• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 hours ago

    She’s hedging out of calling Putin a war criminal

    “In so many words, yes.”

    Hasan won’t take “yes” for an answer. Which is a weird thing to do, given that he keeps looping back around to attack her for her condemnation of Biden and Netanyahu.

    She will agree with general statements saying he could be a war criminal under those circumstances

    Under what circumstances is Hasan conceding that Netanyahu is a war criminal? All he does is deflect blame for war crimes away from Netanyahu, which is a really weird thing to do across multiple interview questions.

    she won’t say it directly

    She will and she did. Of course, Hasan keeps cutting her responses off to interject with new defenses of Netanyahu. Which is, again, a very weird way to establish Jill as a Putin-defender. It seems more like Hasan is hedging on Netanyahu and trying to back Jill into recanting her views on Israel.

    • Cadeillac@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Say weird some more. We aren’t going to be desensitized to it. The right will still be fucking weird

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I think it’d be easier to take yes for an answer if she said the word yes. And frankly I question why someone can’t use the word yes if it’s such a clear yes

        • TheFonz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 hours ago

          How come she can give a clear yes for Biden but Putis it has to be surrounded by a million qualifiers? Multiple times.

          We all watched the interview. What are you trying to prove.

          • jumjummy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            Eh, the OP asking the question is operating in bad faith. They are most likely some disinformation shill or useful idiot who just espouses 3rd party or bust vibes every time I see them. You’re going to have as much luck getting through to them as Hasan had of getting Stein to say “yes.” with no qualifiers attached.

          • cogman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Well, if we prove her quotes accurate we can surmise that she may have said yes, with further investigation. But I’ll tell you, once we get to the bottom of our deep investigation we will find that she may possibly believe putin might be a war criminal given the current political climate of the UN and the ongoing hostilities in nations. After all, we need to address the issue of tariffs in china.