kamala Harris, as a da, locked people up and refused parole to keep them as slaves fighting fires.
mod says it’s misinfo (probably without fact checking) and removes the comment
update:
idk how I was doing mod abuse
PTB, everyone here defending the mods and Harris are foolish.
sen pai!
Libs gonna lib. Their primary concern is violently maintaining power so ofc they gonna support prosecutors, prisons, slave labor, etc.
Ah yes those notoriously violent liberals
Look, that’s the entire reason I disliked her as VP and as a candidate.
But the words you used, the way you used them do not accurately represent the facts of the matter.
So, yeah, it’s misinformation. When someone bends facts, that’s exactly what it is.
Hyperbole being presented as fact is just another form of misinformation.
Since the only action taken was removal of the comment, I can’t see any power tripping, just a difference of opinion about the precise definition of what makes up misinformation.
I can’t fully say YDI in this case, because you clearly weren’t acting in bad faith to break a rule.
But it also isn’t a clueless mod either.
It’s somewhere in between those two. The comment being removed was a justifiable action. If they’d done anything at all beyond that, it would have been over the line, but they didn’t.
Well, that screen shot does change things to a degree.
However, we have no way of seeing any reports you sent, or any messages with the mods.
Since both of those are cited as reasons for the ban alongside the comments, there’s a couple of ifs involved.
If those two reasons are accurate enough, then it would switch it entirely to YDI for the ban alone. You go around fucking with reports, you get banned, and you should be. But, again, nobody here can see that, so that’s a giant IF.
If the only factor was a claim of misinformation, I’d call PTB because the mod log does not back up a claim of repeated misinformation. Nor does your user history. The links you’ve posted, the comments you’ve made in the last month or so don’t have a pattern of misinformation at all, though you do have a habit of hyperbole that might read as pushing an agenda. IMO, that’s only a problem if you’re going crazy with it, or you’re beating the drum in inappropriate communities, and I’m not seeing that happening.
But, because the ban cites behaviors we can’t see, it doesn’t serve to change my opinion on the original matter of the removal. The removal itself, not power tripping. The ban might be, but it could also be totally justified.
I will say that it is entirely possible that the mod in question could be exaggerating those other reasons, because that kind of thing does happen. But that makes the ban as evidence of power tripping useless.
Disputing the early release of prisoners is different than ‘locking people up’ and people in her office advocating against early release is something that can be attributed to her because she is ultimately reponsible, but is not the same as her refusing to let them be paroled.
What you said is that she put people into jail and forced them to fight fires, which is not what happened.
What you posted was literally misinformation. YDI.
Also, fuck Kamala Harris.
as a da, then as ag, she sent people to prison.
she kept them there specifically to exploit their labor.
what I posted was true.
Except she didn’t keep them there because the effort by her office was denied in court, and her job was to lock people up. She didn’t prosecute people with the intent to make them fight fires and she didn’t get to deny them parole.
She sucks because of being in favor of shitty laws and being pro punishment for non-violent crime, but this specific thing you said is not accurate.
you know I can see how there is some nuance, and how my statements were vague enough to be misinterpreted as misinformation, but the words I chose were true.
No, they were not true.
they absolutely were.
She didn’t send people to prison. The judges did that. She just successfully argued that they should do it. What you posted was not true.
when a da runs for reelection, they do it on their conviction record. you’re splitting hairs
No, you are. A person who’s job it is to convince judges to put people in jail runs on their record of convincing the judges to do so is … unsurprising.
No, this is false. Her job was/is fundamentally to help ensure justice is administered, it is not to convince a judge (or a jury) to put people in jail.
Plenty of AGs have run on not enforcing specific unjust laws.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal system.
And yes Kamala was and continues to be a horrible human being. She never would have survived a primary for this reason.
We literally denied Nazis the defense of ‘I was just following orders’ for good reasons. Just because kamala’s actions were slightly less damning doesnt change the fact she made the personal choice to make those arguments in court.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal system.
No, you do. It is an adversarial system. Prosecuting attorneys… prosecute. Defense attorneys… defend. It is the jury that decides factual guilt or lack thereof, and the judges who sentence. ALL of these roles put the furtherance of justice as their #1 priority, or should at least.
If you want to argue she is responsible for some sort of prosecutorial misconduct, I will listen. To say she put people in prison without a guilty verdict and judge’s sentence gives her authority she doesn’t and shouldn’t have and to argue otherwise is a “fundamental misunderstanding of the legal system”.
Child, an AG has the power to decide which cases they decide to prosecute. They don’t need to prosecute any case they don’t want to. In fact you’ll often see AGs decline to prosecute cases. take a look at texas’ current asshole AG as a great example of this. Or the current DOJ over the next few years.
Kamala choose to prosecute those cases and choose to make the arguments that her department made. Trying to claim that just because part of the role of an AG is to make a case against defendents completely ignores the reality of how they choose which cases to prosecute in the first place.
To say she put people in prison without a guilty verdict and judge’s sentence gives her authority she doesn’t and shouldn’t have and to argue otherwise is a “fundamental misunderstanding of the legal system”.
Again you’re demonstrating your fundamental misunderstanding of how the legal system works quite blatantly here.
- She choose to prosecute people which non-violent drug use crimes. drugs for which the majority of americans can now access legally.
- Prosecutors often make sentencing recommendations too the judge.
When an AG declines to prosecute a case that defendant will not end up in jail. this is just a fact. I’m not arguing she has authority over the judges final determination, I’m saying she had the authority to pick and choose which cases and arguments the department she led made.
So yes, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal system and you’re denying kamala had agency in the decisions her department made which is absolutely moronic.
this is splitting hairs
She sent them there for crimes
Oh yeah the American legal system and prison-industrial-complex are notorious for arresting only criminals and not just anyone off the street for say existing while black.
like truancy. she’s a fucking Nazi.
Stop diluting the word “Nazi.” All it does is water down the meaning and provide cover for the real Nazis.
Being an authoritarian does not make someone a Nazi.
no, thank you. I’m not going to distinguish between fascist or Nazi, either.
Then you’re literally just helping them by playing their game of co-opting terms with definite meanings.
Congratulations on helping Nazis. You are part of the problem.
I don’t know how you think calling a cop whose excuse is they’re just doing their job dilutes the term Nazi for you, but I’m most definitely not helping nazis
Well in that case she will have a pace on the current administration
This is nn example of tone censorship… The mods politics and news subs engage in this shit to maintain favourable regime discusions. It is reddit 2.0
Just block those communities and use alternatives that’s the entire point of fedi anyway.
The “political” mods of lemmy.world always call inconvenient facts, “misinformation”. They’re trying their best to reproduce the liberal fact-checker culture of around a decade ago where there were liberal nannies evaluating posts for left wing thought and helping to maintain their walled garden of mainstream propaganda. There still are such nannies, of course, but they’re more openly reactionary now. This kind of person thinks that if Snoped wrote an article about it, that’s all there is to it.
Selectively incurious and intellectually lazy, the real impetus behind this form of liberalism is a simple contradiction: their entire political philosophy is predicated on them being a good and correct and moral person with good and correct and moral views, totally unassailable, but their beliefs are incoherent and often disagree with reality and they spend very little time actually learning and understanding the topics they weigh in on. And they’re used to contrasting themselves with more openly reactionary people that are even less likely to be in alignment with reality, which really makes them feel good and correct and moral. So when presented with left thought, i.e. fsr more coherent and informed opinions, they have a little crisis in their identity and lash out, looking for some way to shore up the opinion they hold after all of five minutes of research. Failing that they just act like a big baby.
hexbear is back and busily improving fediverse
Relevant:
In 2014, as overcrowding persisted, a three-judge panel in California ordered the state to make eligible for parole nonviolent prisoners with only two felonies that had served half their sentences. Harris’ lawyers argued early release would harm the prison’s labor program, which included its work program to help fight California’s wildfires. The judges rejected the argument.
Criticism against Harris resurfaced after her announcement for president last month brought heightened scrutiny. In 2014, Harris told BuzzFeed News she was “shocked” to learn about what her lawyers were arguing in court.
PTB. OPs comments are factually correct, even if they are too unpalatable for a liberal audience to accept. We have to assess politicians by their behaviour, not by their lies, and on that basis Kamala absolutely supports the US prison industrial complex aka slave labor. As do all establishment Democrats, who have helped foster this disgusting industry just as much as the Republicans have.
OPs rhetoric on this is actually very chill, considering.
Yeah OP is trying to be clowned on but all it shows is that the flat.world libs are upset at someone calling out bad people doing bad things.
So what, she is so utterly incompetent that she doesn’t even know what her own lawyers are doing?
Give me a break. There is no way she was not informed at the time.
I’m not really here to argue about us politicians, I just felt that as OP didn’t provide any sources someone should. I even went with a right leaning newspaper to make it fair to OP.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/washington-examiner/
YDI
i thought pre-emptively putting sources in when arguing with libs would at least shield me from getting my comments deleted over false accusations of disinfo but it doesn’t. Not even the libbiest most mainstream sources can protect you, they cannot deal with their cognitive dissonance and so must completely mute one side.
It happens to me on the regular, even when I provide the most Media Bias/Fact Check-approved evidence.
