@aihorde@lemmy.dbzer0.com draw for me several people pointing at a computer screen and discussing whether an image is faked

Style: unstable diffusers

deleted by creator

They already did! The ‘presidential immunity’ ruling they recently made basically said that if a President does it, we (SCOTUS) will decide if it is an official act, and if it is, then the Prez is blameless, but if we say the act isn’t ‘official’ then WE will tell you the Prez is a baddie.

This probably isn’t helpful, but I like guided tours where a tour guide tells you about the castles and churches while everyone dutifully takes pictures to prove they were there. The guide/agency arranges the busses/boats and hotels so all you have to do is follow along with the program. The downside is that it always costs too much. The upside is that you spend less time waiting in lines because the planners will have all that worked out with the various sites. Some of those trips are almost exclusively senior citizens, but some have wider age ranges. Either way, you get to meet a set of fellow travelers who may become permanent online friends.

Alright, I admit that from a tactical point of view, if the local cop got shot it would have alerted other security and maybe no one would have died … though at such short range, it would be likely that the cop died instead of the firefighter in the stands.

That said, I still don’t blame the cop – who I presume never had Secret Service training – for taking cover when someone aims a gun at them. That seems like an instinctive reaction that you’d need serious training to overcome. I expect it to take a few seconds at least to figure out how to approach the situation before you stick your head back up for easy targeting.

Better solutions might have been to either: a) have at least one person on that group of rooftops and every/any other roof-group in advance, or short of that b) when rally-goers said there was someone on the roof with a gun, radio that info FIRST and THEN look. It is possible that the latter happened, but no one passed the information forward and the cops haven’t owned up to the failure yet, but IF that happened, that sort of detail would tend to come out later rather than immediately.

I was hoping daily beast’s source link had more info, but no. I even looked for the full article and it is equally devoid of details. From apnews :

A local law enforcement officer climbed to the roof and found Crooks, who pointed the rifle at the officer. The officer retreated down the ladder, and the gunman quickly fired toward Trump, the officials said. That’s when U.S. Secret Service gunmen shot him, the officials said.

Honestly, I don’t blame the office for not getting pointlessly shot. I hope the officer immediately messaged the situation, but it was probably too late.

In fact, one of the news sites last night showed the shooting from an angle where you could see the anti-sniper to Trump’s right (left side of TV screen) as the shots came in.

I’d swear I could see the anti-sniper’s recoil hitting BEFORE Trump was shot. Don’t quote me on that, though. I’m not an expert.

In case anyone just wants to see the pic:

from: https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/images-trump-secret-service-smiling-after-shooting-are-fake-2024-07-14/

While I didn’t think it was staged, I did have a post removed because I was answering the question of how someone might fake it. At the time I was thinking it was a silly mockery of conspiracy theorists, but in retrospect I am GLAD my post was removed lest anyone think I was serious.

New info from TV coverage says the shooter was outside the secured area and had climbed a low nearby roof.

Edit for clarity: this is not yet confirmed, so we’ll surely hear more later

Agreed. Further, Chozo@fedia.io in this post commented that we can hear the rounds hitting before the report, and since blanks don’t hit, we can presume this was not faked.

So far this is the best pic I could find so far – open it in a new tab to apnews.com

Removed by mod

CNN speculated that lots of those shots were the Secret Service returning fire. They are reporting on TV that you can hear them saying “Shooter down” and that it was then safe to move Trump. I couldn’t hear that, but someone on TV said they could hear that in the chatter.

Agreed. Further, I doubt any of the OP’s examples are tracking. lui=english just means to have the page use english (not spanish, chinese, etc.), cat=web means not shopping, news or anything like that – just a web search, and while I;m not sure about device, I THINK that refers to whether the result should be formatted for phone, desktop, or such.

Ummm… why does Israel allow any settlers at all when they still haven’t dealt with Palestinians who lost their homes some 50 years ago? It doesn’t really matter whose ‘fault’ it is that these people exist. They do exist. They have no country and no one to take them in. I’m not saying they had to figure it out in 1967, but somewhere in the 70s this should have been resolved.

Are you talking about this?

• https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-universe-is-not-locally-real-and-the-physics-nobel-prize-winners-proved-it/
• https://discoveringcosmos.com/the-universe-is-not-locally-real/

Reminds me of a piece that is gone – but the below rephrase comes from here: https://mstdn.social/@ZhiZhu/109502665651546617

"The Paradox of Tolerance disappears if you look at tolerance, not as a moral standard, but as a social contract.

If someone does not abide by the contract, then they are not covered by it.

In other words: The intolerant are not following the rules of the social contract of mutual tolerance.

Since they have broken the terms of the contract, they are no longer covered by the contract, and their intolerance should NOT be tolerated."

I agree with you on most points except your first: the central point Vox made was to dump Biden as if that was the only option. I WISH Vox suggested a daring change – or ANY other option. Personally, I don’t think that simply replacing Biden would seal the deal.

I do absolutely agree that the U.S. public seems to blame Biden for inflation and credits Trump with … what? wanting retribution? As if being a wind bag means a person is a strong leader? At the least, too many potential voters seem to have forgotten that a consensus of countries ousted their monarchs/dictators in favor of either democracy or communism. Populations everywhere seem to agree that strong man leaders are both bad for the people and painfully hard to remove. Further, lots of U.S. citizens lost relatives fighting Nazis, so why are they trying to give Nazis power now? We fought that war. We paid in lives to stop that. It dishonors the dead to just give in to it now.

tldr; Vox talks about multi-party systems where coalitions of many groups (not just two) can join together to defeat anti-democratic candidates – but then thrusts the U.S. in the mix as if it is comparable, and it is not. It is just another lazy commiseration, “Woe is us! Woe is us! Throw Joe Biden under the bus! We don’t like Trump! We say it loud, – but another change is not allowed! We’ll only fight with our own kind. So right moves forth. And left? Behind.”

chunks FTA:

In particular, the winning parties in both the UK and France won by realizing that the nature of their systems required that they sacrifice some specific candidates in order to defeat the right.

Unlike France and Britain, the United States only has two viable choices on offer: the center-left Democrats and the radical right Republicans.

Biden can’t count on help from other parties to boost him the way it helped Labour or the NFP; polling suggests he actually does slightly worse when third parties are on the ballot.

In their systems, the French and the British had a strategy for addressing their problems: sacrificing marginal legislative candidates in service of the greater good of defeating the right. But in the American system, sacrificing marginal candidates won’t be enough to overcome the effects of general public discontent and anti-incumbent sentiment.

Here, the ticket is defined by the president — a man increasingly seen as too old for the public to trust in addressing their concerns. Defeating the right might very well require the center-left in America to make a more radical kind of political sacrifice: a change at the very top of the ticket.

FU, Vox! The comparison is invalid. This COULD have been an article on why the U.S. needs to change its voting system, but instead it was just another take-down of Biden. removed about Biden and wringing your hands about Trump is EASY. Worse, it is stupid and LAZY. We already know the anti-Biden arguments. We need an alternate playbook. Something like a 2025 plan for the left where as soon as a Congress can do it, they pass new laws invalidating the idea of ‘Presidential Immunity’, taking back rights that the Courts have revoked, and fixing what has been broken by years of deregulation and underfunding (fund the IRS, fund health/food/safety inspectors, and pay them through tax rates of America’s Golden Age of the 50s/60s).

I read the other posts about your relationship with the local birds and now I’m really thinking it is a kid saying, “Mom won’t feed me anymore, but she said you’d do it. I CAN’T!!! Look! I’m TRYING and it doesn’t WORK!”