top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 422 points 2 years ago (18 children)

Country wide outage at the corruption involved with the health insurance

Health insurance industry: we can make it worse

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (17 children)

    outrage*

    Also, not an insurance company. He worked for Pfizer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 2 years ago (16 children)

    Pfizer is a med company. They negotiate with insurance. They work together to fuck us over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 2 years ago (15 children)

    It's a pharmaceutical company. They're no saints, but it's disingenuous to compare them to people who take money and provide nothing but a rubber stamp.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • [–] 263 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They're certainly not being subtle with the class warfare

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 195 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I knew they were going to try him in a kangaroo court, I just didn't think they'd be this obvious about it.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 185 points 2 years ago (18 children)

    Interesting, interesting, interesting, interesting.

    I need the bootlickers to show up and tell me it's just coincidence.

    The whole damn thing is a show. They are terrified. The book they usually play by isn't working. What will happen? The amount of support Luigi has is astounding. It's even a topic I tested the waters with at work and these people I work with make a decent living.

    America is waking up. I feel it.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    I genuinely think that they'll have a hard time finding an impartial jury.... I think that at this point, pretty much anyone who doesn't live under a rock has heard of him and has an opinion on whether he should be found guilty.

    Regardless of which way you fall on that particular topic, you're biased, and that would exclude you from serving on the jury.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago

    I thought the same thing about the Trump trial, but they legitimately turned over rocks and found the most oblivious Americans living under them. There are evidently tons of people out there living in their own little bubble, completely untethered from the news media or even just casual conversations with strangers and probably have no idea who Luigi is right now. The news might not be able to reach them, but a jury summons from the state can, and the prosecution is going to hunt for these individuals specifically.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (13 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 175 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    That’s definitely a conflict of interest.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 172 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    A certain fair and unbiased trial he's getting..../s

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 150 points 2 years ago

    There were 24,849 homicides in 2022.

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm

    Almost none of them, if any, likely required a nationwide manhunt.

    Not one of them required an escort of 30 police officers plus a helicopter to the courtroom.

    As far as I can tell, none of them were charged with terrorism.

    And now he's getting as biased a judge as he could possibly get.

    If we're going to start charging murderers with terrorism, let's start with the cops.

  • source
  • [–] 119 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Rich people being shot means nature is healing ❤️

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 113 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Surely she’ll do the right thing and recuse herself from the case.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 105 points 2 years ago

    This is the sort of thing judges are supposed to recuse themselves over.

  • source
  • [–] 93 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    "conflict of interest" was old speak from the dark ages.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 78 points 2 years ago

    you people clearly don't know what you are talking about. "conflict of interest" only happens if it conflicts the interests of billionaires

  • source
  • [–] 75 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I would think it might be excusable if this were a straight-up murder charge, which is mostly facts and evidence based. However, if they're charging him with terrorism, which is much more subjective, doesn't that make this a serious conflict of interest?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 72 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Doesn't seem like a conflict of interest /s

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 52 points 2 years ago (3 children)
    load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 52 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 46 points 2 years ago

    This judge needs to recuse themselves from the case.

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago

    Yikes. Incredibly messed up.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 2 years ago

    Once against proving we have a two tiered justice system.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I guess conflicts of interest just aren't a thing anymore.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 20 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Definitely good reason to get them swapped out for a different judge but are they going to oversee the whole trial or just the pretrial?

    Also, they were an executive at Pfizer, not an insurance firm.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 18 points 2 years ago*

    Kill her husband? Send a message?

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago*

    It's the magistrate judge doing the pretrial hearings, not the trial judge. Not great, but not quite as outrageous.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    This motherfucker was chosen specifically because of his racist and homophobic bias. Endorsing him is endorsing his prejudices.

    Go on, you pieces or shit. Defend this horrifying bastard. It just places you on the same disgusting level as him.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›