493
submitted 22 hours ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 2 points 10 hours ago

You literally said worse twice, but you weren't talking about better or worse?

Huh?

[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 2 points 9 hours ago

I mean I'm not talking about who is worse than who. For the record I do think Trump is far worse than either Clinton. But I absolutely reject that that somehow means it's fine to authorise death squads etc. or that it's somehow "not important enough" to remember all the horrible shit that happened under the Obama admin.

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 2 points 8 hours ago

But I absolutely reject that that somehow means it's fine to authorise death squads etc. or that it's somehow "not important enough" to remember all the horrible shit that happened under the Obama admin.

Nobody said any of that.

[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

Yes they did lol, the first thing I replied to was

Those are political things. Those are things she should have been voted out of power for, not locked up for.

Crimes against humanity are not "just political things".

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 8 hours ago

They never said said crimes against humanity are just political things.

[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

The comment is still there, I can still read it, you could too if you wanted to

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 8 hours ago
[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago

Okay, you tell me what they are saying here then?

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

You've completely lost the plot.

What @FaceDeer@fedia.io was saying is that Hilary Clinton shouldn't be exempt from being locked up if she's guilty of crimes.

I don't think they'd even disagree with you that she should be locked up if found guilty of crimes against humanity. They even cited an example of one.

[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

You've completely lost the plot.

That's not a nice thing to say.

I don't see any way of reading those posts which I can interpret the way you said though. Which words are you specifically referencing when you say that

@FaceDeer@fedia.io was saying is that Hilary Clinton shouldn't be exempt from ...

?

I bring your attention again to the comment I replied to, which reads:

Those are political things. Those are things she should have been voted out of power for, not locked up for.

(Emphasis mine)

This is in a direct response to @Maeve@kbin.earth 's comment listing several things which are firmly in the category of "atrocities".

So how exactly do you reach your interpretation?

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 6 hours ago

All of your questions can be answered by reading from the top of the thread down instead of being stuck partway through. Hence why I say you've lost the plot.

[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

No, that's wrong. Reading back further only shows that this person thinks locking up Hillary would be fine specifically and only if she covered up for Epstein, not any of that stuff in the other comment, which would be political.

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 5 hours ago

specifically and only if she covered up for Epstein

You're making things up.

[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago
[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 5 hours ago
[-] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago

Oh, I see, you're just a troll. Well, you got me this time I guess.

[-] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 1 points 5 hours ago
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2025
493 points (100.0% liked)

News

32087 readers
2212 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS