The US is too good at destroying people's reputation, yeah. This guy is gonna get vilified hard (whether he did it or not).
winterayars
joined 2 years ago
But if also a cornerstone. (For better and worse--it got and still gets used to excuse people who commit hate crimes, for example.)
It is actually legal. It's built directly from the laws and kind of a necessary component if you want jury trials to actually work and not just be a kangaroo court. People just don't like it.
Critically, the elites want this "solved" asap.
Bebop could be pretty fire.
Russia fucking sucks but this, at least, is true. (The West sucks too, don't get me wrong. I ain't going to Russia but i will use their search engine.)
...Yes. Whoops! Edited.
Dude, it's been 25 years of fascist creep in the US government. How much longer do you want to wait before "Jump[ing] to conclusions"?
So uh.
If, say, hypothetically, a hypothetical shooter of a hypothetically monstrously terrible hypothetical person--let's say, hypothetically, a health care ceo--i would hypothetically be really considering my options in terms of what decision i would make about the case.
Technically they didn't fully rescind it. They rescinded it in some places but not others, and for some patients but not others. It's just PR, they have no intention of actually changing things.
Elections were the deal. We'd vote for representatives and abide by their decisions rather than, y'know, killing people in the streets to change society.
When elections can't change society, though. When the deal is broken, it's back to the old ways.
Maybe interpol doesn't know China is straight up kidnapping people of the street in foreign (non-China) countries? Maybe they want to do something about that?
No?
Okay, then. Of course they're prioritizing someone downloading some jpgs, why would i think differently?