- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Your affiant asked Boston if she used the phrase “Delay, Deny, Depose. You people are next.” during her call earlier today with BlueCross BlueShield to which she acknowledged she said it and apologized. Boston stated she used those words because it’s what is in the news right now. Boston advised she learned of the phrase because of the current events regarding the UnitedHeathcare homicide. Boston stated she did not own any firearms, and she was not a danger to anyone. Boston further stated the healthcare companies played games and deserved karma from the world because they are evil.
You must log in or register to comment.
start making shirts
I’d wager the “Delay, deny, depose” part had less to do with her arrest than the “You people are next” part.
Don’t make threats, just act…
Be the Luigi you wish to see in the world.
I’m going to assume you mean by voting. Please be careful about what you say, I don’t like removing comments.
Voting, yes. And also communicating regularly with our representatives. They can’t possible get things right without input from their constituents.
An action I’m in favor of is canceling policies. “Since your company is in such a habit of denying customers the service they have paid for, I’m no longer paying for your service.” Get a few million of us to do that and maybe something will get done. Money talks louder than ballots especially when the ballot box is just piped to /dev/null the way it is for so many Americans.
I am new on this instance, came from .world, and it’s nice to see a mod give someone a chance rather than just swinging the ban hammer.
Thanks, but I will temp ban easily if I’m pretty sure they’re a troll. Every mod is different too, just like the place that shall not be named. I love this instance though.
Would discussion of the break down of the efficacy of civil venues for change, leading to this kind of violence, as an outcome of their own actions, be acceptable?
Talking about what lead to “this kind of violence” and calling for it are 2 very different things. You all are extremely smart, you can figure it out.
I know from experience some mods don’t see the difference. Which is why I asked.
TBH, it kind of sucks being a mod. I don’t have time to mod that often and I rely a lot on reports. I try to give the other mods the benefit of the doubt that they didn’t have time to really check in most cases. There are definitely some exceptions to that though. I also have a lot of experience with trolls from the r/ place so it doesn’t take much for me to see genuine comments most of the time. Of course, I’m still sometimes wrong and try to apologize if I can.
This makes sense. It’s unjust, but considering the world we live in and the current events, it was very stupid to make such a statement on record.
1st Ammendment much?
That only really matters for people with money. The rest of us are fucked.
Guys guys… he’s just a messenger!
This is why I love being on an instance with downvotes disabled. Way better experience.
This is MADNESS!!
SPARTATATATTTAATATATTTATATTTATAA
Wouldn’t you be more comfortable on .world with the rest of the class traitors?
Excuse me? Just what do you think “it’s unjust” means?
I’m not saying it’s right she’s arrested, but we live in a state that values the lives of the wealthy over the rights of the proles. Of course she’s going to get arrested for parroting threats against the wealthy, they’re scared now and the police serve their interests over those of the public.
I’m not a class traitor for noticing that. If you make threats against the state, the state is going to take action against you.
A death threat is a death threat.
You don’t make death threats on record like she did. You send an anonymous letter with the words made up of cut out letters from magazines and newspapers then pasted on the paper, being careful not to leave any prints or DNA.
Yeah, obviously stupid to do it in a way that could be tied back to you, but this is constitutionally protected speech.
The supreme court ruled in Virginia v Black that only “statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.” are unlawful, and this doesn’t communicate an intent to commit violence, just that someone should.
She said “you’re next” very obviously referring to the murder of the United Health CEO. If that’s not a direct that, I don’t know what is.
The supreme court has defined legally actionable threats extremely narrowly. Yeah that’s a pretty direct threat, but I don’t think it meets the legal standard of a “true threat”
In NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. The Supreme Court ruled someone saying “If we catch any of you going into these racist stores, we’re going to break your damn neck.” was protected speech.
That’s more direct than her threat.
There’s an insanely high standard for convicting someone over a threat.
Lol, I think the magazine letters would tip them off. When is the last time you read a physical magazine or had access to one?
I was gonna say to print different web pages, but apparently printers have fingerprints that can tie the printed material directly to the unique printer.
Settle down, they’re allowed to have an opinion.
It’s not about being comfortable. This is a public forum and I for one don’t want the content I consume to be in a thought vacuum.
While I can empathize and even appeal to Boston’s remark, I have no interest in the US devolving a land of vigilantism and “purges.”
