• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      586 months ago

      That’s assuming they don’t make the death-penalty terrorism charge stick… which they will in a heartbeat.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            36 months ago

            The minions of the wealthy hate anything that impedes them from executing the will of their masters.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          46 months ago

          I don’t see them letting it come to that. They’ll pick jury members of which they are 100% sure they won’t do jury nullification.

          Remember, the whole system is behind getting him charged.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              26 months ago

              Do you really think there’s no way for the combined power of the state & capital to influence jury selection? That feels like a very naive take.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  16 months ago

                  No, I think I understand it well enough to also understand that the system isn’t perfect.

                  For example, the same system that is trying to get him charged is also responsible for producing the jury pool. Coincidentally, the same system regularly buys data about its citizens from big tech companies, like social media. The same social media on which plenty of people publicly commented on the case.

                  Unless the defense is literally involved in every step of the process (starting from voter registration), there’s no way to be sure that the jury pool is actually unbiased.

                  Now, hopefully I’m wrong about this, and you can show me specifically how we can be absolutely sure that the jury pool is completely unbiased. But I don’t think that you’ll be able to do so without implicitly relying on the same system that is being defended against.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                16 months ago

                The defense has the right to pick half the jury - and defense lawyers are usually very serious about defending their clients and getting the best possible outcome. They’re going to pick the most favorable jurists they can.

                IMO he got over charged and they state is gonna learn the hard way that their strategy of making an example of him will backfire.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  16 months ago

                  Please see my reply to the other comment - you’re assuming the pool of jurors contains enough people that would consider nullification. As far as I’m aware, the defense has no influence on this pool itself. So how do you know that the jurors the defense can choose from are actually randomly selected?

                  It’s pretty much a given that the state knows your opinion on jury nullification if you’ve ever publicly posted about it. Hell, based on the Snowden leaks there’s a good chance they know it if you’ve ever mentioned it over e.g. the telephone. How can you be sure that this knowledge isn’t used to bias the jury pool?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          36 months ago

          I haven’t heard about it at all. Not a once. I would never talk about it during a jury selection process either.

    • Pennomi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      196 months ago

      If that happened, it would light the fire even hotter. They need him convicted, not assassinated.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        116 months ago

        Yep. Also people liked JFK. They don’t like insurance CEO. So you can sell the idea that jack ruby was a good guy.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    225
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Whenever he gets cheers and applause in a news comedy show, the host always looks uncomfortable. You can almost see the leash of their corporate overlords being tugged.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1756 months ago

      I mean, it’s not just that. it’s legal liability. part of the reason they charged him with terrorism is to tie any show of support to a crime as well. supporting him is like supporting al-qaeda now. so I ask you, DO YOU CONDEMN HUMMUS? DO YOU CONDOM MORDOR OF CEOS?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        276 months ago

        It is perfectly legal to advocate for illegal activity. The first amendment has broad protections for this. SCOTUS has ruled on this even recently. You need to be able to advocate for illegal activity if you want people to have any chance to change the law.

        It is perfectly legal to come right out on national television and say, “Luigi did nothing wrong. The president and governor should pardon him, and the mayor of NYC should throw him a parade.”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          226 months ago

          lol… those who remember the 2000s know that’s all out the window if the government says anything is terrorism.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            266 months ago

            The right to free speech and the right to peaceably assemble hasn’t been respected at any point during US history.

            Not immediately after the country was formed when they signed the sedition act into law.

            Not while people were protesting for abolitionism.

            Not while people were protesting for women’s suffrage.

            Not while people held demonstrations while on strike.

            Not during the cold war and red scare.

            Not during the civil rights movement.

            Not during the George Floyd protests.

            They’re not going to start now.

        • RamenJunkie
          link
          fedilink
          36 months ago

          Like the incoming Christo Gestapo crew will give a shit about that when they start rounding up potential “wrong thinkers”

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        16 months ago

        Didn’t Hillary Clinton stated in one of those leaked mails that AQ was with the US or something?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        306 months ago

        Also, lets not forget who will be president soon… Trump and his fellows have hinted at going after fake news media before. Going after terrorism supporting fake news media is even easier.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          546 months ago

          For the longest time, people thought “terrorism” meant “very evil,” so now that someone who isn’t evil is being labeled a terrorist, they are upset.

          In reality, if you try to change politics with violence against a civilian, you are a terrorist.

          “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              26 months ago

              I think they’d technically be classified as insurgents/rebels because they mostly/exclusively fired upon the military as far as I know.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                4
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                as far as I know.

                Well, it’s time to brush up a bit before commenting, then, huh?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  16 months ago

                  Do you thoroughly recheck every topic before you make a comment? Must be exhausting.

                  That or you’re a hypocrite. Up to you.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              106 months ago

              You don’t engrave a message on casings unless you’re sending a message to the living.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                46 months ago

                That’s an incredibly flimsy argument. People have been writing messages on ammo since ammo existed. There’s not even an established pattern of terrorists writing on ammo - they’re more likely to claim credit for an attack after the fact and include their message there.

                Those were words for him. Deny and defend this, mother fucker.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  16 months ago

                  You assert my argument is flimsy, yet your argument is that someone is going to be able to read the casings popping out of a guy’s gun shooting at him from behind?

                  Lol. Lmao, even.

              • AnyOldName3
                link
                fedilink
                26 months ago

                The company’s other employees are, at time of writing, still living, so sending a message to the living doesn’t mean it’s not solely revenge.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            116 months ago

            That’s not what the law in NY actually says. It’s not merely that you’re trying to change government policy through violence. It’s that you’re trying to do it through intimidating government employees. The prosecutor screwed the pooch on this one. Luigi didn’t actually meet the terrorism modifier requirements in NY. At least that’s what I got from Legal Eagle.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              36 months ago

              Interesting. I thought his terrorism charges were the federal ones?

              Either way this will be a hell of a case.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                26 months ago

                No he got NY terrorism charges and murder charges in NY and federally and then federal gun charges iirc

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              46 months ago

              As a side note, legal eagle is available on nebula.tv with no ads. I think the first episode is free, and then the service is $36/year, with more of that going to who you watch.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            76 months ago

            It certainly causes more terror, but mostly just with the rabble, not the ultra wealthy who actually matter.

    • Øπ3ŕ
      link
      fedilink
      English
      46 months ago

      Not all “news comedy”, FWIW — though I think you were referring to Faux “News”, Twatter, FB, MSNBC, et al.

      That’s not the expression in those moments. Take another, longer look.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      276 months ago

      It’s also just the purview of the liberal elite. So rich and far removed from society they think murdering someone makes you evil and there’s never any reason to do it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        126 months ago

        They obviously don’t have a problem with murder (they have a murder problem!) unless it’s one of them receiving the murdering

      • Apathy Tree
        link
        fedilink
        English
        28
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Meanwhile our media is absolutely jam packed with freedom fighters and underdogs and man against the system… ultra gore.

        So like idk what message the elites have been getting out of the media but the really popular stuff is always the stuff that speaks to the masses… and feels relatable.

        So sitcoms and… horror dystopia, yep.

  • Trailblazing Braille Taser
    link
    fedilink
    33
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I’m too old to know the four notes from the Hunger Games, so I substitute my own: 🎼 you ♩ must ♩ use ♩ the ♩ force ♩

    Shit, that was five notes.

  • comfy
    link
    fedilink
    5
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Eugene V. Debs will always be my favorite imprisoned candidate. Respectable vote count too, given their situation.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    106 months ago

    The problem is that the guy would be a third party candidate, which means he would get treated as a sinkhole for the voters of the opposite party. This would work specially well for the GQP since they could just have a candidate adopt his ideology, throw a lot of money into news, media, and rallies to trump up support, and then easily turn around and just not fulfill it when they win. Meanwhile, there will be plenty of people in the other side of the flawed bipartisan system who will just blame democrats for not choosing their third party candidate regardless of the actual consequences voting third party has in USA’s democratic facade of a system.

    • Captain Aggravated
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Every single thing I know about the Hunger Games comes from this video and I bet I know what four notes they mean.

      Also, is Colm’s fiancee there actually American? I don’t know how well an Irish girl would have faked “sahd bah sahd wid’ mae.”

  • @[email protected]M
    link
    fedilink
    276 months ago

    Remember remember!

    The 4th of December

    A CEO dies all alone;

    On the street he was lain,

    cold, pale and in pain,

    thousands of deaths that he own.

    The decisions he’d struck,

    Layers removed from the slaughter,

    Were a shareholders treat,

    Your dead mother or daughter.

    Those investors all wait, on that cold winter morn,

    Still unaware of profit potential they’d mourn,

    Poking at hotel breakfast, bored looks on their face

    As Brian’s when he denied and delayed at great pace

    Endless growth, deposed, on behalf of us all

    Luigi didn’t do it, we were hiking in Nepal.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    46 months ago

    He should get all sorts of leanency and considerations based on the election cycle and media image.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    426 months ago

    Just pointing out if an insurance office shuts down for the day then no claims are getting approved.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        56 months ago

        Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16% and UnitedHealth denies double that at 32%, so that means the vast majority of claims are approved even for the worst examples.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Right right right, but that’s more than zero. That’s tens of millions more cases than zero. We need to understand every action, or inaction, will have consequences to make the best possible decisions. Some users are advocating armed violence against the offices that would be allocating funding for healthcare, not even the CEOs but the actual workers at the company, it is each of our responsibilities to weigh the pros and cons and examine all of our options to solve these problems.

            Theres no easy way. It’s not as simple as pushing a button or pulling a trigger.

          • Queen HawlSera
            link
            fedilink
            English
            166 months ago

            This, I’m tired of the 1% saying we “Just want free stuff”, like we’re demanding Xboxes and snazzy T-Shirts with pictures of [Insert Profitable Brand Here]

            We’re asking for the systems we actively maintain (often against our will and under threat of homelessness, starvation, and death I remind you) to do anything for us.

            • Venia Silente
              link
              fedilink
              English
              26 months ago

              We’re asking for the systems we actively maintain (often against our will and under threat of homelessness, starvation, and death I remind you) to do anything for us.

              WHAT? But the profits!

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              86 months ago

              I wish it were only the 1% saying bullshit like that, but sadly it seems the majority of voters are sold on the idea.

              • Queen HawlSera
                link
                fedilink
                English
                66 months ago

                Yes, but once they realize that THEY themselves are the Welfare Queens that the GOP they will wake the fuck up…

                I’m kidding, I’ve ran into several “The Government needs to keep its hands off my Medicare!” and “Where was Uncle Sam when I was on Food Stamps!?!”

                And they never take “The Government runs Medicare. This is like asking McDonalds to get their hands off of your Big Mac.” and “He was the gentleman giving you the food stamps” for valid answers.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  1
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  It’s been 14 years, I don’t think they’re going to wake up unless we go door to door explaining how the GOP has been voting and the projected results of the legislatures.

                  Example: “The government spends more on medical because of privatized care than if they simply distributed funds directly. Insurance companies pay all of their employees and CEOs on profits taken from people, a government program would have no profits to speak of. The government is distributing funds to these companies on the poor’s behalf, more funds than would just cover the care if we changed to a Single Payer system. This could actually lower your taxes if it went through, but it takes 60 senate votes and for over a decade one of the two major parties always votes against it in unison.”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          86 months ago

          If you presume the other health funds are acting rationally, accepting legitimate claims, rejecting those that are not covered by the policy of the person claiming them, then for every illegitimate claim denied by the average fund United deny one illegitimate and one valid claim.

          In what way is that not terrible?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            26 months ago

            I’m not sure who you’re arguing against but it isn’t me.

            I’m not defending anything. I’m just pointing out an obvious lie.

            Why do you think none of the claims being accepted is not terrible but 84% being accepted is terrible? Are you pro-debt and unnecessary death and sickness?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              76 months ago

              100 minus 36 is 64, not 84.

              I never suggested all should be accepted. I made an assumption for my argument that the average health funds are acting fairly. I don’t believe that, incidentally, since many are far below the average and I don’t believe they are approving invalid claims

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                26 months ago

                Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16% and UnitedHealth denies double that at 32%, so that means the vast majority of claims are approved even for the worst examples.

                Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16%

                industry average denied claims is around 16%

                16%

        • Bahnd Rollard
          link
          fedilink
          14
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Ideally it should be 0% (this is too optomistic, but I am not one make that figure) people pay into an insurance system to distribute risk. If a company cant resolve the inflow/outflow problem (not even going to get into profits, for-profit insurance is unethical) then it needs to be managed by an organization that can. ~30 governments (USA not amongst them) that have solved this problem for their citizens and anyone requiring medical assistance within their borders.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            46 months ago

            Right right right all cool, but I was conversing with that other user who claimed nothing was getting approved.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  9
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  What is this comment supposed to bring to the discussion? Edit: bro is like im going to win this debate by having a very narrow defensible argument that 1 is smaller than 3

              • bizarroland
                link
                fedilink
                106 months ago

                Especially when you consider that these claims are not being made by random people but by trained board certified physicians whose entire livelihood depends on them providing prompt and appropriate care for their patients.

                I feel like even 16% being rejected is very high

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  26 months ago

                  Well, the claims are reviewed by physicians but they’re often not in the specialization of the care provided so they can make mistaken judgements and a great way to appeal it is to ask the insurance company for proof that the physician who denied the claim does specialize in the type of care being reviewed.

                  Unfortunately most people don’t know that, less than 1% of denied claims are appealed.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          206 months ago

          I’m sure we’d be pretty sanguine about a school bus driver who gets 68% of the kids to school safely, too.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            If the options were a bus with 32% fatality and no bus with 100% fatality, would you advocate we tear down the bus?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              156 months ago

              And we only have those two choices because of capitalist gaslighting. Given those two options, I would advocate deposing a few more insurance executives to improve the situation.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                16 months ago

                Alright, clearly you’re lost.

                This is a post about making threats of death and violence to people who work in an office building handling insurance claims, getting it to shut down for the day.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  10
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  I don’t think swingingthelamp is lost.

                  I think they just hit you with the polite version of the “coconut island” cohesive nature of capital.

                  I think capitalist realism is what makes many of us choose the lesser evil of 68% mortality.