actually, the first amendment, I believe, permits unspecified threats of violence as long as there is no proximal, specific, ie named individual in a stated time period. Therefore they cannot threaten you with any kind of breaking of the first amendment.
Vance is a piece of work, his co-ordinated bullying of Volodymyr Zelenskiy with Trump as his co-bull dog is a case in point. It was so blatantly set up beforehand. This is an attempt to silence you by scaring you. Sarah, I know you don't scare easily. But watch your back, and be careful how you word things. And make sure you lawyer-up in advance. Thank you for your courage and your diligent support of Ukraine.
Having covered the war in Ukraine for many years, I would have to note that many of the Russian state journalists closely cooperated with Russian intelligence, including the GRU, military intelligence, and this was discovered by Ukrainian intelligence and journalists and published often on YouTube. Therefore, to consider these people who are all but in uniform as "free speech" victims is ludicrous. More to the point, if I understood correctly, Sarah said these "journalists" should be hunted down and should face justice. Yes, indeed. I fully endorse her comment as a civilian who also embrances non-violation for civic organizations. Coming from a citizen from a liberal democracy working for an emerging democracy, that doesn't mean "hunt them down and kill them summarily" as Russian soldiers themselves would do, with their state lackey media looking on and appluading.
I have seen Russian state journalists *present while Ukrainian POWs were tortured* and other obvious violations of the Geneva Convention such as parading POWs in front of the media.
"Facing justice" means going to the Hague or a domestic court where due process and the rule of law more or less prevail -- which is more than we can say about Russia itself or the zones it occupies. These are important distinctions. Sarah did not incite violence or retribution and her case would likely be dismissed as frivolous by any civilized court of law. If Russia and the pro-Kremlin JD Vance want to hysterically misportray her statements as "violence," the answer isn't only "First Amendment" or Ukrainian speech law, such as it is. The answer is to say: why does "justice" imply "summary execution" to you, JD? Is that how you roll? That's how Putin rolls.
actually, the first amendment, I believe, permits unspecified threats of violence as long as there is no proximal, specific, ie named individual in a stated time period. Therefore they cannot threaten you with any kind of breaking of the first amendment.
Vance is a piece of work, his co-ordinated bullying of Volodymyr Zelenskiy with Trump as his co-bull dog is a case in point. It was so blatantly set up beforehand. This is an attempt to silence you by scaring you. Sarah, I know you don't scare easily. But watch your back, and be careful how you word things. And make sure you lawyer-up in advance. Thank you for your courage and your diligent support of Ukraine.
Maybe he should focus more on MTG and her threats to people?
Thank you for supporting Ukraine. JDV is the Earth's second biggest a$$h0le. The Blue whale is third
Wow, just wow. Don't know what else to say
Having covered the war in Ukraine for many years, I would have to note that many of the Russian state journalists closely cooperated with Russian intelligence, including the GRU, military intelligence, and this was discovered by Ukrainian intelligence and journalists and published often on YouTube. Therefore, to consider these people who are all but in uniform as "free speech" victims is ludicrous. More to the point, if I understood correctly, Sarah said these "journalists" should be hunted down and should face justice. Yes, indeed. I fully endorse her comment as a civilian who also embrances non-violation for civic organizations. Coming from a citizen from a liberal democracy working for an emerging democracy, that doesn't mean "hunt them down and kill them summarily" as Russian soldiers themselves would do, with their state lackey media looking on and appluading.
I have seen Russian state journalists *present while Ukrainian POWs were tortured* and other obvious violations of the Geneva Convention such as parading POWs in front of the media.
"Facing justice" means going to the Hague or a domestic court where due process and the rule of law more or less prevail -- which is more than we can say about Russia itself or the zones it occupies. These are important distinctions. Sarah did not incite violence or retribution and her case would likely be dismissed as frivolous by any civilized court of law. If Russia and the pro-Kremlin JD Vance want to hysterically misportray her statements as "violence," the answer isn't only "First Amendment" or Ukrainian speech law, such as it is. The answer is to say: why does "justice" imply "summary execution" to you, JD? Is that how you roll? That's how Putin rolls.