Court case seeks an emergency court order to halt US support for Israel’s war on Gaza, prohibiting the transfer of weapons and unconditional support to the Zionist state
Wait, genocide charges in a civil court? What are they even trying to accomplish? I’m certainly not a lawyer, but that doesn’t sound like it makes much sense.
As far as I know there’s no way for members of the public to criminally charge the president under US system. What this accomplishes is drawing attention to the fact that Biden is complicit in a genocide.
What’s obvious is that my assessment is probably correct. The lawsuit will fail because the “actual point being made” is not a legal point but a political one. And certainly not a criminal point.
The use of the word “charged” here is willfully dishonest.
What do you expect from clickbait nonsense.
do elaborate
It’s a civil case.
Which is also why it’s doomed to fail.
Wait, genocide charges in a civil court? What are they even trying to accomplish? I’m certainly not a lawyer, but that doesn’t sound like it makes much sense.
As far as I know there’s no way for members of the public to criminally charge the president under US system. What this accomplishes is drawing attention to the fact that Biden is complicit in a genocide.
Obviously it’s doomed to fail, war criminals have never held to account in a totalitarian dictatorship like the US.
Just… wow.
If you disagree with my assessment, then perhaps you could provide an example of a US official being held accountable for the atrocities US commits.
But we’re discussing your disagreement with my assessment that “charge” is willfully dishonest.
There’s no disagreement, it’s obvious that your assessment is sophistry meant to distract from the actual point being made. Nobody is falling for it.
What’s obvious is that my assessment is probably correct. The lawsuit will fail because the “actual point being made” is not a legal point but a political one. And certainly not a criminal point.
deleted by creator
He was not.