Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 17-Feb-2025 09:17:38 JST Paul Cantrell

   • Lawprofblawg

   This — THIS — what @lawprofblawg said — and also:

   You cannot determine whether you saved money when your only source of data is a sociopathic con artist.

   Basic question for every reporter, every politician, every citizen every time this swindler opens his mouth:

   “Says who?” https://mstdn.social/@lawprofblawg/114016215723252218

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 17-Feb-2025 09:19:31 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     Hello, I am pleased to report that I personally saved the US government $173 trillion dollars.

     Oh, you don't believe me? Fair enough — but my track record of telling the truth is a hell of a lot better than the chronic liar to whom you all are giving your attention and your column inches.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 17-Feb-2025 09:24:36 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     EXTREMELY CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENT

     News sources can and should use priors about the person speaking when assessing the truth of their claims.

     Failure to use such priors is a reporting failure.

     “_________, a chronic liar, today claimed that…” •is• an acceptable sentence for a new story.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 17-Feb-2025 09:26:23 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     Also, focusing on the impact of their actions — WHO are they affecting and HOW? — and leaving the random bullshit they spout for the 11th paragraph is also very much an acceptable practice for a news source. Acceptable? Nay, responsible.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 17-Feb-2025 09:27:40 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     • A Flock of Beagles

     @burnitdown
     Not if it's true. AIUI, factuality is an absolute defense against defamation claims. (Corrections to that from actual lawyers welcome.)

   • Embed this notice
     A Flock of Beagles (burnitdown@beige.party)'s status on Monday, 17-Feb-2025 09:27:41 JST A Flock of Beagles

     in reply to

     @inthehands i believe they could be sued for saying something like that, and it's why they don't?

   • Embed this notice
     Nick Silkey 🪓🪵 🪣💧 (nicksilkey@hachyderm.io)'s status on Monday, 17-Feb-2025 10:07:18 JST Nick Silkey 🪓🪵 🪣💧

     in reply to

     • Lawprofblawg

     @inthehands @lawprofblawg 👋 true. but if you believe you "are" the US in a general sense since you're all the capital, and all that capital going to the government was (is?) kind of yours anyways, you're saving your own money.*

     *I do not believe this, it's sociopathic rationalizaing. But I attest the oligarchs do based on their repeated pattern of actions - including ✨ t h e i r o w n ✨ words they've published and told us directly (Yarvin's RAGE, Thiel's op ed, a16z manifesto, etc).