Minnesota U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar’s guest for the State of the Union address was removed from the chamber during President Trump’s speech and later arrested.
“My guest, Aliya Rahman, stood up silently in the gallery during the president’s speech for a short period of time, part of which other guests were also standing. For that, she was forcibly removed, despite warning officers about her injured shoulders and ultimately charged with ‘Unlawful Conduct,’" Omar said in a statement.
Rahman, a Bangladeshi American, was dragged out of her vehicle by federal agents in Minneapolis last month on the way to a medical appointment. Rahman testified at a Congressional forum that she was dragged through the street and suffered severe injuries to her shoulders, leaving her unable to lift her arms normally.
Omar claims Rahman was treated aggressively again last night.
“Reports indicate she was aggressively handled until someone intervened to secure medical attention. She was taken to George Washington University Hospital for treatment and later booked at the United States Capitol Police headquarters,” Omar said. "The heavy-handed response to a peaceful guest sends a chilling message about the state of our democracy. I am calling for a full explanation of why this arrest occurred.”
some people complain this comes out every time R’s are in power, like it somehow doesn’t exist when D’a are. personally, i prefer my enemies feeling comfortable enough to take their masks off
Well. You have them where you want them.
Step 2?
I want racists to be scared to show they’re racist, not comfortable. The less comfortable they are, the more comfortable everyone else is. What kind of logic are you following?
It’s the same stupid bullshit that Clarence Thomas says about his Republican benefactors as they vote to take away the voting rights act and affirmative action that tries to help students from classes that have been systematically disadvantaged.
just that like my enemies out in the open
So you can what
There was some “debate” a liberal was having recently. Think it was with Hasan but don’t remember. The usual “lesser evil” bull shit. They were talking about healthcare and saying “well, if 100,000 people die without healthcare under Republicans and only 70,000 die under Democrats. Clearly that’s better”
It’s like, dude, you are just advocating for killing 70,000 people.
gotta love completely arbitrary made-up numbers when it comes to these “debates” too. hell, I would hazard to guess that the US’s godawful for-profit/ratfucking galore healthcare system kills far more than that through sheer negligence (denying claims, general expense detering use, deadly conditions that could get caught/managed early with proper proactice healthcare instead reactive (which is more lucrative), people being to afraid to call an ambulance, the list goes on).
all lives that could be saved by ditching it for some single payer/universal system, call out all these parasitic middlemen.
I was absolutely cutting into you earlier, and I stand by that. But right here, you’re nothing but correct.
Eh fuck off. I’m pretty mediocre with math, but your whole schtick about “lesser evil” fall right apart when your own make believe story spares THIRTY THOUSAND lives.
You’re making your own point.
Tell me, what is the number that you would change your opinion? 80,000? 90,000? 99,999? Does it only change when the line crosses past 100,00?
Or is the entire premise of the scenario just dumb as fuck?
The entire point is how absolutely brain dead the entire argument is. That was the point of my conclusion “you are just advocating for killing 70,000 people”. It is a rejection of the entire framing that the world works as if it’s a “trolley problem”. It is to reject the false premise the entire argument is built on. It’s to scream and say “who the fuck tied the people to the track!?” Can we stop acting like pulling the lever is the only option? The world is not a fucking trolley problem.
It’s a testament to your complete lack of understanding that you think it’s about “math”.
Judging the performance of a ruling party based on how many people they kill is just an insane premise to begin with. You should reject the opinions of anyone that does that.
That’s the entire point of why I said “you are just advocating for killing 70,000” people. It exposes the true meaning behind what they are arguing for within its material outcomes and reality.
At least it does to anyone that can use their brain. You, well, you can apparently only see the world through the filter in which you have been told to look at it with. That’s why the premise of the 100k or 70k question you accept without even thinking.
It’s only purpose serves to justify that people keep dying from not being able to afford access to healthcare.
Dude.
I’m responding to you doing exactly that. And not only that but making up a number without sources while you’re at it.
Your enemy is you. And I’m just here to point it out.
Go back and read my original comment that you replied to. I was talking about a “lesser evil voting” liberal debating someone. They made up this scenario of 100k vs. 70k. I am not the one that came up with that stupid hypothetical premise. I was literally mocking it.
You, misread my comment and then defended the made up scenario that I was mocking.
You might want to read a comment twice before you respond to it. Because if you could read my last response and not think “hmmm, did I misunderstand something? He seems to be rejecting his own hypothetical. He’s either really really stupid or maybe I misread something.”
That’s what a normal person with some level of self doubt would do. Just take a second to double check their own assumptions when faced with such a massive contradiction.
It’s what I did when I read your comment just now. Literally checked to see if I had a typo in my original comment or something. Because I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. But, no, you’re the type of person that isn’t even smart enough to question yourself.
Had me in the first 90% but I have eyes. No you weren’t, and no you didn’t. Please link it if I’m wrong.
I’m all for fucking up, but in this case I haven’t. Your “in some story somewhere” is exactly what I’m talking about. This is no longer about anything real. My whole point is to make that known. So go ahead and provide the things you need to provide to be right.
Worst part is I don’t disagree with you. I disagree with how you’re going about it.
So, wait, which is it now? I “made up the hypothetical premise” or “I made up the debate of a liberal making up a hypothetical premise?”
Because those are two different things mate. You’ve spent this whole time arguing I made up the 100k vs. 70k premise.
Like, are you not capable of scrolling up? Are you really so unable to admit you misunderstood something that now your demanding a link to the debate I was mentioning?
Like, I have it. I’ll look for the exact part of the debate for you. But you’ve literally just changed the entire point you were arguing against.
It’s a two hour long discussion. I’ll find a timestamp for you if it’s that important. But, holy shit, did you just move the goal post.
https://youtu.be/0jQ7cob4sLo
It’s 3-5 comments up. We’re not inventing teleportation over here.
https://vger.to/lemmy.ml/comment/24188869
I’ll link it for you.
Smiling foxes and snarling wolves. Or like an old saying goes, one party throws rocks unabashedly, the other throws rocks and hides their hands.