this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
1373 points (98.0% liked)
Political Memes
6645 readers
2655 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/silk-road-drug-vendor-who-claimed-commit-murders-hire-silk-road-founder-ross-ulbricht
Yes, the allegations of a drug dealer who was himself caught are very reliable indeed, even though the case was dismissed due to lack of evidence and the agents charged with corruption involved with the case, we should believe the corrupt cops and cornered rat over the other guy and he should rot in prison forever for the thing that was dismissed due to lack of evidence and corruption, JUSTICE!
Btw, while this source backs your claim (that I never disputed) that he was accused of these crimes, you're gonna hate this part:
Now where have I heard that before? Oh yeah when I said it (among other places.) Interestingly enough the whole "proven guilty" part is the bit that never happened.
I never claimed he was proven guilty or convicted. I'm only stating there is valid evidence that he paid for an assassination.
You say the case was dismissed due to a lack of evidence, but I've seen no proof that was the actual reason for dismissal. Also "not enough evidence" doesn't invalidate existing evidence, it just means there is not enough that meets very specific requirements for a conviction, not that a person could not logically conclude an event happened as a matter of personal opinion.
Again, "innocent until proven guilty" does not mean a person can't be personally judged by individuals, as a matter of personal opinion, for that person's actions simply because a court of law had not convicted him of it. Especially if there is evidence of those actions.
For example, it's clearly obvious that OJ Simpson murdered his wife and another person. But he was not convicted of it.
You're seriously overly concerned and worked up over the fact I simply disagree with you and have evidence supporting my reasoning.
I thought you were saying that you don't care about me? You seem to care a whole lot about what I think, considering you're trying real hard to be insulting, but you just look like a fool instead.
Move on, kiddo.
No u.
K