I appreciate you bringing this to light. Terrorism charges should not be used lightly and of course, judges who have such clear conflicts of interest should not oversee the cases. In putting both of these cases together side by side, it is easy to overlook one GLARING and frightening fact: One of the persons accused did nothing on its face wrong, they said something that could be construed as meaning violence in a country that likes to talk about " free speech". If you explore this issue further, I think that more examples of individuals charged with terrorism who clearly did not intend terrorism ( And those cases are out there) would be helpful.
It piques my curiosity as to why we do not require public disclosure of the financial holdings of judges before they are appointed? We could then disqualify them from the bench if they do not recuse themselves from cases that put their probity in jeopardy. They should also annually update their holdings.
Perusing the responses to this posting I am sure there are few people in the US who are not now aware of the fact that the hedge fund owners of health insurance, hospitals, "independent" clinics, Old Age nursing homes, pharmacies, Drug brokerages, etc. ad nauseam,... ALL of whom are asset stripping pirate for profiteers. The same must be said of the awareness of the said 1percenters who invest in and profit from from the crooked, criminal financial mob currently running the country - including, of course our Law and Order judicial and LEO institutions. There is no possible doubt that the SCOTUS corruption is mirrored all the way to the bottom dwellers of these systems
So if we accurately label profit-based insurance policies of “delay deny depose die” WE are the terrorists?
When for-profit insurance corporations actively impose murderous policies on innocent people just dying to live, I’m not particularly concerned that a handful of corporate pirañas are terrorized by the thought of unexpected consequences to their greedy policies. How did their statisticians fail to predict the buildup toward critical mass by the rest of the 99% of the population who are terrorized daily, who lose their lives, homes, and security, who are at the mercy of corporate profiteers?
How would those corporations suggest labeling those human beings who protest against being exploited and slaughtered by their policies? “Enemies of the people?”
For the record—I have arthritis in my hands, can’t even hold a gun, am ardently against gun violence of any kind, advocate sensible gun control, and avoid even watching violent movies. Unless they want to charge me with stochastic terrorism (in which case they’d better first arrest Agent Orange), those words do not fall under the definition of terrorism.
No doubt Luigi did something he clearly should not have done. However Insurance Corporations do the same thing with their corporate crime actions daily, killing, what was that number again, 68,000 Americans daily, weekly! A lot of people w their politics, denials, corruption kill a LOT of people. #UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson killed many people in the course of his job. Attaching terrorism to this particular crime only weakens terrorism
I cannot tolerate the utter criminality & stupidity of the legal system in this country (present company excepted)
No violence, but these medical insurance companies have no interest in patient health-- bottom line is profit -- and healthcare should never have been put as a capitalist endeavor.
Being a judge and being ethical, are diametrically opposed. Upholding the bullshit laws that are meant to oppress the poor, are unethical in their existence.
Not always. I worked for some judges who were phenomenal, great people, and one who was a racist and sociopath who made my life hell. They're human like the rest of us, but some let the power of the position go to their heads.
I just finished reading this article and I wanted you to see it. DT has interfered time and time again with a ceasefire agreement. I alerted Biden on X before the election about what was happening, I’m no longer on X. Biden needs to do something before he leaves office.
I'm guessing charging somone with terror charges and not murder charges (in Luigi's case) and makeing death threats (in Briana's case) is done for purposes such as, in Luigi's case. To ask for longer sentence and/or the death penalty. And in Briana's case, for the prosecutor to ask for denied bail, longer sentence etc?
Death/killing seem to be fluid concepts. What we choose to focus on determines their importance. Currently, thousands have died in Gaza. Gun violence is the number one killer of children. Many die due to denial of healthcare by for-profit insurance companies. Do we truly care about all of these or just when someone who the system is designed to protect is murdered?
I posted Brianna Boston's GoFundMe link before but that lady Iryna(?) took it down and claimed the charges were dropped. After reading this I looked again and unfortunately no they are not. Her husband opened a new GoFundMe and here's the link.
Thanks for the link. I'd hope that if myself or anyone I care about was ever targeted by the government in this way, others would step up to help with defense costs. Any one of us could be the next Brianna.
Both judges should recuse. But, if they don’t, I have no confidence SCOTUS will support a recusal requirement when the appeal process reaches them. Their willingness to invent new law supporting corporate America and the “conservative movement” out of thin air is frightening. How long People are willing to tolerate that behavior is a very big unknown.
One would presume that terrorism-related charges would correspond to the alleged victim being the member of a class protected by anti-terrorism laws, such as Jews, Muslims, Blacks, Muslims - but not CEOs of insurance companies. That's just absurd. Since when was there a prior case of an individual or group attacking a health insurance company or its employees? This charge could set a dangerous precedent.
I appreciate you bringing this to light. Terrorism charges should not be used lightly and of course, judges who have such clear conflicts of interest should not oversee the cases. In putting both of these cases together side by side, it is easy to overlook one GLARING and frightening fact: One of the persons accused did nothing on its face wrong, they said something that could be construed as meaning violence in a country that likes to talk about " free speech". If you explore this issue further, I think that more examples of individuals charged with terrorism who clearly did not intend terrorism ( And those cases are out there) would be helpful.
CORRUPTION!!!🤬🤬🤬
It piques my curiosity as to why we do not require public disclosure of the financial holdings of judges before they are appointed? We could then disqualify them from the bench if they do not recuse themselves from cases that put their probity in jeopardy. They should also annually update their holdings.
Perusing the responses to this posting I am sure there are few people in the US who are not now aware of the fact that the hedge fund owners of health insurance, hospitals, "independent" clinics, Old Age nursing homes, pharmacies, Drug brokerages, etc. ad nauseam,... ALL of whom are asset stripping pirate for profiteers. The same must be said of the awareness of the said 1percenters who invest in and profit from from the crooked, criminal financial mob currently running the country - including, of course our Law and Order judicial and LEO institutions. There is no possible doubt that the SCOTUS corruption is mirrored all the way to the bottom dwellers of these systems
Brilliant analysis. Thank you.
So if we accurately label profit-based insurance policies of “delay deny depose die” WE are the terrorists?
When for-profit insurance corporations actively impose murderous policies on innocent people just dying to live, I’m not particularly concerned that a handful of corporate pirañas are terrorized by the thought of unexpected consequences to their greedy policies. How did their statisticians fail to predict the buildup toward critical mass by the rest of the 99% of the population who are terrorized daily, who lose their lives, homes, and security, who are at the mercy of corporate profiteers?
How would those corporations suggest labeling those human beings who protest against being exploited and slaughtered by their policies? “Enemies of the people?”
For the record—I have arthritis in my hands, can’t even hold a gun, am ardently against gun violence of any kind, advocate sensible gun control, and avoid even watching violent movies. Unless they want to charge me with stochastic terrorism (in which case they’d better first arrest Agent Orange), those words do not fall under the definition of terrorism.
No doubt Luigi did something he clearly should not have done. However Insurance Corporations do the same thing with their corporate crime actions daily, killing, what was that number again, 68,000 Americans daily, weekly! A lot of people w their politics, denials, corruption kill a LOT of people. #UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson killed many people in the course of his job. Attaching terrorism to this particular crime only weakens terrorism
I cannot tolerate the utter criminality & stupidity of the legal system in this country (present company excepted)
It’s the “appearance” of impropriety
Excellent summation of the rule of law.
No violence, but these medical insurance companies have no interest in patient health-- bottom line is profit -- and healthcare should never have been put as a capitalist endeavor.
Being a judge and being ethical, are diametrically opposed. Upholding the bullshit laws that are meant to oppress the poor, are unethical in their existence.
Not always. I worked for some judges who were phenomenal, great people, and one who was a racist and sociopath who made my life hell. They're human like the rest of us, but some let the power of the position go to their heads.
The laws they enforce are unjust.
Omg, ceasefire must be done
https://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/latest/gaza-death-trap-msf-report-exposes-israels-campaign-total-destruction
I just finished reading this article and I wanted you to see it. DT has interfered time and time again with a ceasefire agreement. I alerted Biden on X before the election about what was happening, I’m no longer on X. Biden needs to do something before he leaves office.
I'm guessing charging somone with terror charges and not murder charges (in Luigi's case) and makeing death threats (in Briana's case) is done for purposes such as, in Luigi's case. To ask for longer sentence and/or the death penalty. And in Briana's case, for the prosecutor to ask for denied bail, longer sentence etc?
certainly seems rigged from SCOTUS on down…
Death/killing seem to be fluid concepts. What we choose to focus on determines their importance. Currently, thousands have died in Gaza. Gun violence is the number one killer of children. Many die due to denial of healthcare by for-profit insurance companies. Do we truly care about all of these or just when someone who the system is designed to protect is murdered?
I posted Brianna Boston's GoFundMe link before but that lady Iryna(?) took it down and claimed the charges were dropped. After reading this I looked again and unfortunately no they are not. Her husband opened a new GoFundMe and here's the link.
https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-briana-bostons-legal-defense
I have had to deal with denials from insurance and frustration causing an angry response is totally understandable.
Thanks for the link. I'd hope that if myself or anyone I care about was ever targeted by the government in this way, others would step up to help with defense costs. Any one of us could be the next Brianna.
Especially after Jan. 20th.
Both judges should recuse. But, if they don’t, I have no confidence SCOTUS will support a recusal requirement when the appeal process reaches them. Their willingness to invent new law supporting corporate America and the “conservative movement” out of thin air is frightening. How long People are willing to tolerate that behavior is a very big unknown.
One would presume that terrorism-related charges would correspond to the alleged victim being the member of a class protected by anti-terrorism laws, such as Jews, Muslims, Blacks, Muslims - but not CEOs of insurance companies. That's just absurd. Since when was there a prior case of an individual or group attacking a health insurance company or its employees? This charge could set a dangerous precedent.
Yep exactly right. Hence the point I make in the screenshot at the top of my article. This is dangerous territory for everyone.
Unless rich people are made into a protected class. Or CEOs. Mangione has been made into a source of entertainment for an angry, bored society.