In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
135d
The statement criticizes the judicial process involving Bolsonaro, suggesting it was unfair and lacked proper defense opportunities. It references a Supreme Court Justice's remarks on the importance of adversarial proceedings. The reply to a conversation about the case's legitimacy and media portrayal adds context to the criticism.
- The statement implies harm by labeling the court as a 'kangaroo court,' which could undermine trust in judicial processes. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- It questions the integrity of the judicial process, potentially affecting the dignity of those involved, but does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not engage in constructive dialogue or provide evidence for its claims, focusing instead on a strong negative assertion. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.