If she disagrees with the plan, she better get the fuck off the Trump Train.

If you’re on a boat where there’s a mutiny, you can’t really be halfway in the mutiny but also hedging your bets saying you don’t agree with everything the mutineers are doing. The outcome is going to be one or the other.

I have no real idea with Navalnvy, and only dim memories of news reports about Magnitsky which went into a little more detail, but I’ll tell you how I assume it operates: It’s basically mistreatment to the point that it’ll kill you, just slowly. Your cell’s cold all the time, in the arctic winter with no blankets. You get bad food and bad sleep and beatings and no medical care of any kind. Once your body starts to malfunction (Magnitsky started having kidney failure), they go on beating you severely enough to cause additional organ damage, but then just continue to put you in your cell day after day with no medicine. Basically, you’re going to die, but they’re drawing the process out enough that it’s indirectly, because of “medical issues” related to what they’re doing to you, instead of just from blunt force trauma or something. So it’s incredibly painful and long and drawn-out, a slow death of constant suffering from which you can’t escape or get any relief.

Also he tried to kill his own vice president when he didn’t do what Trump wanted, committed multiple rapes, and said he is above the law.

I feel like that kind of thing should get mentioned more often whenever someone starts comparing candidates. It’s like that Batman comic where they elected The Joker mayor.

Not a map, but things I’ve seen on the roads in Boston:

• Left turn only from left lane, straight or left from 2nd lane, straight or left from 3rd lane
• Green light and perpendicular traffic coming to me on the cross street, also going, because they also have a green light
• Two lanes, surprise! Lane markers go away it’s one lane, not defined who yields, you guys can work it out

He’s just trying to help you, dude. lemmy.world is by far the biggest instance; 3x the users of the next biggest instance and much more than most. But, lemmy.world is also defederated from some notable instances like beehaw and hexbear. Another instance which also has in the tens of thousands of users (enough to be subscribed to “most stuff”) might well give you better search results.

You may decide that the defederated-from-here instances aren’t worth bothering with, with some justification, but you came in asking for help, he’s trying to help you, and you’re lecturing him about what’s what. 🙄

Lemmy.world has by far the most number of users. OTOH, it’s defederated from some notable instances, so you might be better off using one of the dedicated search sites if you want to cast the widest net.

I don’t even know about that, because instead of the article I got my App Store opened up demanding that I install Phantom Surfer Browser to protect me from viruses.

Not since late last year they’re not. They spent early 2023 winning back the north of the country, then had a summer counteroffensive which captured essentially 0 of the East, then over winter they got nothing in terms of the ammunition and weapons aid they’d need to have to fight against an opponent which can outproduce them 20:1. They’re now desperately trying to hold the front line even though after 3 months of nothing they’re basically out of ammunition.

The big aid packages out of the US and EU are stalled apparently indefinitely. There’s that little package from the UK which hopefully will help a little, but unless the GOP stops being compromised by Russia sometime soon, it seems like they might be in real trouble.

Whataboutism is shifting focus away from something person A did, by bringing some action by person B into it when it doesn’t belong.

Asking how a legal theory would apply in some other context, to highlight the absurdity of what the lawyer is saying because the answer would be absurd, is a very different thing.

I can see maybe saying it without the word “Biden” but focusing it on Trump would be better, yeah. E.g. asking if some other president would be allowed to murder his political rivals (specifically including Trump), without opening to door to complications. Obviously the answer is that Trump thinks he should have a special set of rules that don’t apply to anyone else, but the closer you can get to forcing his lawyer to explain out loud that that’s what they’re asking for seems like it’d be a good thing.

How on EARTH did the judge miss his chance to ask the obvious follow-up.

“Does this apply to Biden also? Can he murder his political rivals under your legal theory? Can he murder your client?”

“Why not?”

I think it’s fair to say that rape is not an official government position. I think it’s also fair to say that some instances of rape of Palestinians by Israeli forces have been part of the outcome of the occupation of Gaza.

My being honest about the idea that, in the light of what I currently understand, I probably wouldn’t include rape in my comment and only the other crimes, doesn’t mean it’s suddenly not happening, or that Israel’s not responsible for turning loose in Gaza a force of people who in addition to other atrocities seem to sometimes rape people.

Get all condescending about “reality” if you like. It’s still happening. Tell me it’s not.

I literally just now realized you’re probably right.

All crimes they’ve committed? Yes.

If you expect the mods to remove comments like mine, I think we’ve hit the crux of the disconnect between us. All good.

Have a good night as well.

Fair point

“Sir, you stand accused of kidnapping, felony theft, rape, murder, and arson. I’m going to have to take you away.”

“That a lie! I never stole anything!”

It’s definitely factual. That’s why I linked to some examples of rape. The occupying forces are committing rape. Want me to try to find more examples? Or do the same for occupation, killing, torture, and systematic dehumanization?

The fact that now that I’ve read up a little bit more, I think it’s genuinely pretty unfair to put that in there in the way that I did, and that context needs to be added, doesn’t change the fact that rape has occurred because of what Israel is doing in the Palestinian territories. It also doesn’t change the overall thesis of what my comment was in the slightest.

The wider point, that us being allowed to have this conversation is a good thing and that forbidding this conversation would be a bad thing, was more my point. I won’t claim to be perfect or right all the time, and I’ll be pretty honest about it if I learn something or realize I got something wrong. But if you want to talk about what Israeli forces are doing in Palestine I’m happy to do that and back up anything I’m saying or have said.

I’ll take your feedback under advisement.

Yes. I’m not irritated at how they found it. What I’m saying is, after it was reported, I’m irritated that they decided to remove it.

The mods are not required to remove comments that are reported. It’s their decision whether or not to.