• null@lemmy.nullspace.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    You’ve completely lost the plot.

    What @FaceDeer@fedia.io was saying is that Hilary Clinton shouldn’t be exempt from being locked up if she’s guilty of crimes.

    I don’t think they’d even disagree with you that she should be locked up if found guilty of crimes against humanity. They even cited an example of one.

    • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      You’ve completely lost the plot.

      That’s not a nice thing to say.

      I don’t see any way of reading those posts which I can interpret the way you said though. Which words are you specifically referencing when you say that

      @FaceDeer@fedia.io was saying is that Hilary Clinton shouldn’t be exempt from …

      ?

      I bring your attention again to the comment I replied to, which reads:

      Those are political things. Those are things she should have been voted out of power for, not locked up for.

      (Emphasis mine)

      This is in a direct response to @Maeve@kbin.earth 's comment listing several things which are firmly in the category of “atrocities”.

      So how exactly do you reach your interpretation?