• Melkath@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re injecting legal drivel to minimize events that have now occurred.

    Either you are an opportunistic asshole, an unwitting weasle who needs to find lands to burrow under that aren’t quite as land bearing, or you are a spineless prick who will soften the foundation of the master you surrendered your spine to.

    Admittedly, I’m having a hard time being cordial in internet conversations these days, but I am pretty sure my second paragraph isn’t patently false.

    • nogooduser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You really need to chill mate.

      You asked “May?” implying that you are questioning why it may be complicate and they replied that they think that the article means he may be legally complicit which has a specific requirement that they helpfully provided.

      They didn’t inject the “legal drivel” the original article did. You’re arguing against things that they didn’t say.

      • Melkath@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        And you really need to gaggle my ball sack.

        Joe Biden just invested 50 billion dollars into genocide and told everyone to sit and spin on it.

    • livus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      @Melkath ha ha ha nah that’s a real swing and a miss.

      OP’s article is literally about lawyers talking about international law.

      I was simply clarifying the point in the article because as you point out the headline “may” makes no sense from a layperson’s perspective if you haven’t read the article.

      Not sure why you’re projecting onto me.