this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024

328 points (85.7% liked)

News

23444 readers

4293 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

328

Kamala Harris Grins as Crowd Chants ‘Lock Him Up’ on Campaign Debut (www.thedailybeast.com)

submitted 4 months ago by jeffw to c/news

46 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 48 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 145 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Bullshit. I just watched that speech, and there was no chant — it was clearly one person saying “lock him up”, and they didn’t even repeat it. And she was grinning before that applause break, not in response to a random heckle at the end of it. Wtf is this.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Not bullshit. They’re not talking about the heckle they’re talking about the 10 seconds of chanting at 7:18. Watch again. https://youtu.be/2soe8ml_weg?si=uJqnlGGNU4SF8im_

[–] [email protected] 35 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I hear "KA-MA-LA" pretty clearly there, I really can't make it out as "lock him up".

[–] splonglo 6 points 4 months ago

Same.

[–] accideath 5 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Idk, to my ears, it could’ve been either. It’s a bit like the Laurel/Yanny thing or the blue and bronze dress. Would need someone who was there to confirm.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Yeah, I was thinking the same tbh. All you can really say is whatever it is has 3 syllabuls, it's so muffled everything else is pareidolia.

[–] errer 2 points 4 months ago

Honestly who the fuck cares. Some random people maybe started a chant at a political rally, candidate smiles…the fuck is this “news” story?

[–] flying_gel 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I put on my sony wh-1000xm5's to get as clear audio as I could. The first few chants could be interpreted as "lock him up" but it quickly turned to a clear "Ka-ma-la" once the cheering and clapping reduced.

At 8:34 there was a single clear "lock him up" after Harris mentioned Trump's recent conviction.

So that's settled now, I they weren't chanting "lock him up"

[–] accideath 1 points 4 months ago

To be fair, I only listened to it through my phone speakers

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I'm unable to hear lock him up much at all. "Loh 'im uh!" is the closest I can get when forcing it... I'm just not hearing any Ks or Ps at the end of those words, no matter how hard I try.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Do we finally have our own version of "Let's go Brandon"??

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

It's "Ka-ma-la"... I just replayed it over and over, trying to hear "lock him up", and at this point I feel like I'm trying to unfocus my eyes at a Jackson Pollock and expecting to see a schooner.

[–] andallthat 9 points 4 months ago

don’t be like that, they are just saying that the two events happened at the same time. “Kamala Harris grins as the world marks new hottest day on record”, “Kamala Harris grins as hundreds more flights get cancelled after huge IT outage”. See? Perfectly innocent journalism!

[–] littlebluespark 4 points 4 months ago

Propaganda?

I mean, fuck Drumpf into a hole with his own arms, but this is still BS.

[–] Jollyllama 42 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Maybe watch the rally? I watched the whole thing live and did not register "lock him up" on my second wacth i heard that some people do chant "lock him up" it doesn't catch on and is drowned out by Ka-Ma-La. You can't believe everything (anything) you read in a headline.

[–] boatsnhos931 2 points 4 months ago

SHE SMILED R U SERTIOUS??!!111

[+] [email protected] -111 points 4 months ago (14 children)

I'm not laughing. I get why some people think it's funny, but it's not a good cycle to be in.

Trump should not have been trying to sell outcomes in the justice system as a political move. It isn't going to improve the situation any to do the same back.

This should have never started. It shouldn't be perpetuated.

[–] FuglyDuck 116 points 4 months ago (1 children)

On the other hand, trump absolutely belongs in jail and should be absolutely locked up.

-Rapist -Pedophile -Fraud -Insurrectionist -Traitor.

Not locking him is as equally political as him trying to lock hillary up. The apolitical thing to do, as a prosecutor or investigator is to do your fucking job; by the book. In fact, a large part of the reason we're in this mess is because Trump has been left free to do as he fucking pleased for the last 3.5+ years.

[+] [email protected] -94 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

The apolitical thing would be to not have chants to jail someone at a rally.

I don't care about Team Red or Team Blue. I care about Trump acting in a way that I'd consider wildly unacceptable for someone in his position. If the Dems start doing Trumplike shit because he did it first, I am going to be done with Harris too. There are other people out there too for whom the issue with Trump is how he acted. Adopt Trump's behavior, and the Dems will kill their appeal to them too.

[–] [email protected] 59 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The apolitical thing would be to not have chants to jail someone at a rally.

"People attending a political rally should be apolitical!"

[+] [email protected] -58 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Well, the proper way to put it should probably be to not insert judicial outcomes into politicking, not politics.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 4 months ago

There are 34 convictions in New York State that are waiting on sentencing. That sentencing can - and very arguably should - include incarceration.

Lock him up.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 4 months ago (1 children)

He's literally a felon. He's facing three more court cases about serious criminal acts directly related to politics and his time in the office he's seeking. That's all directly relevant to the political campaign.

[–] FlyingSquid 11 points 4 months ago

He's literally a felon who has been convicted of campaign finance fraud. But oh no, don't mention that since he's in the midst of another campaign. That would be too political.

[–] FlyingSquid 8 points 4 months ago

You're saying that if someone is convicted for election malfeasance and is running in another election, their opponent shouldn't mention it? Really?

[–] [email protected] 37 points 4 months ago

Get out of here troll. Trump rants at HUNDREDS of rally’s to lock up people he doesn’t like and ONE chant that is actually true - he should be locked up - makes you think they’re all tHE sAmE??

[–] Passerby6497 32 points 4 months ago

The apolitical thing would

Because if there's one thing a political rally is known for, its being apolitical.

[–] andrewth09 6 points 4 months ago

The apolitical thing would be to not have chants to jail someone at a rally.

I mean, it's a political rally. Wake me up when a judge assigned to one of Trump's many cases shows up and starts chanting.

If the Dems start doing Trumplike shit because he did it first

Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez got convicted on bribery charges. Democrats dropped him like a bag of rocks. Would you say the same thing would happen if a pro Trump senator was indicted?

[–] citrusface 43 points 4 months ago

Oh I'm sorry - the 34 TIME CONVICTED FELON shouldn't be locked up? That's what you think?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 4 months ago

This isn't a political outcome being sold, other than denying him the presidency means he's not simply immune. People going to prison for being found guilty of crimes in courts of law is the normal course of events.

[–] Passerby6497 27 points 4 months ago (2 children)

So tell me, what's the difference between one candidate calling to lock up their opponent for 'crimes', and another letting the crowd repeat the first one's chant after they were convicted of multiple felonies and are doing their damned best to weasel out of countless more criminal proceedings? Is it minuscule, or a massive difference that makes the two situations not remotely the same? Hint: the latter one.

Fuck him, lock him up. Criminals should be called out as criminals, especially when they're running for office. Boo fucking hoo, don't like being called a criminal, don't be a criminal, and don't be super public running off your stupid dumb mouth.

[+] doodledup -24 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Maybe the civil war is inevitable. And maybe a half-decent multi-party democracy comes out of this too. Jesus christ, the internet is full of this shitshow of a "democracy" these days.

[–] Passerby6497 21 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How is it not democratic to bring up the fact that the opponent is a criminal who is only not behind bars because of who he is? In an actual democracy the fucking felon wouldn't be able to run because his crimes would have disqualified him from running. But in this banana republic he gets to walk around and plot for his second attempt at a coup.

So again, fuck him, lock him up. And fuck off with this bullshit that we should forget that he's a traitor to the country and should absolutely be in jail for the crimes he committed, and he's only not in jail because of the anti-democratic moves by his toadies in congress and in the judicial system. That's the real undemocratic part of this whole campaign, not some fucking chanting at a political rally.

[–] doodledup -2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

It's a two-party system. So first of all there is no way for you to vote if you want a middle ground. Or if you want something done that none of the two parties have in their program. There is zero political color in the US. Just Red and Blue yelling at each other. There are other democracies where you can vote for like 20 parties and multiple parties end up forming the government. There is not one winner. You'll get proportionally represented no matter what. The US system big time in this regard and is probably the number one reason for all the unrest in the country.

Secondly, everything is about the candidate all the time. It's not about the politicics at all. In a democracy it should be about the party and what they want to do. There should be a program that you can look up on their website that you can vote on. The candidate is just an interchangable delegate representing the party. So in a good democracy, you should be able to vote based on the party's program alone and the party's views should be very clear and concistent. But I'm not sure they even have a program here. All I hear is "president this, president that" and a lot of drama about the person.

Third, the actual voting system itself. There should be a direct vote for the party and not based on the states.

[–] Passerby6497 4 points 4 months ago

None of that answered how bringing up the criminality of the candidate is undemocratic, so I'm not going to respond to any of your non-sequitor.

Again, how is it undemocratic to point out that the candidate in question is a criminal and should be behind bars, but isn't because of political machinations of his party?

[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago

But he actually did crimes

[–] Coach 9 points 4 months ago

Seeing Trump in an orange jumpsuit, as opposed to just orange face makeup, will greatly improve my situation.

[–] frog_brawler 8 points 4 months ago

Locking him up should end the cycle. You have to close the loop where it begins.

[–] njm1314 7 points 4 months ago

Oh for God's sakes sake quit with this they go low we go high bullshit. It's nonsense and a fever dream you're having. There's no point in playing this game with Republicans. You're wasting your time trying to go high.

[–] spongebue 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I just woke up and saw this headline. My knee-jerk reaction was the same as yours, since I always hate stooping down to someone else's level like that.

Then I remembered Trump has been charged with many specific violations of the law and convicted of some of those charges already, and is only awaiting sentencing (thanks to the courts doing him so many favors, that wait keeps getting extended). We're good to call for him to be locked up at this point.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago

Umm...what? Like, seriously - what??

Can I have some of whatever it is you're smoking???

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

not really a cycle when one person is getting it thrown in their face

[–] andrewth09 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I get what you are saying. It could push us down a path where political enemies are locked up after they lose president elections, but I don't think that is the case.

(1) Jailing Trump isn't a major taking point from politicians. I think Democratic politicians present the prosecution of Trump to be a good thing especially regarding the Georgia and Florida cases, but they typically present his felony conviction as the goal. "Lock him up" typically isn't a railing cry which makes this article newsworthy.

(2) Trump is unique. The Florida and Georgia cases ARE notable. Holding onto state secrets come with a high legal burden. He fucked up. You can't pressure Georgia officials to find votes for you as President. He fucked up. I'm happy having courts investing that.

I expect if Trump actually got sentenced it would be like 8 months probation.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I get your point, and mostly agree from a political standpoint. She should ask people to stop.

But it is funny, since she's a former DA and AG, while he's a actually a convicted felon. And he started it? Yah it's a little funny. Once

[–] Diplomjodler3 0 points 4 months ago

Boohooohooo we did some bullshit for years and now they're doing it back to us! So mean!