3 ms·

The saving grace of our society is that, thankfully, things are still pretty comfortable at the personal level, even if their politics dictate that they be in c

The saving grace of our society is that, thankfully, things are still pretty comfortable at the personal level, even if their politics dictate that they be in conflict. If you don't search for it you won't see the kind of bifurcation around the Chauvin trial. Most people just breath a sigh of relief, including a lot of Republicans. It does deeply concern me that so many people claim Chauvin was framed, etc. Those who don't believe it, but claim it for effect, they are the sociopathic trolls; the ones who really believe it, I would suggest either have serious mental health issues or are very susceptible to groupthink. It is the groupthink folks that I find particularly terrifying, because they are really good people, but will happily cheer on someone or something truly horrible, and continue to truly believe they are right with God.

jl2718 6y ago
Framed? That is a completely stupid thing to believe, and I have never heard it suggested by anybody except you. The problem here is not those boogeymen that don’t exist. It’s you. And now me because I’ve dragged myself down to your level.
- javajosh 6y ago
  I flagged your comment. Calling names and pointing fingers doesn't solve anything. Especially since, in this case, you are reacting to something I did not say (and I reread my post to make sure).
  - jl2718 6y ago
    > so many people claim ... No they don’t. You created that monster in your mind. And you breathe life into it by telling the world it exists. What difference is there then, between that monster, and you.
    - javajosh 6y ago
      "I see people I know who say, 'Chauvin is innocent', and I'm like, did we watch the same video?" This from the OP video https://youtu.be/0DRHn_Dz_js?t=384 https://youtu.be/0DRHn_Dz_js?t=384 Here is Tucker Carlson claiming the jury only convicted because they were scared to do otherwise. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/549435-tucker-carlson-suggests-chauvin-jurors-intimidated-by-protests-please-dont https://thehill.com/homenews/media/549435-tucker-carlson-sug... "This was a trial about whether the media was powerful enough to create a simulation and decide upon a narrative absent any facts." Candice Owens on Tucker Carlson's show https://www.foxnews.com/politics/candace-owens-slams-democrats-media-for-mob-justice-in-derek-chauvin-trial https://www.foxnews.com/politics/candace-owens-slams-democra... How is claiming that Chauvin was framed different from these statements in any material way? They all tacitly assume Chauvin was justified, and explain it in some absurd way. Their narrative gets life from the same callous cruelty that let them watch that video with the motive to figure out a way to blame anyone but the obvious murderer. The summary is: "Yes, Chauvin killed the man, but he was justified. The facts were distorted by those with a political agenda in the media and in the justice system, and they got what they wanted, convicting an innocent man for murder." And that's no different than what I said.
      - jl2718 6y ago
        Why do you even know anything about these people? It appears you seek your own hate. Once again, we see the monster is within.
        javajosh 6y ago
        It appears to me that I triggered someone on the internet by using a word they didn't like. It triggered them to pivot, ironically, to an unrelated warning about talking about people you don't know personally. I'm disengaging, but I suggest you look up the word "irony". Or maybe it's "hypocrisy". I don't know. Either way, I will not stop calling out anyone, famous or not, who I know personally or not, who watch a LEO murder a man in cold blood, from the start of the murder to the end of the Floyd's life, and STILL defend the cop! It is outrageous, monsterous, and that's where your energy should be spent, not attacking someone who, in your opinion, used the wrong word to characterize this kind of inhuman reaction to a gross injustice.

jl2718 6y ago

Framed? That is a completely stupid thing to believe, and I have never heard it suggested by anybody except you. The problem here is not those boogeymen that don’t exist. It’s you. And now me because I’ve dragged myself down to your level.

javajosh 6y ago
I flagged your comment. Calling names and pointing fingers doesn't solve anything. Especially since, in this case, you are reacting to something I did not say (and I reread my post to make sure).
- jl2718 6y ago
  > so many people claim ... No they don’t. You created that monster in your mind. And you breathe life into it by telling the world it exists. What difference is there then, between that monster, and you.
  - javajosh 6y ago
    "I see people I know who say, 'Chauvin is innocent', and I'm like, did we watch the same video?" This from the OP video https://youtu.be/0DRHn_Dz_js?t=384 https://youtu.be/0DRHn_Dz_js?t=384 Here is Tucker Carlson claiming the jury only convicted because they were scared to do otherwise. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/549435-tucker-carlson-suggests-chauvin-jurors-intimidated-by-protests-please-dont https://thehill.com/homenews/media/549435-tucker-carlson-sug... "This was a trial about whether the media was powerful enough to create a simulation and decide upon a narrative absent any facts." Candice Owens on Tucker Carlson's show https://www.foxnews.com/politics/candace-owens-slams-democrats-media-for-mob-justice-in-derek-chauvin-trial https://www.foxnews.com/politics/candace-owens-slams-democra... How is claiming that Chauvin was framed different from these statements in any material way? They all tacitly assume Chauvin was justified, and explain it in some absurd way. Their narrative gets life from the same callous cruelty that let them watch that video with the motive to figure out a way to blame anyone but the obvious murderer. The summary is: "Yes, Chauvin killed the man, but he was justified. The facts were distorted by those with a political agenda in the media and in the justice system, and they got what they wanted, convicting an innocent man for murder." And that's no different than what I said.
    - jl2718 6y ago
      Why do you even know anything about these people? It appears you seek your own hate. Once again, we see the monster is within.
      - javajosh 6y ago
        It appears to me that I triggered someone on the internet by using a word they didn't like. It triggered them to pivot, ironically, to an unrelated warning about talking about people you don't know personally. I'm disengaging, but I suggest you look up the word "irony". Or maybe it's "hypocrisy". I don't know. Either way, I will not stop calling out anyone, famous or not, who I know personally or not, who watch a LEO murder a man in cold blood, from the start of the murder to the end of the Floyd's life, and STILL defend the cop! It is outrageous, monsterous, and that's where your energy should be spent, not attacking someone who, in your opinion, used the wrong word to characterize this kind of inhuman reaction to a gross injustice.