct presentment.

Another end run around prosecutoral discretion is to petition the court to appoint a prosecutor pro tempore. Here is a real word example from Utah.

https://dc.law.utah.edu/scholarship/134/

Abstract
This is a petition filed in the Utah Supreme Court on behalf of four women (Jane Does 1, 2, 3, and 4) who were sexually assaulted, and yet the public prosecutor with jurisdiction refused to file criminal charges against their attackers. The petition relies on Utah Constitution, article VIII, § 16, which anticipates situations where a crime victim might need her own avenue for initiating criminal prosecution. Accordingly, this constitutional provision provides that “f a public prosecutor fails or refuses to prosecute, the Supreme Court shall have power to appoint a prosecutor pro tempore.” Indeed, to underscore the fact that other ways to initiate a prosecution are available, the provision specifically states that public prosecutors in this state shall have the “primary responsibility” for prosecuting crimes. “Primary” responsibility is, of course, not the same as exclusive responsibility.

This petition explains why the Utah Supreme Court to use its power to appoint a prosecutor, both to bring justice for these four particular sexual assault victims and, more broadly, to help protect a class of victims – women and girls who have been sexually assaulted – who are under-protected by current prosecutorial practices in our country. The petition argues that the Court can address systemic under-prosecution of rape cases through its power under the Utah Constitution, not only under the Court-Appointed Prosecutor Provision, art. VIII, § 16, but also to protect rights contained in Utah’s Victims’ Rights Amendment, art. I, § 28, the Utah Uniform Operation of Laws Clause, art. I, § 24, and the Utah Equal Rights Provision, art. IV, § 1. It also has power to act through the federal Equal Protection Clause, U.S. Const., amend. XIV.

The petition concludes by asking for the Court to appoint a prosecutor to prosecute the sexual assaults committed against the four Jane Does.

That said, I just read the indictment of Ricky Vaughn and I see that it's a federal case. Presentment to a Federal Grand Jury was initially the law of the land, but apparently that was done away by fiat in 1946. I found this on the Fedbook page of the "Federal Presentment Restoration Society."

About

A non-political foundation handling the day-to-day operations to educate Americans and their legislators regarding traditional federal grand jury "presentment" power in facilitating federal office oversight, removed in 1946 by fiat - unconstitutionally.

Presentment is the action of a federal grand jury to inquire, ex mero motu, into federal malfeasance. Ex mero motu is Latin for "by its own whim."

This merits more investigation. If this process could be restored...the republic would be restored.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Facing 10 years in prison...for writing what amounts to political cartoons.


Pro-Trump Meme Maker “Ricky Vaughn” Indicted For Using Twitter to ‘Spread Election Disinformation’ to Hillary Clinton Voters in 2016 – Faces 10 Years in Prison

Wow, such harsh punishment over 1st amendment free speech rights?

If above reporting is not fakenews, this Dems admin admin could be seen as "GOP-Adelson admin on steroids".


Cartoonist banned from Trump White House over hate speech against top Obama donor
July 10, 2019
Cartoonist Ben Garrison has been disinvited from the White House Social Media Summit according to Politico Playbook.




Trump guts the First Amendment: signs Executive Order suppressing criticism of Israel

 

[Anti Federalist]

That said, I just read the indictment of Ricky Vaughn and I see that it's a federal case. Presentment to a Federal Grand Jury was initially the law of the land, but apparently that was done away by fiat in 1946. I found this on the Fedbook page of the "Federal Presentment Restoration Society."

And here I was, actually getting some hope up that maybe a loophole had been found.

LOL - How silly of me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't that result in any "citizen indictment" just being dropped and the charges reinstated by the feds?

 

[Anti Federalist]

Cartoonist banned from Trump White House over hate speech against top Obama donor

Not on the same level as going to prison for ten years.

Go slide someone else's thread.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

Not on the same level as going to prison for ten years.

That's exactly what I said:

If above reporting is not fakenews, this Dems admin admin could be seen as "GOP-Adelson admin on steroids".

Biden admin is showing that whatever Trump could do, they could super-alpha their moves and do it many magnitudes bigger.

Erosion of rights tends to be a slippery slope.

 

[jmdrake]

And here I was, actually getting some hope up that maybe a loophole had been found.

LOL - How silly of me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't that result in any "citizen indictment" just being dropped and the charges reinstated by the feds?

Well...the loophole is there for state cases. It might be possible to sue Ms. Kristina Wong civilly and cite the criminal statute and ask for an injunction against her. That doesn't carry the same weight as 10 years in prison...but it would be a propaganda victory. I looked up the statute Vaughn is being charged under:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Hmmmm...if conspiring to fool someone into not effectively casting his vote counts as an "injury" then all one needs to show is that Ms. Vaughn shared this tweet with liberal friends for them to share to Trump supporters.

Now, other concrete steps that could actually be taken.

A) I'm sure there are crimes happening in every state by corrupt officials and their cronies that could be brought forward through direct presentment where it's available.

B) We need to educate ourselves about what happened in 1946 and what needs to happen to undo that. Seriously I wouldn't have even looked into this if it weren't for this thread. (Pat yourself on the back).

C) We have to spread the word. Unfortunately that will be made more difficult thanks to the fallout from the January 6th antics. It would be great if people like Rand Paul, Mike Lee and Thomas Mackie were talking about this on the floor of the House and the Senate.

 

[Anti Federalist]

That's exactly what I said:

If above reporting is not fakenews, this Dems admin admin could be seen as "GOP-Adelson admin on steroids".

Biden admin is showing that whatever Trump could do, they could super-alpha their moves and do it many magnitudes bigger.

Erosion of rights tends to be a slippery slope.

I have a hard time deciphering anything you say.

 

[Anti Federalist]

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

Am I reading this correctly?

If I am, should Dorsey and Zuckerberg and all the rest of those assholes be afraid?

 

[jmdrake]

Am I reading this correctly?

If I am, should Dorsey and Zuckerberg and all the rest of those $#@!s be afraid?

Hmmmm.....maybe. Make your case. I know that a case could be made against Dorsey, Zuckerberg and actors at Google for violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act and that has criminal and civil penalties. Zuckerberg in the Section 230 hearings had to address the whistleblower allegations that Facebook, Google and Twitter shared information about who to deplatform.

https://nypost.com/2020/11/17/zuckerberg-grilled-on-claim-of-facebook-collab-with-google-twitter/

Here is the relevant language from the Sherman Anti Trust Act.

15 U.S. Code § 1 - Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty

Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.

I would say that conspiring to take people off of social media platforms who were selling things off of those social medial platforms is a prima facia case for a "conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States." And note that they could spend 10 years in a Federal prison over this.

But everything I've read about the current anti-Trust case against Facebook is all about their acquiring WhatsApp and Instagram. That's well and good, but it doesn't bring up the de-platforming issue. And the push to repeal Section 230 would affect websites like this one. People are barking up the wrong tree. Somebody needs to file an antitrust lawsuit against Facebook, Twitter and Google. It needs to be someone who got de-platformed, preferably off of multiple platforms, in order to have standing.

I've talked about the Sherman Anti-Trust act over and over again but sadly few people seem to be listening and nobody on the national stage (that I know of) has suggested using the Sherman Antitrust Act against de-platforming.

 

[tod evans]

Justice will not be found in their courts.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Arrested for a MEME? Lawyer Explains - Viva Frei Vlawg

It actually happened. Someone in the U.S. has been arrested for a meme. Here's the breakdown of Douglass Mackey, arrested for election interference resulting from memes.

https://rumble.com/vdd493-arrested-for-a-meme-lawyer-explains-viva-frei-vlawg.html

 

[phill4paul]

Justice will not be found in their courts.

Well, we've been saying it since this forums was founded. It's been never more evident. So what now?

 

[tod evans]

Well, we've been saying it since this forums was founded. It's been never more evident. So what now?

Those willing to extract justice must take it upon themselves.

Then they must be prepared to defend themselves from those who would withhold said justice.

It's a huge gamble but when a man is pushed into fight or flight he must choose.

 

[phill4paul]

Those willing to extract justice must take it upon themselves.

Then they must be prepared to defend themselves from those who would withhold said justice.

It's a huge gamble but when a man is pushed into fight or flight he must choose.

O.K. So it is personal?

If one loses their job it is solely on that individual to enact "justice."

For example, [MENTION=1866]AntiFederalist[/MENTION], just lost his job, and so did his shipmates, and tens of thousands others, but because I live in the Piedmont of N.C. I should really pay no heed because it does not affect me, other than a rise in my gas prices and grocery bills.

Since the petroleum fuel industry powers the country shouldn't "do nothing" sympathizers just do our part and bring the whole grid down so that those, living in their cities and supporting the bullshit, lose their jobs.

If I lost my job because of Biden, I'd wreck the power grid in my area. All companies/businesses closed. Let's ALL feel the pain.

 

[tod evans]

O.K. So it is personal?

If one loses their job it is solely on that individual to enact "justice."

For example, [MENTION=1866]AntiFederalist[/MENTION], just lost his job, and so did his shipmates, and tens of thousands others, but because I live in the Piedmont of N.C. I should really pay no heed because it does not affect me, other than a rise in my gas prices and grocery bills.

Since the petroleum fuel industry powers the country shouldn't "do nothing" sympathizers just do our part and bring the whole grid down so that those, living in their cities and supporting the bullshit, lose their jobs.

If I lost my job because of Biden, I'd wreck the power grid in my area. All companies/businesses closed. Let's ALL feel the pain.

Personal or not isn't really the issue in order to extract justice......Anyone can for any reason.

Where it becomes personal is when their "Just-Us" system comes for the person who sought justice outside of their control.

It'll get bloody quickly.

Whether or not "do nothing sympathizers" band together is not something to discuss using 1's-n-0's, there are government sympathizers in every little town and on every digital means of communication, hell I'm reading articles about kids turning in parents!

Anything substantive will take community, in person discreet community, and even then the risk it total...........But so is the reward.

My gut says when things go off neither coast is going to fare well, my gut also says folks out here in the sticks are prone to support small/anti-government factions over the big-gov factions but we'll have our own battles with government sympathizers in our midst.

100 miles is too close to a major (200k) city in my opinion.