Would he nice if that attitude persists for a while.

The correct solution for an outlier event is to set up a proper Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The U.S. still thinks it’s above that, but it’s not. A TRC would have worked after 1/6 because it was an inherently partisan event. You cannot have it be bipartisan for the same reason the Nazis didn’t get to be judges at Nuremberg and neither Shining Path nor the former government officials in Peru got to sit on their TRC. The group that perpetrated the violence shouldn’t get to adjudicate it.

Why would that change speedy trial? Plenty of defendants with PDs waive speedy trial.

I’m curious where this narrative that the case only began in 2023 came from. Smith was appointed in November 2022 and the investigation doesn’t necessarily start when the public finds out or when the prosecutor (special or otherwise) is announced.

To be clear I’m just talking about federal prosecutors. State and local tend to be political and, as a result, that tends to be where you see way more corruption. Ironically, it’s also why state AGs will have policies that are entirely different from the governor’s: they’re a separate political office.

It’s a norm because prosecution is both an executive and judicial function. It straddles both branches and you want it to be neutral in exercising prosecutorial discretion. When the chief executive steps in to direct prosecution, it has a strong tendency to become political and lead away from democracy.

My old one? It’s a good question and I have actually thought about it. I have a lot of inanity on there but some (I think) decent replies to people trying to be “reasonable” fascists, racists, misogynists, etc. if that makes sense. I’ll admit I mostly posted news articles I thought were interesting, though I would regularly participate in the discussions for those articles, but those articles frequently got a lot of traffic. So I guess there’s two problems with nuking the account:

(1) If I delete all my comments, you end up in some cases with what looks like someone deleting their response to a bad actor, leaving that bad actor not only unchallenged, but looking like they “won” the argument, and

(2) If I delete all my posts, I remove from public view the comments of (at this point) likely tens of thousands of people, if not more given how many high karma and high participation posts I submitted, many of whom might not have wanted me to do so.

I have so many of both that it’d be a massive pain to go through and selectively delete stuff. Easier to just leave the account be and never use it again. Deleting the account just means it’s anonymized, which can also invite bad faith.

It is, there’s a lot of highly specific knowledge on Reddit. It’s still a resource.

Did they? I had one of the top non-porn accounts actually run by a person (most high karma accounts use bots, I didn’t out of ironic laziness) and I haven’t posted or commented since whenever Day 0 was for rif is fun. I’ve been back a couple times for very specific things but not logged in or participating in any active way. Of course, I’m just one (high karma) data point, but I really don’t think I’m unique in this. I also have no real desire to contribute to Reddit again in the future. Getting off of it has been pretty nice.

Look, it’s not that people aren’t still posting, the site obviously still has content, but it really is just “content.” The quality of discussion I’ve seen has gone down pretty steep. Modding appears to be almost nonexistent in big subs or very agenda-driven otherwise. I think a lot of contributors who treated Reddit like old school forums have left and it’s slowly turning into a weird combo of Facebook and 4chan if that makes sense. If that’s what the userbase wants, go for it, I guess. But that’s not my jam.

You start maxing out at 47 years.

A lot of people cancel after watching the series. Releasing over several weeks allows for a continual revenue stream over those weeks. For people who like bingeing, the show is pretty much always up in full at the end of its run.

Okay and what’s wrong with seeking engagement with whatever they’re making (which every person who makes anything does) and trying to ensure continued subscription, which makes sense given the business? I agree that streaming has generally become ridiculous and diluted, but there’s nothing inherently wrong with wanting people to watch stuff and attempting to ensure a steady revenue stream to do it.

Israel has nukes and is run by nutjobs. They won’t use nukes in Gaza, it’s too close to Israeli cities. But there’s no telling what they’ll do the further away a conflict gets.

Congress could dissolve the Court on Tuesday if they wanted to. Impeach and removal. Not every justice has behaved egregiously enough to merit it, but it’s a political decision anyway.

Just another turning of the Wheel every time you boot it up.

“I have won again, Lews Therin. Flicker.”

More than anyone, they knew Mr. Blue Sky.

It’s a 20% increase and 10% of the total, which is massive.

Arguing that there’s only one definition of Zionism or that yours is the correct one is disingenuous at best and antisemitic at worst. I personally prefer to just believe you’re uninformed given your inability to cite a source that supports your claims.

Additionally, Israel is by no means unique in having its right to exist questioned. I’m not sure where that particular bullshit talking point came from but it’s sort of racist? Ukraine, for example, is waging a war for its right to exist in the face of Putin trying to restore the USSR. Georgia too. Maduro recently said Venezuela should just conquer Guyana. Taiwan has been under threat from mainland China for its entire existence, itself having a pretty similar story to Israel where an outside group moved in (Chiang Kai-Shek and the Kuomintang), who proceeded to control the indigenous population (who had already been through many rounds of occupation).

Finally, you’re making a huge leap when you claim that people calling out the self-proclaimed Zionists controlling the government of Israel for committing war crimes equates to calling for the death of all Israelis and all Jewish peoples. Anyone can criticize the Israeli government, doing so is neither antisemitic nor is it wishing death on anyone.

What do you mean “isn’t that much greater”? The Haaretz study shows a civilian death rate of around 61%, whereas prior conflicts in Gaza had a civilian death rate of 33% to 40%, and the article says the 61% level is unprecedented. A 20%-30% increase is an insane number of additional dead.

Sorry, can you point me to the specific part of that article that says many of the doctors are Hamas? Because what I read is this:

In the first three weeks of the current operation, Swords of Iron, the civilian proportion of total deaths rose to 61%, in what Levy described as “unprecedented killing” for Israeli forces in Gaza. The ratio is significantly higher than the average civilian toll in all the conflicts around the world from the second world war to the 1990s, in which civilians accounted for about half the dead, according to Levy.

“The broad conclusion is that extensive killing of civilians not only contributes nothing to Israel’s security, but that it also contains the foundations for further undermining it,” Levy concluded. “The Gazans who will emerge from the ruins of their homes and the loss of their families will seek revenge that no security arrangements will be able to withstand.”

The study confirms an investigation 10 days ago by the Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine and the Hebrew-language outlet Local Call, which found Israel was deliberately targeting residential blocks to cause mass civilian casualties in the hope people would turn on their Hamas rulers. The figures will make uneasy reading for the Biden administration, which is facing global criticism and isolation for vetoing a UN security council vote for a ceasefire on Friday.