Impressive piece of journalism.

Good. He’s overusing his “witch hunt” rhetoric, in a situation where it’s unusually easy for anybody to verify the details for oneself.

I see, thank you for the detail.

According to the White House, El Salvador’s government received $6m (£4.62m) to take the detainees

Ahhh, that’s the part I was missing. I thought the Central American govts caved awfully fast after initially protesting the deportations. This is going to get ugly, if they’re basically being turned into a revenue-stream. El Salv will need to ensure they make a profit of some sort on that 6m.

… he’s a Mennonite, lot of them won’t even use the internal combustion engine. It’s one of those low-tech sects of Christianity like Amish.

Interesting to be cutting oversight during a time when Boeing was having so much trouble with its planes.

Let’s not ignore that there’s a real, policy-based disagreement here. Tech companies like to be able to import top talent from wherever they can get it (and are generally correct that this is overall beneficial), while white nationalists are dead set against the idea, as it strikes directly against the very core of their values.

It’s a legit disagreement, and pretty foundational.

That said, I do overall agree that we’re kinda beaten at the moment, and too busy licking our wounds and regrouping to care that much about this.

grapples with political turmoil and North Korean propaganda.

Y’know, of all the world’s countries, I would expect S Korea to be one of the most resistant to adversarial propaganda. I mean, here in the US we were largely insulated from it during the Cold War, so we didn’t really have the exposure and thus experience in dealing with it. But S Korea has always been in radio range of an adversary, so shouldn’t it be pretty well understood as “a thing” by the public at large?

Like, when someone knocks on my door and asks if I’d like to talk about Jesus, I understand exactly what is happening and why. We’re culturally familiar with that here. If a S Korean picks a pamphlet up off the ground and it’s obvious N Korean propaganda, do they have that same degree of cultural familiarity?

The comment I was replying to said the following:

For anyone wondering, this is what those staff ignored for two hours (WARNING: this may well trigger you, it sure as fuck ruined my day): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx4in4UpdWE

This video is 43 seconds long. You hear that sound out of a little kid’s leg, followed by the screaming for two hours, and don’t immediately call the ambulance, you’re not a reasonable adult. You’re an inhuman monster. Anyone saying “well maybe they thought he was just acting out” is ignoring the basic facts of the case so they can be contrary on the Internet.

This implies staff knowingly ignored a severe injury, which is what I find unlikely and wanted to get straight.

Agreed, mostly. My issue is with the assumption that the staff knowingly neglected a severe injury, which is what the other commenter was trying to imply for some reason. There’s just no way that ends well for them, in our country where people will chew out teachers for even giving a bad grade. The only way this strikes me as possible is the staff severely underestimating the child’s condition after a “slip and fall”.

Perhaps I don’t. Though I think each of your examples has systemic reasons that make it unique from this situation.

It’s a school, so there’s no capitalist profit incentive unlike a nursing home. These are not bystanders, but people with a specific responsibility towards this child, and again, no profit incentive.

In this case, the child has parents that will be expecting their kid back from school in one piece at the end of the day. There is no way in hell they could realistically get away with knowingly ignoring such a severe injury. Broken femurs, again, can kill you due to internal bleeding. Not the death of some elderly nursing home patient, the death of a child (who has parents) under your care in a place where children do not die very often.

I don’t see it as very likely.

So let me get this straight:

You think the staff heard something like this, and therefore knew that there was a severe injury, but just ignored it for some reason? Maybe they hated the child or something?

Even though they would most definitely get in deep trouble for ignoring what is actually a life threatening injury after anyone found out?

It’s actually between those two extremes. It’s in the name, Chief Executive Officer. They’re essentially there to execute the will of the ownership. They manage the company.

edit: To further expand on that, it’s not too different from the executive of a country. While they make a lot of decisions, one thing they don’t deserve blame for is any laws passed by the legislature. It’s not a perfect analogy, but it captures the basic idea.

Sure, they do make a lot of decisions, no question. However, those decisions are at the direction of a Board of Directors.

In the same way a manager would be fired if they went against their owners wishes, a CEO is similarly subject to their superiors.

The CEO is an employee, a manager. You know how shops have managers hired by the owners to run the place? If that were the motive, wouldn’t owners be the preferred target?

Yeesh. I knew the Abrams was outdated and has become really maintenance heavy, but I wasn’t totally convinced it needed to be replaced.

I am now. These boys deserve a better tank.

The article specifies that the bullet votes claim used incorrect numbers. The man lied, or was misinformed or something.

Witness was just one example of one type of evidence I would accept. Many forms of fraud can happen that can be witnessed. I also listed others.

What specific irregularities? I haven’t heard anything credible yet. This article is about how some of the irregularities being claimed are actually falsehoods people made up, the numbers they use are incorrect.

Evidence could really be anything, a witness, a whistleblower, a report of some sort. A shift in voting patterns doesn’t really qualify is all, since that happens all the time, and is very normal.

You need evidence to justify a recount when they’re normally only expected to shift the results by less than a percentage point. They’re not cheap, you don’t just do them whenever people feel like it.

There’s still a lot of education that needs to be done on these topics, it’s all still pretty niche among the broader public.