Congressional Candidate Laura Loomer Banned from Stripe | Hacker News Reader

Congressional Candidate Laura Loomer Banned from Stripe

loomered.com

17 pointsfireeyed31 comments

She's a great illustration of why we need instant runoff voting.

She won the 2020 Republican Primary for the 21st district in Florida with 14526 votes out of 34156. That's 42.5%. The remaining vote was split among 5 other candidates (8724, 4194, 3221, 2421, 1070).

It is highly likely she would have lost to any one of them in a two person race, but because they split the vote you end up with a a situation where a majority would have preferred any other candidate to the one who won.

You can dislike her, not support her, that is your choice and it is it American way. Banning her from services and de-platforming is not something should be encouraged or supported. If you are justifying this, and saying she should find an alternative, then you should also support when people of faith refuse to service/do something that goes directly against their faith and conscious, for example.

Plus, if we are still in a Constitutional republic, and equal justice under the law is not just words, then the civil rights acts which were signed into laws all ban discrimination. If you ban today because someone is in the party you don't like then expect the same done to you, if one day, the shoe is on the other foot.

Societies depend on cultural morality as the first line of defense, and that’s arguably far more true in the US where the law is so blunt that it ought be the very last resort for remedy or justice.

By the time you need to sue you’re probably screwed. Our daily peace depends not on our ability to enforce the law, but on the contentment of our neighbors.

The people in the US either feel the fellowship in the air or they don’t.

She was also banned from CPAC, if you're looking to deem this "cancel culture" run amok.

Yes Loomer is horrible person. No body is contest that. Problem here is some person can not go and "build your own" payment provider. Digital world move money from a thing any person can use for any transaction with having no restirction to a thing only useble in some sanctioned capacitey or transaction.

Go find an alternative payments processor. They absolutely can and corporations should have some level of morality and actually ... stripe was made by a bunch of people who built their own payment processor. Last comment was a bit tongue and cheek.

No because it is vital for to have banking cooperation and this is not a thing anyone can do. Go and see problem with people who are selling pornography, it is very hard for such reasons as these. Point of cash is that no person can control, but cash no longer is always useable.

I am making edit now for this comment for I am unable to make another reply; excuse please.

nazi site has been in previous years banned from Visa and others: https://nypost.com/2017/08/16/credit-cards-are-clamping-down...

We have been see a progresing push to block whole financial backbone, yes. I am not having concern over this individual case but as a part of big trend. https://www.aier.org/article/financial-services-and-hate-spe...

Explicit material is a violation of MasterCard and VISA policies not the banking system as a whole. You can't really process online payments without the blessings of those two companies.

This situation is not comparable. She is not being restricted by anything in the financial backbone. She absolutely can go to another payment processor and they too could choose to refuse her. Eventually she may need to build her own payment processor, which she would be able to do... It'd just be expensive and time consuming.

I think the parties themselves should build their own payment platforms. Yes, expensive, but it would solve deplatforming.

Disagree. Individual companies can deplatform if they deem that person a risk. I do think there is a morality component to it. I do think they need to be clear about the rules of their platform and if you are in violation thats on you.

To other peoples comments, they have many other options to use payment processors out there.

She used her media credentials to go into the media area and harass reporters. That's a little different from what we're talking about here, so it's important to note.

The free market means that Laura Loomer is free to pick a new payment processor (there are many) or start a new competitor at any time. Don't even know why this is news.

You're being purposely obtuse and attempting to establish a reality that doesn't exist. One doesn't just "start" a new payment processor, nor is anyone "free" to do anything at this point in our history.

The payment industry is the opposite of a free market.

Stripe needs to look at legal action, if she thinks just because she's a politician she can violate an EULA then we have an obligation has citizens to make sure nobody is above the law.

I personally hate it when politicians break the law so it was disturbing to me she would be open about pressuring them to work for her against their own agreements.

EULAs are not law. They are an agreement between a business and a customer, and breaking them is wholly separate from breaking the law.

The US Dept. of Justice has determined that violating a website's terms of service is a felony under CFAA 1030(a)2(c).

Breaking EULA is considered a crime the same extremely broad way. It just depends on how rich/powerful you are if the district attorney in $venue can be bought and convinced to do your bidding. They don't normally enforce these things.

I'm not sure which way you're falling on this, but I'll take this whole thread as evidence that everyone is punitive.

I frankly don't believe the people who claim to hate the cops, all you have to do is present them with someone they detest and they reveal their lust for "the law", obscene punishment and violence.

And some EULAs contains clauses that are illegal in some jurisdictions and therefore cannot be enforced.

Stripe is a private company. If they don't like your brand of BS then they can boot you and should. Doesn't make them Nazis, makes them discerning.

I am agree with this. No person should be forced for to serve any customer. I am however concern about the concept that some person cannot transact busines over internet because of it. Some digital curency official from Fed would make a reduction in this.

You mean like restaurants opening and not requiring a mask? I mean if we're talking private companies that don't like your brand of BS....

Restaurants can be more careful than state/local health codes require. They cannot be less careful.

Stripe, similarly, can decide to boot an asshole off their platform. That's well within their legal rights. They cannot go the other direction - they can't opt to allow Iranian nationals to violate sanctions on Stripe, for example, or take donations for North Korea's nuclear program.

> Stripe, similarly, can decide to boot an asshole off their platform. That's well within their legal rights.

What's the legal definition of "an asshole?"

Can I just discriminate against my customers on the basis of some protected class and when asked just say "they're an asshole" and I don't wish to serve them.

> What's the legal definition of "an asshole?"

None is needed. "I believe you are an asshole" is sufficient, as long as that belief is not based on your membership in a protected class.

> Can I just discriminate against my customers on the basis of some protected class and when asked just say "they're an asshole" and I don't wish to serve them.

Yes, you've discovered the widely-used loophole.

It's not a perfect loophole if you draw attention for using it too much. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact

Literally who?

Notorios hater of Moslem and purveyer of conspiracy theory, a very bad person and no serious candidate for office, just is running to make point, I supose. For instances, she has been refusing for to use any taxi with Arabic driver.

In 2018 she chained herself to the front door of Twitter's New York offices while wearing a yellow star to protest being permanently banned from Twitter for hate speech against Ilhan Omar.

So she's just an all around terrible, toxic person. Doesn't surprise me she's been apparently banned from Stripe, CPAC and probably a bunch of other places.

She's probably most well known outside of far right social media for not properly maintaining her tires [1].

[1] https://jalopnik.com/theres-a-huge-ridiculous-twitter-fight-...

I see, she's a perennial victim

Reply on news.ycombinator.com