True, but it only happened after these journalists confronted the DA’s office with the results of their investigation. The DA says they had no idea this guy was a nazi, but if that’s true then their hiring and vetting process has serious problems, and I doubt those are going to be addressed in a meaningful way.

Verdi and Rey say they have shielded their grandkids from the severity of Gentile’s current situation in South Georgia, where he is clad in an orange jumpsuit and fighting to remain in the country. They told the children that he had to leave on an urgent trip.

“They ask, ‘Where is my daddy?’ And we can’t tell them, ‘Daddy is in jail,’” Verdi said.

“We had to lie to them because we don’t want to hurt them,” Rey added.

Absolutely deranged scumbag behavior, voting for Trump is bad enough but lying to children in your care to protect your own fragile egos from what you’ve done (that “we don’t want to hurt them” is self serving bullshit whether they’re consciously aware of it or not) is even worse. Those kids are going to go to school and they’re going to hear what really happened to their father from one of their classmates, probably in the most traumatizing way possible, all because these fucking sorry excuses for caregivers didn’t have the backbones to admit what they’ve done.

Yeah, the fact that the prosecution did the absolute bare minimum

Over about two-and-a-half days, prosecutors moved quickly, calling only five witnesses, including Mills, a medical examiner and Nichols’ mother, RowVaughn Wells.

and the judge allowed in irrelevant evidence

For the first time, the defense introduced evidence of items that investigators found in Nichols’ car

didn’t make their jobs any easier, but yeah I don’t know how any reasonable jury could’ve done what they did

Just because he may be pushing eugenics for somewhat sympathetic reasons tied to his own adverse childhood experiences doesn’t make him pushing eugenics any less dangerous

LaFavers said she was changing some settings on her phone to make sure there’s never another surprise delivery candy crush at home.

C’mon guys, that joke was easier than taking credit card information from a single parent

They updated that dateline since this was posted to

Updated 5:07 AM CDT, May 7, 2025

I think this article was initially “Murdoch family member sues other Murdoch family members” back when the suit was initially filed last year and now we’re just getting to the first hearings in it today

Besides that, their actual business model is about as close to mutual aid as mainstream American society gets outside of libraries. Give what you can, but all are welcome to watch.

Actually, it’s the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and independent members stations who choose to syndicate NPR and PBSs programming who decide that

Essentially correct, but I think this will be struck down in the courts and never take effect in any meaningful way because the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is an independent organization that is funded by but in no way controlled by the US government. Also, the member stations that the Corporation funds are all independent organizations who choose to purchase programming from NPR/PBS and there’s no way Trump can stop them from doing that.

The people who designed this system knew someone would come along to try to mess with it and intentionally set it up to make that as difficult as possible.

Thank you.

Yeah, I’ve struggled a bit to process a really good friend of mine being raped years and years ago, and the “weird levels of guilt and self-doubt” is something I experienced in my own way, because I thought I got traumatized “more” than my friend did (though I know now that’s not how trauma really works) and thought that was selfish of me (which I know now was a silly thing to think), and sorting all of that stuff out was a big part of my own journey. And I guess watching my friend wrestle with that stupid “what is the right way to feel about what happened to me and how should I perform those feelings” aspect of trauma, and watching her have to deal with other people’s feelings about her feelings, and hearing her “joke” multiple times about how being murdered would have been less of an inconvenience for her is all a big part of what makes me feel like I do about what rape is and isn’t.

We both have the same desire here, but slightly different stances on where that line should be drawn and that’s ok.

Thank you a million times over for understanding.

This is a really important point and definitely not how I wanted that to be interpreted. I agree 1000% with all of this

People process things differently. Some will be more and some will be less traumatized by being raped.

Forcing a particular experience onto a victim, saying they must feel a certain way, is just so incredibly problematic. A victim can feel whatever they feel and process a crime against them however they want. And the way they do so doesn’t change whether a crime was committed against them.

I think forcing another person to go through that process, whatever process that might be for them, is the essential thing that makes it the crime that it is, but I definitely don’t mean to say that a survivor needs to have a specific experience. It’s the heinous nature of making someone a survivor and forcing them to go through that personal journey that sets it apart as a particular kind of harm to me.

Apologies my initial statement was clumsy here, and thank you for your reply because I really do think all the points you made are extremely important.

Yeah, this is actually a really good point I should edit into my post

Research has shown that getting traffic stopped by police is correlated with lower likelihood to vote (arc). I think it’s reasonable to infer that the heavy visibility of constant police actions against citizens has a huge chilling effect on democratic participation in Texas (and like every other red state in the south too).

Yeah, basically, if theft can be committed against a corporation or business entity (which I don’t think anyone would dispute) surely it can be committed against an estate (i.e. the legal representation of a deceased person for settling their will, which may or may not include next of kin, but the basic idea is still there)

The dead also can’t have their consent violated and feel that particular psychological trauma which I think is the real root of what makes rape such a particularly awful thing.

Fair enough, but when someone commits an arson not knowing someone’s in the building and that person dies it’s still murder, and it doesn’t seem right that defendant knowledge matters in one situation and not the other.

I’d say if the alleged conduct here is true it should be charged as attempted rape and punished the same as an actual rape, so this is kind of a semantic thing, but it’s something I feel pretty strongly about. I just think that it dilutes our understanding of what rape is and why it’s so horrible to call something rape when it doesn’t happen to a living creature.

I’m not saying one is worse or more traumatizing than another or trying to diminish the horrible thing that was allegedly inflicted on the deceased’s family and friends here, and I would be totally in favor of sexual assault of a corpse carrying the same penalties as rape. I just believe that it’s a disservice to rape victims to call sexual assault of a corpse rape. The particular harm that was inflicted here is different than the harm that’s inflicted when a living creature has their consent violated. It might just be a semantic distinction but words mean things and powerful words like “rape” should be defined very narrowly.

So, federal government goons can just crash in to your court proceedings and kidnap people, and if your state judges try to stop them from doing that you’ll punish them by removing the power to hear cases that was given to them by the voters of the state, and that is supposed to restore confidence in Wisconsin’s court system? Like, did they just not say it out loud all together like that before putting out this ruling or is the Wisconsin supreme court really this stupid?

I don’t think you can rape a corpse because the suffering of a living victim is an essential part of what makes rape rape.

I do think it should criminal to commit sexual acts with a corpse, but I don’t think we should call that crime rape.

That’s a smart buying strategy, but unless you’re actually pulling out the antennas these subscription services use it won’t be an effective security strategy

Yep, unless you get down to the level of pulling antennas off of circuit boards, but you’ll probably have to be careful that that doesn’t set off some sort of anti tampering system that shuts the whole car down

e; Also, doing these kinds of modifications are definitely going to violate your car warranty and maybe void your car insurance

Also also, any time you’re messing around with electrical components there’s a non-zero chance of electrocution or starting a fire, so in good conscience I can’t say this is a realistically safe option that people should pursue (like, I wouldn’t stop anyone from doing it, but I’m not encouraging it, just trying to highlight how completely fucked the situation is for consumers in the United States)