SquaresUnfiltered
60400
1400
84
FP Edit: Morning folks. I'm not having too good of a day myself (still recovering from my seizure the other day.)
-Regarding this ruling. This sets it so other third parties can have more time to secure funds, and out/bid/maneuver the current winner The Onion. This does not bode well for anybody who wants to see less of Alex Jones and his Cesspool of a platform. Also, keep in mind the future ruling will happen under Trump.
This is not just about getting the Sandy Hook victims more money. It is about stopping Alex Jones from keeping hold of his platform. By doing so we can prevent more victims like the ones from Sandy Hook that he harassed. This is not a hard concept.
Could you do me a favor? If you are on BlueSky or YouTube I'd appreciate a follow and subscribe.
Jokes aside I hope to see you all there
BlueSky- @gridsquares.bsky.social
Youtube-
@VeteranGridSquares
-Original Post-
Can someone please tell me why we are following the rule of law anymore? Judges do whatever they want, they don't care about precedent or law. The only thing that seems to rule is the holy dollar.
Folks I'm so fucking tired of the rich getting away with the literal murder.
If anybody wondered why people were rooting against the CEO, this is exactly why. If you have money, you can get the law to work in your favor.
Folks let me know what you think of the comments below.
Toqom
I am no longer following the law, the top doesn't, why should anyone.
syntheticgod8
I thought we were past this already? Wtf is the point of letting the victims decide which bid to accept if a judge can step in and say "no, you have to pick the largest bid, not the one that actually grants you, the victims, any sense of justice."
WrathOfJigglypuff
Rule of law? What's that Grandad?
lifeisadadjoke
artie500
All else aside, bankruptcy judges have discretionary power to ensure that creditors get the best deal possible,
Eucrow
We can't ever win, can we? Not in the smallest thing. Seriously want to take a dirt nap.
TrueNorthernLights
I mean, that's not surprising, is it?
f3n1x187
The establishment does it again...
ThatPug
Hey, that's the future head of the 'committee of truth telling' appointed by Trump, gotta make sure nobody pisses him off right?
damogen
You got that all backwards. Being pissed off is his only qualification
TilSovngarde
Followed you on BlueSky @op !
SquaresUnfiltered
Big ty!!!
doctorId
I've stopped being surprised at all the ways the law favours the oligarchs.
owlcatsanctuary101
As a European, wtf is going on? XD
Misteree8
*SIGH* it was a good joke while it lasted...
FuDang
https://bsky.app/profile/gridsquares.bsky.social
I'm fairly new to Bluesky but you have a follow from me bro! I wake up and go to sleep in opposition to our criminal president
Blahend
@op subbed on YouTube’s
SquaresUnfiltered
Thank you. I know there's not much there. But I'll be figuring that out. Big thank you
Blahend
Homies in need yada yada!
SkidMarc25
Alex and Elon need a Luigi in their lives...
AnUnintentionallyAirborneHowlerMonkey
You do not want to live in the world you are suggesting.
5m4llP0X
I actually do. Maybe that'll actually get something accomplished.
MrNobodyLivesHere
Following...... o7
SquaresUnfiltered
Ty!
override367
I was wondering why people celebrated this. Know this: Alex Jones WILL get it back, the court system is owned by conservatives. The fact that the families collectively own infowars and they all agreed to sell it to the onion and the judge blocked it was a foregone conclusion. he was always never going to suffer a single solitary fucking consequence
SquaresUnfiltered
And this is what I was arguing earlier in the comment section. There's a lot of people that don't understand this at all
override367
what he ruled is completely beyond the pale too, the rules didnt even mandate an auction occur AT ALL, and gave broad latitude for how to discharge the assets as long as the families agreed
FunkeymonkeyTTR
There's a lot of cringe in this text, earn your followers
[deleted]
[deleted]
FunkeymonkeyTTR
I'm not sure it was only the last part if I'm being honest, thank god for the /s this whole text kind of reads like someone who would genuinely say that.
Unholytrashpanda
Y'all didn't actually read the ruling. The judge ruled that the purchase price was too low to cover the debts owed by Jones to the families impacted by Sandy Hook. He isn't saying the Onion can't buy InfoWars, he's saying that the auctioneer made a good faith error and it needs to be re-done. This benefits the families otherwise they won't get the money owed by Jones.
SquaresUnfiltered
This also gives the few third parties that were trying to gather funds the ability to come in and out bid the others. A redo is not a good thing. Especially since it will occur while Trump is in office.
override367
They literally agreed to this, the Judge is doing this so Jones can get infowars back, because Jones (via proxies) is the other bidder. Quit shining this shit, the Judge is in the tank for Jones
BlazeMarshall
The families literally agreed to take less money so that the Onion purchase could go through.
YouCantSpellSlaughterWithoutLaughter
Wait, so you're telling me they will not allow the auction to go through if it cannot ON ITS OWN cover all the costs? If they cannot sell inforwars for over a billion dollars then what, are they just going to let him keep it? So the victims get nothing at all?
KawhiLeonardIsSenpai
The judge decided not to hold another auction and let the trustee make the decision.
The trustee already decided on The Onion. So what was the point of this?
SquaresUnfiltered
To make it so the Republican backed third party can have another bed, understand what the competitions bids were. Now the same third parties parties have the ability to collect funding and overbid. This will give them the ability to hand Alex Jones everything back, which will mean business as usual for him. And no actual repercussions will be filled for him. They will take it as a win, and recuperate any money that they have to give over either way
KawhiLeonardIsSenpai
"U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez in Houston said he did not want another auction but offered no roadmap over how to proceed"
This means that no other company can place additional bids on Infowars. It's up to the trustee to determine how to proceed.
MichaelMars
Maybe Alex Jones could be next...
oldradios19772000
Maybe this is the wrong thing to do but I turned off the news after the election. I know it sucks. And it's going to suck for at least 4 years. And I'll do what I can to donate to various organizations to fight it but for my mental health I can't deal with the bullshit anymore
SquaresUnfiltered
Putting one's head and the sand will not hide you from the storm. I get it, I truly do. But, politics will fk with you even if you don't fk with it. Stay strong and stay safe.
oldradios19772000
I have to do this for my own mental health. Yes, I intend to be aware of what's going on. And if things get really bad? Maybe it's time to move out of the country but for now? I just don't want to know about it
lovehandlesmessiah
I'm not cutting myself off completely, but gone are the days where I doomscroll throughout the day and then go to bed depressed and angry for my species being such selfish, ignorant assholes. It's the idea that we're told as children to grow up and behave maturely and we find out most adults are not fucking role models.
oldradios19772000
At this point most of the adults in Congress and in the Senate who have an r in front of their name can't even act like children anymore. They're monsters. People that have absolutely no business being in positions of power
16bitStarbuck
Follow and subscribe? Downvote and no.
SquaresUnfiltered
I'm sorry you weren't love
4b6e6f747779726b696e
Read this article: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/10/business/media/the-onion-infowars-alex-jones.html
Stefnos
fuck nytimes
GhostOfAnrui
Not everyone wants to read content from that shitty rag
Syxcfaq
Not everyone has a subscription to the Times.
4b6e6f747779726b696e
Sorry, I don't have a subscription, and it came up for me at first view. Try https://archive.ph/8q8m8
Syxcfaq
You get like 3 or 4 free article views per month based on ip. Once you use up the free ones, you get the paywall. However, my local public library will give you a one day free code to access the digital version of the times online! For Free! So check your local library! (while they still exist)
rudejohn
Unfair auction takes a LOWER bid, taking money away from InfoWars' victims, judge blocks the bid that is millions lower than other bids, and THIS is the post you take away from the situation?
SquaresUnfiltered
This also sets it up so third party bitters can accumulate more for the next bid and easily overtake the bidding process. This is even more troubling because it will happen under a trump presidency.
rudejohn
Higher bids = more money for the Sandy Hook victims' families = a win in my book, I couldn't care less about WHO actually buys it. This is a liberal judge in bankruptcy court looking out for the victims, not someone playing politics because they don't like The Onion.
kojenk
wrong. you're disregarding that the Sandy Hook families were on the Onion's side. You cant make these claims acting like you're on their side and disregard their autonomy and decisions.
rudejohn
The "vote" of the lawyer representing some of the victims is not the final authoritative decision maker in bankruptcy court.
SquaresUnfiltered
It's not just about getting the money. It's also about stifling another hate based news platform. If it gets in the hands of somebody that likes jones, he gets to keep on doing the wretched shit on his already established platform. It would be a slap on the wrist.
So, it's not just about the money for the Sandy Hook victims. It's preventing more victims like the Sandy Hook victims. How's that a hard concept
rudejohn
InfoWars site traffic was a tiny fraction of what it was before even before the bankruptcy. This isn't a ticking time bomb. It's a dying site The Onion could have turned into something funny, or a redirect to their site, if they cheaped out and the victims took a fraction of what they could have earned. The judge here is not the badguy. The executor of the bankruptcy is the badguy for not following an honest auction process.
SquaresUnfiltered
Seems are still missing the point. It was a fair auction process. The scrutiny from the judge is unwanted. They want this to go back up for auction so one of Alex Jones supporter third parties can sap it up and he can keep going. It's not just traffic either. It is also all of his assets, that make that thing run, including email lists, equipment, etc.
Everybody's worried about the money for the victims, but aren't thinking about him continuing and creating more victims of his platform
Targe0
Technically, this is them following the rules. As, the Onion's bid wasn't actually the highest bidder. They had added benefits that would have been provided within their bid, such as an ad revenue share from the site in the future, but that means they were technically the second-highest bid. Which is why they were able to win the objection to the sale here.
StoppedLurkingtoDownvote
The Alex Jones shell company put in a bid of $3.5 million. The Onion and the families owed put in a bid with an effective cash value of $7 million. Their bid maximized the value going to the Texas family, who would receive very little payout with the shell company bid.
Whatdoyousaytoanicecupoftea
Bastards, still, right?
YouCantSpellSlaughterWithoutLaughter
If I remember correctly, the rules for the auction were not the the highest cash bid should win, but that the bid that resulted in more money in total for the victims would win. Or something like that. Since The Onion-bid would generate more compensation to the families in the long run, it was considered the better bid.
kojenk
It was the best bid due to:
darkstarmc
You should go look at legal eagle video on it. One side said part of what they wanted was to get Jones off air and they gave up part of their settlement to give the other plaintiff more value out of the bid. It actually was the best and highest bid.
cbale2000
You're not typically allowed to leverage debt of the item being sold or future earnings in an auction. Auctions are typically paid in cash up front.
Targe0
Yes, but it was agreed to by the people who would be getting the payout from the sale and who also agreed to a lower cap on their payout for that agreement. Which is why they initially won.
ServerMonkeyKing
And yet, the requirements laid out for the bids were "best bid" not "highest bid". The adjudicator for the bid looked at them and made a determination that the Onion's bid was in the best interest of the company even though it wasn't the highest bid. This is also why government contracts learned that the lowest bid was not always the "best bid". This is some next level bullshit and judicial overreach. But our judicial system has been overstepping their bounds for a good while now.
kbryant414
Best interest of the creditors, none of whom objected to the sale. So the creditors were satisfied, the Onion was satisfied, the judge was satisfied, the victims were satisfied. The only one objecting was the shell company who lost the bid. So everyone except Alex was happy, but Alex gets to throw a fit and get another delay in his favor.
azgrak
The shell company is owned by Alex Jones and his family.
PileOfWalthers
How dare you add nuance and reasoning here!
CardboardStomach
For additional nuance and reasoning though, the reason they were trying to accept the Onion's offer is because the actual top bidder was an Alex Jones shell company. Personally I'd take a monetary hit on compensation if it meant that bastard could never use Info Wars to spread propaganda again
tzahtman
The highest bid also actually paid less to the people that Jones owes, which is why the Onions bid was chosen. Legal Eagle on YouTube has an episode covering it.
CardboardStomach
Sweet, I'll check it out later today! My layman understanding of it so far is that if his shell company is allowed to win the bid, Jones is just being rewarded for hiding his assets. The families get a fraction of what they're owed by Jones and he gets to buy back his confiscated assets for a fraction of their value.
Targe0
The Judge has said the shell company isn't getting the win, but neither is the Onion. Basically, they said the auction is voided, and they don't want to do another one. So what the next step will be is still up in the air as it's not been ruled on yet.
LordKingSalmon
According to what the guy in charge of choosing the winning bid said, he had discretion on the matter over choosing the best bid, which wasn't necessarily the highest bid. All of the information suggested he did nothing wrong in the process.
A piece of information shared elsewhere in these comments says the judge says both bids were too low, apparently. But unless they set a minimum, given it was bidding, I don't see how that's possible.
therecanNEVERbeTMI
I interpreted it as the judge meant that since the goal is to use the money to pay the Sandy Hook plaintiffs, the goal was to extract as much money as possible. But that was how I interpreted the article. Might be wrong in this.
HedonistBeard
Right but the onions bid gave the plaintiffs more money than the other one, regardless. So yeah, it's complicated.
Hekatombe
The problem, as I understand it, was the Onion's bid wasn't the highest, but rather they made a weird bid in collaboration with the two of the debitors (victim, either they dropped part of their claim or they accepted a lower priority when it comes to payment ), so the onion had a bid that may, arguably, been the better for the other debitors
cbale2000
Yeah, it turns out, in a legal "auction" you can't use debt leveraging of the product you're trying to sell to buy said product from yourself. Auctions are typically done in cash up front.
Hekatombe
Depends on how you structure the auction. If you want to argue anything, I suggest you start with the bankruptcy law. If the trustee has to maximise money for all the creditors then he has failed. If he has to maximise value then I'd argue he succeeded.
Slashenaar
*Lower bid, more would actually go to the families, so the families chose that one
Lethous
I mean it's just fake news buying fake news right? It's a fair buy to me. Just one of the fakes knows it's fake...
mmodlin
Legal Eagle did an episode on it, the details come out in the second half if you're in a rush: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmDNz7irGgw
Ikusame
you do realize that the entire point of the auction was to get as much value for those that were owed as possible. Given the families were owed 97% of the debt, the deal that was brokered did exactly that, by a wide margin. Its not a problem unless you dont believe the families were owed.
Hekatombe
Honestly I don't know, but you are probably correct. I was trying to provide the facts I remembered without being wrong.
CptNesquick
Who's the actual highest bidder ?
PaintedSlate
The Onion, easily, but not in raw total dollars on paper. It's a bit complicated. "Under all of those different scenarios and permutations, [The Onion's offer] was just better than the other," Murray said. "By a lot." The judge ruled the closed final offer process was insufficient despite the creditors and trustee being satisfied.
kojenk
Hekatombe
Deathtospam
A shell company controlled by Alex Jones, basically.
GerbilHereReportingLiveFromRichardGeresAss
and THAT doesn't seem to be an issue?
Sageypie
Well of course not, because it's a company owned by Jones' daddy, which is totally fine, and not a corruption at all, because this company is the same one that Jones transferred a ton of Infowars assets to to begin with, which was also fine and legal and not at all a corruption of the law, or a reason why it may be better to maybe just Luigi ol' Alex in the streets to bring about some sort of actual justice for all the shit he's done. Nah, we have a grand fucking legal system in this country
/s
pdpi
They're offering different things that can't be directly compared. FUAC's offer is all cash. The Onion's offer pays less cash upfront but has sort of a "share of profits" element. Saying which is higher requires you to put a dollar value on that share of profits. Arguably, the fact that the creditors who'd get the share of profits were willing to accept a serious haircut on the cash upfront suggests the Onion's offer is, in fact, the highest.
7hatsBollocks
The victims should have complete control of it. Their number one objective is to remove Alex Jones.... er I mean eliminate his hate channels.
50m31AW
Onion's offer is not the highest, however given that there was more than one lawsuit with different payouts, some of the Sandy Hook families would get A LOT more from the sale than the others from the other lawsuit, while they got peanuts, comparatively. The families that would get more basically said "we'll reduce our cut so the other families can actually recover some of what they're owed if tge Onion's bid is selected." It is however the *best* offer for the families bc it helps the ones 1/
50m31AW
who would otherwise get shafted collect a larger portion the damages awarded. And the other families don't care if they get a lower portion bc their damages were way higher to begin with, and also bc "fuck alex jones, the onion bid is funnier and sticks it to the bastard." 2/2
3Davideo
The linked article says the other bidder was a Jones shell company, but *that bid was also rejected* so new bids have to be drawn up.
Hekatombe
Slashenaar
The judge ordered that the only two groups found qualified or able to purchase weren't offering enough? Smells fishy?
kojenk
Also
JackieTreehornProductions
The judge stated it was his duty to ensure the most money possible is collected to pay the victims. He feels the complexity of the deals didn't actually do that and a final offer not extended to increase the bid by the losing bidder so there's gonna be a do-over so to speak. Could it be nefarious? Sure. Could it be a judge actually trying to recoup the most funds for the victims? Sure. The truth no doubt lies somewhere in between give the sliminess of Jones.
BlazeMarshall
The judge's obligation is to the families, not their wallets. The families approved the Onion deal. This was a transparent attempt to help Jones by a corrupt judge, and it was transparent when the block first went through pending investigation a month ago.
3Davideo
Wait, it very specifically says *both* bids were too small, and reading the article this means that that it's NOT awarded to the shell company, but that the process goes back a step to the drawing board for new bids to be drawn up.
So it's a *setback*, but not an outright *loss*, and the result may yet still be InfoWars sold to the Onion.
ZackWester
plus there might be a chance that onion still get to buy it whit the other biders backing down. and infowars + alex jones and co, might be banned from bidding themself or ask another party to bid for them (they was allowed to bid on themself last time).
SpamYarBlockers
Seems likely musk will pay whatever it takes to own infowars himself. He got this sale blocked
kwyjiboner
So many people are taking this to mean that Alex Jones has won without even looking at the facts present here. It's not corruption for a judge to block something that may not have been fair in the first place.
bobthefunny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmDNz7irGgw&ab_channel=LegalEagle
fiddlewheelx
Well they do whatever they want because they think there is no repercussions for their corruption.
SquaresUnfiltered
There was Luigi 😁
CallMeMcGyver
There are no consequences for their corruption, not even the slightest hint… if you become a judge you are immediately above the law and encouraged to accept bribes, gifts and other remunerations by those seeking favors.
Tumescentpie
Wake me up when they have repercussions
LobotomyJones
They do whatever they want because they KNOW there is no repercussions for the corruption.
SilentScreamsX
Until they get "CEO'd".
Renza0
its not a pattern until at least two more people get CEO'd
CardeasIV
They know*
thedarklord187
Luigi was the first this will only get more violent the longer it goes fuck the rich
TacoPoweredHelicopter
They will just security up.
thedarklord187
Security can't protect you from everyone
CallMeMcGyver
Luigi was the exception. People don’t do that anymore because after 9/11 there is a camera on every business, lamppost and door in most of this country… nobody is willing to throw it away for one evil person, knowing they’d likely be caught the next day. That’s why the right is violent and insurrective… they believe they are above the law and entitled to act violently and get away with it and become folk heroes.
Sooner70
We can hope, but unfortunately, unless you're talking French Revolution levels of rich guys being lined up for the slaughter, nothing will change.
ColmCorbec
Someone get Luigi a warp pipe out of that cell and a new gat...
TheDoomBear
we cant expect luigi to do ALL the work...
TheShoggothOfMosquitoCreek
Or raise him up so high that imitators become inevitable.
EternallyIgnorant
The hero of Canton, the man they call Jayne.
push2play
There isn't.
stayingalive4life
Or there hasn’t been enough (at best).
DeusExSpockina
There was on Monday
bearatrooper
WildWeasel76
The former CEO of United Healthcare would disagree… except he’s dead.
EternallyIgnorant
A certain dead CEO might disagree. But yeah, so far 99% of the time thats true. Might not last much longer. There is a logical reason to suspect it might not last much longer. Financial disparity has never been higher (in the history of mankind) and is continuing to rise.
afatality
Yet.
ih8clickb8
ColmCorbec
BigSausagePizzaa
He’s going to mamma their mia
Raikupath
Love the armchair "revolutionists" who couldn't even get out of their chair if they had to fight fascism but it's always funny to watch you guys eat up all of that bullshit propaganda and spread it like the little internet warrior you are.
Rogahar
Looked in a mirror lately?
ColmCorbec
Do you need a hug? I think you need a hug.
afatality
Chereazi
Step 1: stop electing fucking republicans...
Trump just recently announced again that companies (or individuals) will be able to just buy their way trough regulations... Nothing fucking matters as long as they are allowed to keep getting power and setting up judges that keep the job for fucking decades...
BEARD3DBEANIEE
Yeah this country is fucked for a Century and we're just along for the ride
Saveitforlaters
Step one: Give people a good education. Smart people don't vote for Republicans, and the ones who do are voting that way because they are sycophants and psychopaths.
0570
Alternative step 1: get rid of the 2-party system
notmyrealface
It's worse than that. People will need to die for any real change to happen.
RemtonDulyak
Step 2: start killing republicans, it's the only way to be sure.
RussianOtter
Yes, please.
StylesRockman
I love the optimism that you'll be able to have more elections after this
TrueNorthernLights
To actually be able to do Step 1, you need to get rid of the Electoral College. I mean, the R's literally came out and said if it wasn't for the EC, no R's would ever win. That's pretty telling that the majority of the US doesn't want an R President.
Dustorm
It’s not just Republicans, it’s full on class war.
SquaresUnfiltered
Republicans are the ones who majority put us in this class war. For decades they've been taking away the socialized programs that were built up or proposed
TheBlackSonOfTheHonestMan
We're at the American Spring I guess.... now it was a long battle... will we be Syria, Tunisia, Egypt etc. Either way, the odds suck
MyCommentsUsuallyHaveTypos
People *really* need to start paying attention to local politics...
Leithoa
We're well past the point where just focusing local was enough. More of a "Yes, and" situation.
midunn
Goldensands
Too late for that. america is a blatant fascist dystopia, they are not gonna have another actual election.
cardinal29
No need for hyperbole. "Elections" are held in fascist countries all the time! Putin was recently reelected! /s
Everyonesfavorite
And putin recently elected trump.
sgnight13
There will never be any meaningful change in this country ever again until the billionaire class is barred from access to the levers of power. And we will never accomplish that vision through traditional means.
Asadsadsadclown
A significant number of judges are also elected. Vote against them. Unfortunately they also run unopposed. Run against them. Because funny thing, there are usually no requirements to run for most of those positions.
Everyonesfavorite
I just assumed you had to be an attorney. Well fuck, I've been wanting to have weekends off for 30years now.
Asadsadsadclown
Depends on the state for basic qualifications but it is far from universal. You also don't even have to be a good or experienced attorney. Cannon, the corrupt judge that destroyed the Trump document case in Florida is an attorney and has only been in 1 trial. Granted the bar is higher for federal judges but those positions aren't elected.
Asadsadsadclown
But aside from that the countless local and state government positions that are often run unopposed and require nothing to actually run beyond the election requirements which are typically $10k in fees - $1 for each signature
billiebitkiller
I don't have a choice about who is elected. I vote and vote all I want but gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement, on and on with the bullshit and it doesn't matter what or how much I do. I know Canada is FAR from perfect but at this point anything else is better than this shithole country and its cheaper to move without having to cross oceans and it's better to go up than down given the whole "planet is boiling" thing.
ColmCorbec
It's getting harder every day to hide the disgust I feel towards those who continue to vote for politicians or political parties with Conservative/Right Wing beliefs.
You are opting to harm others, often the most vulnerable
You are opting to put more money in the pockets of the rich, usually these politician's friends
You are opting to degrade the rights of minorities
You are opting to put your faith in a group of people who have lied to your face that they want to improve all our lives.
SavageDrums
Why hide that disgust, they should know that they are revolting garbage people.
Groetgaffel
People voting for Lijah Cuu, believing he'll only stab the people they don't like.
ColmCorbec
EXACTLY!!!
Groetgaffel
(I apologise for the memories, but I simply couldn't not do it when I saw your name)
ColmCorbec
Fething Lijah Cuu
StopTheWorldIWannaGetOff
Don't forget the de-regulation will inevitably mean untold harm to the environment which... Not to put too fine a point on it: we all need to LIVE. I don't care how fancy and decked out your bunker is, if the Earth bucks, we're all fucked.
myotheralt
That is a point that's so confuses me about my parents. They applauded a foreign company coming into Montana to do some computer chip manufacturing process because that company would have to abide by the German EPA standards which were far more strict.
And then they turn around and vote Republican every single issue. And the Republicans clearly state that they want to dismantle environmental protection standards.
StopTheWorldIWannaGetOff
It's like a bad case of ADHD (? not sure what else to call it because this feels like an insult to people with ADHD), where they are only focusing on the issue in front of them and forming decisions and opinions in that moment, then the next headline or speech flashes in front of them and it's like everything else is forgotten and a fresh opinion and decision is made.
BellicoseAlgorithm
Cause they all can't think more ahead than their lifetimes. In all likelihood we'll get to see some of the "find out", but it'll be the next gens that will have to deal with the full fallout.
From what I saw in my days as a climate scientist, we're already past stopping it. We're now in the mitigation phase and quickly heading towards "Whelp, it was a good run..."
StopTheWorldIWannaGetOff
Well. Fuck. All the best to you all, friends. It's been fun.