GiveSendGo stands firmly behind its decision to host content related to Mangione.
“We believe every person is entitled to due process in a court of law — not in the court of public opinion,” Alex Shipley, GiveSendGo’s communications director, said in a statement. “To be absolutely clear, we do not support or condone vigilante justice. However, people have a constitutional right to a strong legal defense, and access to that defense should not be reserved only for the wealthy or those who fit a particular narrative. Our role is to give individuals and their communities the opportunity to fundraise for that defense, because true justice is served when everyone has equal access to a fair trial — regardless of the verdict.”
Classic case of lemmy liberals moving the goalpost. “They’re only doing good when they’re helping further my agenda” gtfoh with that stuff
As a leftist I agree.
Although I don’t agree with them fund raising for Rittenhouse, I respect their decision and I wouldn’t want them to fund for Luigi but not someone I don’t agree with. That’s a double standard that we call out the right for and I think we should practice what we preach.
Exactly the point succinctly put. You either accept fundraising for all types of criminals or reject it. There’s no in between. It is on the donor to determine whether they would donate or not.
To expand on my previous comment I have been appalled that the main stream media for the last 14 months has been justifying the slaughter of innocent Palestinians in the interest of self defence but the same people are outraged at the murder of one CEO.
The double standards are sickening and I think we should all treat others as we want to be treated and hold ourselves to the same accountability as we hold others.
deleted by creator
They’re focusing too much on the payment site. Yes, they have fun raised some very questionable people, but I would also argue that Luigi is a very questionable person at this point.
The focus really needs to remain on the fundraising.
Yes! It is good to be ethical! How is that controversial?
Also you literally know nothing of my politics other than I think Kyle Rittenhouse is a bad person and facilitating him makes donors bad too. Don’t call me a liberal just because you have an axe to grind and want to lump people you disagree with into your simplistic idea of a boogie man group.
Someone who knows enough about language to be a commissioned grammar cop should also know that “Liberals” ≠ the Left.
Liberals aren’t the ones decrying th hypocrisy of bad actors. That’s the Left.
An example of typical liberals is the .world admins and mods making it forbidden to discuss jury nullification and removing factual and relevant criticism of Dem leadership, labeling it “misinformation”.
First of all, grammar police ≠ political scientist. Secondly, you probably meant “…decrying the hypocrisy of ‘good faith actors’…”, and quite frankly I don’t care who’s doing the decrying. It’s shifting the goalpost to fit one’s agenda, and if i had to extend that argument to “The Left”, i would.
Furthermore, removal of discussions on jury nullification does not signify the actualisation of any political agenda (jury nullification is a democratic process in and of itself, so it would not serve the mods well if they WERE indeed furthering an agenda). The actions of the mods can simply be viewed as damage control if not anything else.