←back to thread

Wikipedia’s nonprofit status questioned by D.C. U.S. attorney

(www.washingtonpost.com)
767 points coloneltcb | 5 comments | 25 Apr 25 23:03 UTC | HN request time: 1.05s | source
Show context
mikeyouse ◴[25 Apr 25 23:34 UTC] No.43799467[source]▶
Remember when people pretended it was the scandal of all scandals that the IRS was reviewing PACs who were forbidden from doing political activity for political activity? And now many of those same people are cheering this, and the act blue ‘investigation’, and the threats against Harvard’s tax exempt status for nakedly corrupt reasons? Man I wish shame still had some stopping power.
replies(2): >>43799481 #>>43799553 #
nailer[dead post] ◴[25 Apr 25 23:36 UTC] No.43799481[source]▶
[flagged]
1. _DeadFred_ ◴[25 Apr 25 23:47 UTC] No.43799548[source]▶
Now imagine a sitting President personally saying 'the highest holders of my grift coin get a personal visit with me'. That would seem odd, wouldn't it?
replies(1): >>43799578 #
2. _DeadFred_ ◴[25 Apr 25 23:56 UTC] No.43799613[source]▶
Accusing others of whataboutism is a way to dodge the real point: if identical behavior is excused for allies but condemned for opponents, the outrage isn't about ethics it's about weaponized partisanship.

Edit in response: The broader conversation is about weaponizing government power against political opponents, ActBlue was just one example give in many being discussed. You narrowed to ActBlue to have something you felt you could condemn safely, while ignoring the larger pattern. That selective focus is the weaponization your argument is trying to distract from.

Edit: Stepping back and noting the pattern there is no need to go into specifics of ActBlue. Especially when this VERY administration is blatantly selling access with their shill coin. Your hyper focus is a weaponized distraction, a 'gotcha' from the larger discussion. The administration does not care about corruption in fundraising, they care about targeting their opposition and shutting down any influence they have via fundraising, via information/knowledge sharing on the web, via universities with students willing to challenge the status quo.

replies(1): >>43801210 #
3. Fauntleroy ◴[25 Apr 25 23:56 UTC] No.43799617[source]▶
You started this (soon to be flagged to nonexistence) chain with whataboutism.
replies(1): >>43799775 #
4. ◴[26 Apr 25 00:28 UTC] No.43799811{4}[source]▶
5. nailer ◴[26 Apr 25 05:42 UTC] No.43801210{3}[source]▶
While ActBlue was the first example mikeyouse bought up, and it happens not reflect very well on the Democrats, we can just as easily discuss Harvard racially discriminating and violating title 9 to control campus admissions, hiring and speech if you like.