@TRobinsonNewEra This one is more defensible. They’re cuffing both of them and they arrived after both were engaged in fisticuffs. Video cuts off before we see what happens after they’re separated.
@SwipeWright@gatorgar Similar exp. And I’ve been sent the googled “why is Ben bad” hit list for why he’s terrible multiple times. And literally every single argument is already posted on DW in a section about the dumb things he said in the past with context, acknowledgment, & if/how they evolved.
@mtaibbi Hey @mtaibbi, that Karen owes me $1500. You see, I had cash hand, and she took it against my will. I didn’t call the cops or anything. No one else was around, and I may have given her a buck or two before. But you know it’s true because this tweet corroborates it.
@ItsGoneAwry box. This is also not the real trial, just the preliminary hearing confirming enough pc to go to trial. But his call is technically defensible under current frameworks. Inconsistency is a problem. We saw virtually everything in the Rittenhouse trial.
@ItsGoneAwry 1/n I get it. There is a root cause issue legislation needs to catch up on. If the trial is public, meaning anyone can be in court, then there is a good argument that anyone watching the trial stream should see everything being presented in court, with the exception of the jury
@michaelmalice Already happening. Several high profile cases in the InfoSec field. Basically get a voice sample, (even your voicemail greeting can be enough). call someone gullible with a convincing story from a loved one’s ai driven voice. Money is gone before scheme IDed.
@noam_dworman You’re not. Many suspicious flaws warranting skepticism. “Consensual Sex you regret” != rape, & 2nd half of message doesn’t answer. She claimed she had to “recall” memories she tried to forget. No rape charges filed. Politically convenient timing after months of oppo research.
@mtracey Narrator: “there will not be knives. Just unfalsifiable allegations with a dearth of supporting evidence, dismissed exculpatory evidence, and a staunch public campaign of presumed guilt.”
@peterboghossian You talk about this in impossible conversations. There is a complicating element here though in that his position set the policy over principled objections. Don’t punish for changing minds versus accountability for trespass that ought never have been AND caused measured harm