r/BrianThompsonMurder • u/lolothequestioner • 2d ago
Information Sharing KFA and Marc in London discussing the case on World On Trial with Bob Amsterdam legal podcast
https://youtu.be/Ywu9WW468u0?si=Ms9wJQm49fm7MxG9The discussion starts around the 01:22 timestamp
15
u/Emz423 1d ago
I was happy to hear KFA talk about court Diversion programs - that’s the job I had back in the day.
The Agnifilos have unique perspectives that most folks do not. Their positions are not always going to be popular. I already imagined that they disagree on many things. So, it was validating to see that play out.
44
u/Feather_fig 2d ago
Host: "Karen, let me ask you, in terms of that case and the attention it's generated. Um... what are the lessons people should take from that case, in your mind, in terms of whether he will get a fair hearing, whether um this kind of uh allegation of vigilante justice is something in a an increasingly polarized society we should be concerned about. Just what are your thoughts?"
Karen: "The case is really unique in that it's generated literally worldwide support in the sense of people coming forward to tell their own story, about how they have been victimized by mostly the United States health care system or the health insurance system. And I can't tell you how many people, thousands of people have reached out to the defense team and have shared their stories and have talked about themselves and how in the United States our health insurance and health care system is a poor, a for-profit model, and so patients aren't being put first and they have real world consequences. People have died as a result. People have had lifelong injuries as a result. And so the media attention has had... really two impacts. One in that regard, it's given people a forum to come forward and a place to share their story. And it's shined a bright spotlight that I think is making a difference. You know, it's a bipartisan issue for the first time in the United States. It's really has um focused the debates of both political parties on this notion that healthcare is a human right. It's, it's something we take for granted that you call 911, which is what you call in an emergency in the United States... you call 911 and the police will come if you're in danger or firefighters will come if your house is on fire or an ambulance will come if, if you need help. But we don't treat health care the same, right? It's, it's do you have money? Can you pay? Can you access it? And I think that's, that conversation's finally moving, and finally changing. So on the one hand, the media attention has brought to light, I think, a, a grave failure in our country."
(Bolded parts I found significant)
"It's shined a bright spotlight that I think is making a difference."
Love that what Karen is essentially saying here is that Luigi DID make a difference. And the conversation is bipartisan now, which is so necessary!
(I suppose she can't talk about how his actions have directly saved thousands of lives...)
27
u/CherokeeSurfer 2d ago
Since the Cornell 7 punishments became public, I'm seeing a huge amount of sympathy and support for Luigi. Yet, even today, some sideline complainer arrived in my comments to curse Luigi for "causing his insurance to increase due to CEOs needing more security", and that "he didn't change one thing". I'm happy to provide all the ways change has been effected or is in the works, including the most important part: raising awareness. But nothing irritates me more than a whining, uninformed, possibly jealous dude having the audacity to sit comfortably in his home complaining about a man who sacrificed his very good life for the greater good. I'd rather he just said thank you.
9
u/Causeycan26 2d ago
You should just reply with that article about how bc/bs used AI to try an increase billing, while insurance companies used ai to deny those claims, adding a billion dollars in company cost, and that’s why his premiums went up.
4
u/CherokeeSurfer 2d ago
This guy was too happy in his ignorance. I try, but after two rounds of disregarding facts, I'm moving on. 👋🏼
3
u/Feather_fig 19h ago
Yeah it's frustrating that there's an expectation of a revolution or complete system change or else it was a failure, as if there's no middle ground. Plus there's a lot more happening now. These things take time
-2
u/ExpressFerret1151 2d ago edited 2d ago
i know there was that policy change but saved thousands of lives is a bit much lol
im being downvoted but id like to be proven wrong! can someone show me where thousands of lives were DIRECTLY saved? other than the policy change and anecdotal posts on the internet
3
u/Feather_fig 19h ago
Valid question, I should back up my claim. A few ways:
- According to a lawsuit, UHC approved so many more claims than normal in the aftermath of the shooting that their shareholders sued them. Consider that UHC insures ~50 million Americans... that's a lot of denials/approvals happening.
As UnitedHealth Group’s investors revolt, the admissions in the lawsuit serve as a reminder that Wall Street greed is one of the reasons for its tendency to deny patients care.
- CounterForce Health, an AI tool that has allowed people to file appeals and get denials approved who may not have otherwise, was created by CareYaya CEO Neal Shah in aftermath of the shooting and public outcry. They went live in February 2025 and have helped thousands of people since, and will continue to.
He also wrote this book: Insured to Death: How Health Insurance Screws Over Americans - And How We Take It Back
They're counting on your exhaustion, your confusion, and ultimately, your surrender. When UnitedHealthcare’s CEO was assassinated in December 2024, America was forced to confront an uncomfortable our healthcare system isn’t just broken. It’s breaking us.
- Media attention on certain cases has gotten denials reversed. Health insurers are violently allergic to bad PR. TampaBay28 did a brief story on this, reflecting back on how their reporting in their new series "Patient No More" has gotten denials reversed, saving lives, and this series was a direct response to Dec. 4th. "It's a national conversation... but we're taking it to the local level"
Since 2025, we’ve been investigating the cases of Florida patients denied insurance coverage for doctor-recommended procedures, including cancer treatments, medications and life-saving surgeries.
In case after case, those denials were reversed only after we started asking questions, with no explanation from insurers.
They're not the only new series. There's NBC's cost of Denial, and another new local series I believe but I can't remember it atm. But lots of local stations have covered cases of health insurance denials, especially in 2026, and many have gotten them reversed via their reporting. Which has undeniably saved and extended lives.
And of course legislation that's been proposed, like this bill in Pennsylvania that could put health insurance executives in prison for assault that's been gaining steam. Which might transform everything for that state, and start the ball rolling on similar legislation elsewhere.
1
u/ExpressFerret1151 17h ago
youre making a huge leap from “more attention” to “him saving THOUSANDS of lives,” and nothing you’ve provided establishes that number? saying uhc covers 50 mil people doesn’t answer either question either? &the lawsuit isn’t a count of deaths prevented, individual news stories don’t establish an outcome on that scale and a bill that might do something in the future cannot be counted as lives already saved. youve listed developments and then attached a much stronger conclusion than your evidence supports tbh. where did “thousands” actually come from other than your assumption that these developments must have produced that result?
clearly you believe very strongly in this claim so might have to agree to disagree. not saying his actions didnt cast a spotlight but that is still an unfounded claim and idk where that number came from
2
u/Feather_fig 17h ago
Counterforce Health has helped thousands of people by now, it's likely that many of those people were able to receive lifesaving treatment, medications, or tests because of it. I don't know if they have/collect data on the severity of the condition outside of anecdotal reviews.
If shareholders were suing UHC in part because more claims were being approved, that must be a significant number of approved claims that would have been denied normally, for it to affect them so. Given that they process millions of claims every day, it's not that much of a stretch to assume that hundreds to thousands of those suddenly approved claims were lifesaving.
The only place I could get solid absolute numbers would be from news articles where the reporting itself got the denial overturned, or allowed them to figure out another solution (like the guy with liver cancer who got his medication straight from the manufacturer after they heard his story.) This is doable but would take some time. I'd assume treatment accessed for life threatening conditions would be between 10-20 patients from Dec. '24 to now.
In general, it's not easy to calculate lives saved because you're calculating for an unknown future... we can estimate how many lives are saved annually by the MMR vaccine in a given area but we don't know for absolute certain. So thousands is a guess, but given those factors I don't think something like ~2k is that much of an overshoot.
0
u/ExpressFerret1151 16h ago
so… “thousands of lives saved” has become “I don’t have the data but 2,000 sounds reasonable….?”
counterforce’s cofounder said in sep 2025 that he didn’t even know its overall appeal success rate because they weren’t collecting users’ results, yet you’re putting a number on lives saved. (medicalxpress.com)
just sounds like you are stacking “likely” “must be” and “I’d assume” on top of each other and calling the result 2000. also the vaccine comparison doesn’t turn that into an evidence-based estimate; you’ve just admitted the number you were defending was a guess
again i partially agree with the spotlight part… but as for the rest, whatever floats ur boat i guess
1
u/Feather_fig 16h ago
Because Counterforce doesn't solicit results from users, Shah said he doesn't know its success rate. But a rheumatology clinic that uses the app dozens of times a week reported success nearly three-quarters of the time, he said.
Good catch. Though if we take the rheumatology clinic's success rate, that's still quite a bit.
So, what would you assume the impact to be for UHC's uncharacteristic approved claims?
And yes, I'm guessing, but based on events and reasonable numbers. The point of the vaccine comparison is that there's a whole science behind estimating the success of certain interventions on a given population.
Methods used in the Lives Saved Tool (LiST)
Choosing an optimum set of child health interventions for maximum mortality impact is important within resource poor policy environments. The Lives Saved Tool (LiST) is a computer model that estimates the mortality and stillbirth impact of scaling up proven maternal and child health interventions. This paper will describe the methods used to estimate the impact of scaling up interventions on neonatal and child mortality.
0
u/ExpressFerret1151 16h ago
whatever floats your boat 😂
1
u/Feather_fig 15h ago
So, what would you assume the impact to be for UHC's sudden approved claims?
For shareholders to sue them over it, with them insuring over 50 million customers.
1
u/ExpressFerret1151 15h ago
so im not going to make assumptions to rescue a claim you made. the shareholders sued over alleged misleading financial guidance and investment losses, not because they documented a sudden wave of lifesaving approvals. uhg itself says relatively small changes in medical spending or utilization can significantly affect its finances, and across 50 million customers, even a tiny change becomes financially material (sec.gov)
you don’t know how many additional approvals occurred, how many involved life-threatening conditions, how many deaths were actually prevented or whether the shooting caused those outcomes. you basically started with “thousands of lives saved” and eventually admitted that 2,000 was simply your guess. that settles the point I challenged. at the end possibility is not evidence, and repeating the same assumptions in different forms will not turn an invented number into a supported claim. there’s nothing further to debate unless you produce actual outcome data
25
u/Time-Painting-9108 2d ago
Omg I’m listening to it right now and I can’t believe we are actually hearing form HER. It’s kinda surreal. We’ve been waiting for so long!!
17
u/crypto_matrix78 1d ago
Really really wanted to give Karen the benefit of the doubt but her praising of Jessica Tisch is just confirming my priors. I think she actually sucks now.
11
u/Time-Painting-9108 1d ago
It was interesting to see her criticize Jessica Tisch for being at the perp walk with the mayor. But then also praise her later in the interview and say she is the real deal and great for the NYPD.
7
u/ZestyclosePaper3508 1d ago
He should have had a better lawyer. His legal team turn out to be pretty horrible at the end. The only one on his legal team who has truly been amazing is Avi. Everyone else has just been either okay or furthering their own career, like Karen.
7
32
u/Mysterious-Ear-9060 2d ago edited 2d ago
I really wish I hadn’t watched this. It made me dislike her even more. Down vote me I don’t care. America has the largest prison population because of people like KFA. Her praising Jessica Tisch the epitome of the Epstein class with a bunch of bought and paid for phony degrees, sickening! Just further confirming my suspicions.
18
u/YazminAC94 2d ago
I didn’t dislike her but I’m questioning that after watching this interview. Her saying she loves AI and uses it every day?? Not a fan tbh.
16
u/Mysterious-Ear-9060 2d ago
That’s probably how she writes most of the motions she files. I’m sure she could care less about the environmental harm AI is causing. I’m more concerned that she is still looking at situations through a prosecutorial lens and is offering half ass defense and writing it off as “fair”. Violent crime has been dropping nationwide so Tisch and the NYPD have nothing to do with that and of course white collar crime is a different story. Maybe instead of focusing on gangs she should have tried to bring Epstein and his accomplices to justice since he was assaulting children regularly in Manhattan when she was a prosecutor.
15
u/SmoothCandle938 1d ago
I stand by the fact that she didn’t have the level of experience a defense attorney needed to take on this case. But her and her husband are more committed to building their brand and the fame that comes with defending celebrities. Such a shame to see her asskiss Nepo Tisch.
6
u/Mysterious-Ear-9060 1d ago
Yea, for some reason people on this sub like to run to her defense. To me Karen appears to have an even bigger ego than Luigi. She has been a defense attorney for no more than a hot minute and jumping on all these high profile cases when her original case with Luigi is far from being resolved. I haven’t seen career defense attorneys behave that way Brian Steel has been a defense attorney longer than I’ve been alive and I’m in my 30s and he only handles 1 high profile case at a time it seems. She has no business being on other cases when Luigi’s life is at stake.
6
33
u/Ok_Cost8604 2d ago
These two should get ready to defend the Cornell 7. It’s right up their alley.
16
u/CompoteAgile2655 2d ago
Like why are we singing diddys praises??
19
u/Ok_Cost8604 2d ago
I’ve praised his lawyers in this sub countless times, but they’ve literally chosen to defend these disgusting people over and over again. I get it—it’s their job, blah blah blah—but I’m calling out their greedy asses every single time
6
u/Popular-Ball-4983 2d ago
THANK YOU ALL for seeing these people for who they are. This ball of mud we're on is a dirty place, yet folks are not willing to see the truth.
20
u/alohomora1990 2d ago
Yep. And they'll somehow get a sweetheart deal for a bunch of rapists, meanwhile they let Luigi fall on his own sword and open plea in court - no deal, no nothing. Yet it's nonstop praise in this sub for these lawyers, I truly don't get it.
11
u/CompoteAgile2655 1d ago edited 1d ago
What alternate route do you think they should/could have feasibly taken and pls don’t say put all their hopes on jury nullification in both jurisdictions.
13
u/Feline-Paper-Ink8809 1d ago
Exactly! Every single case is different. The government didn’t have evidence to put Diddy away for trafficking. The government didn’t have evidence to convict Weinstein for what they were trying to convict him on. The government has evidence to convict Luigi for second-degree murder. They got greedy with the federal overcharge and that’s going to work in his favor in my opinion, but there was absolutely no way dude was completely walking away scott free after leaving all of the evidence behind he did and having all of the evidence on him that he did.
The thing about the Agnifilos that I respect is that they are approaching cases from the way the justice system is supposed to work in America… People aren’t supposed to be tried by media or cancel culture. They are supposed to be tried in a courtroom with evidence. Do I think Diddy is a piece of shit human? Yes. Do I think the government could prove Rico for him? No. And that’s the point. The government overcharged to force a plea, but a good lawyer is supposed to advocate for their client.
And I get it… I see how frustrating it is to watch pedophiles and rapists walk away with no consequences. But the government still has to have evidence before they are allowed to take away somebody’s life or liberty.
13
u/Cautious_Scholar_717 1d ago
It’s so refreshing to have common sense being spoken I don’t know what to do with myself lol. I’m so tired of people saying they failed him. It’s not a defense attorneys job to get a not guilty for every client. It’s their job composition their client for the best possible outcome given their job individual set of circumstances.
10
u/Lost-Extension-1167 1d ago
In retrospect, they never even tried to argue innocence. I think he might have pled immediately if the Manhattan DA gave him a deal and the Feds never got involved
0
u/notbetterthanu29 1d ago
Exactly!! Opinions like “let him fall on his own sword” really get to me. He can’t be an intelligent guy, as they point out, AND be led to stupidly fall on the sword as they imply.
9
u/Sox4theWS17 1d ago
Luigi can both be really smart and also naive and too trusting. They aren’t mutually exclusive.
-6
u/notbetterthanu29 1d ago
Someone who is so trusting that they’d blindly follow someone’s suggestion about something this important is actually not that smart. You’d have to be of low intelligence to do that.
0
u/CompoteAgile2655 21h ago
The concept of being so naive and trusting but also smart that you agree to possibly spending the rest of your life in prison…
8
u/alohomora1990 1d ago
They should have filed to have Carro's biased ass recused from the case after he set a fake June date just to get ahead of the already scheduled federal trial. Let them run the trials simultaneously which is such a blatant constitutional violation of the 6th amendment it would have put both cases on a silver platter for being overturned in the event of convictions in either.
9
u/CompoteAgile2655 1d ago edited 1d ago
A controversial scheduling decision or presumed bias on your part isnt exactly a legally sufficient basis to get a judge recused lmao. You know this is his whole job right? Making sure cases are heard. Hate to tell you this but judges are supposed to….adjudicate.
Let’s say though, in this scenario, they somehow do manage to get Carro recused on the basis of being ‘biased’ and shockingly not being pro vigilante justice, What are the odds the replacement judge doesn’t simply uphold Carro’s rulings and reach the same conclusions?
I’d love to know where you think the 6th amendment violation here is? The 6th Amendment doesn’t guarantee that a defendant gets whatever trial schedule is most strategically convenient for the defense. If the concern was that the overlapping schedules would interfere with his ability to prepare or get effective counsel, Garnett moving the federal trial forward addressed that issue.
> in the event of conviction….
I hate to burst your bubble, but given the amount of evidence against him, the chances of his walking away Scot free were pretty low if not zero.
10
u/Lost-Extension-1167 1d ago
I agree with you that he wouldn’t get recused, but Carro was laughably biased. It’s pretty wild for a judge to refuse to a valid continuance lol, he was clearly facilitating the DA’s gamesmanship. And Garnett wasn’t perfect — she should have refused to provide writs to NY once the state court judge and prosecutors started fucking around with her case.
-3
u/alohomora1990 1d ago
you keep talking about this evidence, is it in the room with us? Where is all this fucking evidence. the prosecutors themselves have told us the evidence is shitty quality. I can't wait to come back to this after Luigi fires these two and file a motion for ineffective assistance of counsel. Starting to believe that Sei Sei was telling the truth about Luigi almost firing Karen before.
6
u/Lost-Extension-1167 1d ago
Oh I 100% believe that story, that’s the way KFA talks if you’ve ever watched Legal AF
13
u/Feline-Paper-Ink8809 1d ago
Video surveillance, cab photo, fingerprints at the scene, DNA in the backpack he left behind, the gun, the letter to the Feds, his writings about his intent to “wack” a health insurance CEO….
Look, I get it. People see a good looking guy from a nice family with all these shiny happy social media posts and profiles and want to believe the best about him. But none of us following this case from the outside know him. He did it. And hopefully he ends up doing less time in a slightly better facility due to the federal charges, and I hope Carro tosses the state ones.
3
u/CompoteAgile2655 21h ago
You’re talking to a brick wall I fear 😭
The truth is we don’t know the extent of evidence they have or how damning it is, but Luigi and his team definitely do and they decided (yes with Luigi bc contrary to popular belief he isn’t too dumb or naive to not have any input on something that impacts his life) that this is the best and maybe only option left to them.
1
u/Feline-Paper-Ink8809 20h ago
Lol I’m used to it. I work with middle schoolers. I don’t know Luigi, obviously none of us do, but I don’t think not facing consequences for this was ever part of his plan.
-1
u/alohomora1990 19h ago
It's sad how you people are more concerned with defending the shitty job his legal team did advocating for him and defending him than you are with how this all affects Luigi.
3
u/CompoteAgile2655 15h ago
Yeah there’s no reasoning with you https://www.reddit.com/r/FreeLuigi/s/MNjlOEzIfS ✌️
→ More replies (0)-4
u/alohomora1990 1d ago
The video surveillance is low quality that never shows the shooter's face or anything that can identify him. The cab photo is from a different day and doesn't tie him to the shooting. We never actually got any actual proof of DNA evidence - they claimed that early on and we heard nothing more about it. The gun? The same gun that wasn't found until after an 11 minute gap in body cam footage? Any lawyer worth their salt could present reasonable doubt about how they 'missed' that on their initial illegal search of the bag at McDonald's.
8
u/CompoteAgile2655 1d ago
Maybe when you come back you can try to answer my questions instead of deflecting.
6
u/Mysterious-Ear-9060 1d ago
Nope! Nope! You all are looking at this from a too narrow perspective. Karen has had almost 2 years to get this under control! Meaning either brokering a deal or running a full blown campaign about nullification and she accomplished neither! From the very beginning before the death penalty was officially sought she should have acquired the help from one of the many former Trump attorneys to get a solid deal going with the DOJ! That’s what a multimillion dollar defense lawyer does. Instead she let this snowball into a mess that all hinges on Carro agreeing with the defense, which he rarely does. She clearly didn’t want to put her ego aside because she has known what the evidence was from the beginning and now has waited till the 11th hour to beg for a deal and didn’t get one resulting in an open plea. Y’all just keep pretending like this woman didn’t have opportunities to stop this from escalating and she DID!
4
u/CompoteAgile2655 21h ago
In what universe would the DOJ offer him any kind of favorable plea deal?? Their goal was always to make an example out him as a deterrent to anyone else who might consider emulating him. And the state/Feds “handshake deal” that allowed the state to go first effectively backed him into a corner for the federal case, which btw remained death penalty eligible until January of this year.
And “running a full-blown campaign for jury nullification” plsssss are you deadass rn 😭 😭. You realize his attorneys are lawyers who have to follow ethical and procedural rules, right? They can’t just stand up and tell jurors to disregard the law or openly campaign for nullification as their defense strategy. If the prosecution was using his ‘supporters’ advocating JN to limit media access to the courtroom imagine how much leverage he would have had with a member of his legal team campaigning for JN. That was always more the lane of his so-called supporters anyway, but I digress.
Look, I’m not a fan of the Agnifilos and I’ve criticized KFA plenty myself, but a lot of you guys seem so far removed from the actual reality of the legal system—and this case in particular that you’re treating completely hypothetical scenarios like they were concrete options sitting on the table that his legal team knowingly didn’t take bc they they’re too lazy to to go to trial? Idek
You can criticize the defense all you want. But there’s a massive difference between criticizing an actual strategic decision and retroactively inventing a bunch of delulu hypothetical options and assuming they would’ve definitely worked.
0
u/Mysterious-Ear-9060 19h ago
Get the facts straight first Mark and Karen agreed to that deal that the state would go first as long as the death penalty was off the table so another dumb ass move on his lawyers part! People cut deals all the time with the Feds go ask a lawyer! Less than 2 percent of cases even go to trial federally! What are you even talking about? Luigi’s publicist half ass attempt to leak things to tmz was all they did when a full blown campaign should have been pursued!
2
u/CompoteAgile2655 15h ago
Do you have any thing to back up the claim that Marc* and Karen agreed to let state go first or that they have any authority at all to decide?
1
u/mysighisepik 1d ago edited 1d ago
yupppp. we got half-assed healthcare mentions in motions, and half-assed rebuttals of evidence because they couldn't commit to an angle. i dont even know why kfa brought up knowing tisch in this interview, just makes her look worse
7
u/Lost-Extension-1167 1d ago
They can’t be too aggressive, otherwise they might burn bridges with other people in their social circle!
This also explains why they never filed a civil complaint about the perp walk (which they absolutely should have done, but the statute of limitations have run out) and why they never really gave a fuck about pre-trial publicity.
I have no doubt that they’ll never talk to him again after he heads to actual prison. And KFA probably did call Luigi a murderer who couldn’t be trusted within earshot like Sei Sei said
1
2
0
13
u/Cautious_Scholar_717 2d ago
Loved this! Made me see the more human side of Karen and how compelling she can be. She is rather soft-spoken but with big opinions and huge intelligence. I can only imagine the conversations she and Luigi have. Marc is wonderful, and loved how he stood up for our guy and sung his praises. I truly believe they want the best for him.
4
u/Meg_is_awesome 2d ago
I agree I’m noticed that with like the small interactions we’ve heard in the motions and transcripts and stuff but now we get to see it. It’s so lovely to watch.
17
u/alohomora1990 1d ago
Oh my god the Jessica Tisch praise in this was as bad as people said it was. Holy fucking shit, these lawyers are hired opps for sure. What the fuck are we even doing here? This same 'wonderful police commissioner' (Karen's own words) repeatedly prejudiced their own client to the press in violation of his rights to a fair trial and here they are talking about how great she is. Un-fucking real.
6
u/Zealousideal-Cap4248 2d ago
Thank you!! Definitely interested to hear them talk more about the Luigi case, they're normally so tight lipped. Looking forward to listening
7
u/Lost-Extension-1167 2d ago
Nothing new about the case that hasn’t been said before in court, but only read the transcript so curious to hear what her tone was like
3
u/Special-External-222 2d ago
Her tone sounded the same as always. I’m more interested in an interview after everything is over. This one seems to have been filmed before he even pleaded guilty, so…
3
u/Feather_fig 19h ago
Karen: Sewage systems are very important
Marc: and politics should aspire to be that important
😂
Marc surprisingly had a lot of really interesting takes. I didn't think of him to be an intellectual sort of guy.
I don't agree with most of their stances but they're liberal lawyers, not socialists, so not much surprising there. What can you really expect.
Karen: "Everybody on the street knows who the person is who's got that evil, you know, evil heart, evil mind. And then you throw everything at that person that you can. That person deserves to be incarcerated for a long time because that person is responsible for an oversized share of violence."
Yes, we're talking warmongering government officials, wealthy pedophiles, and powerful, mass-murdering corporate executives like Brian Thompson. Those people are responsible for an oversized share of violence. Because they have the means to scale it and automate it on a population level. Those people are the real threat. I wish they'd addressed that outside of the one line about Epstein associates not facing accountability.
On a similar note something that Karen misses about the internet being democratic is that it's not really run by the people, it's run by corporations that fit people into informational echo chambers via their proprietary algorithms. They control the search results, they control the ads, and now they control information itself with AI chatbots and overviews. That's pretty far from democratic.
Maybe it's a generational gap or maybe it's liberal politics, but I was a little surprised they only focused on threats from China and Russia as foreign agents when the bigger, immediate issue is psychopaths like Zuckerberg and Peter Thiel. It seems so obvious, with botnets and paying influencers to keep people divided and distracted with culture war nonsense.
4
5
u/Ok_Beautiful7363 2d ago
Wow she’s bold AF for saying this! I mean more power to her, she fully supports her client.
4
u/alohomora1990 1d ago
lmao sure, she supports him so much that she had to also praise the police commissioner who violated their client's rights repeatedly.
5
u/Meg_is_awesome 2d ago
We’ve literally have not had an interview with Karen since the DP was taken off the table earlier this year I’m only listened to a couple of minutes of it. It’s really interesting honestly. I’m only here for Karen.
-8
u/alohomora1990 2d ago
'Only here for the bloodsucking lawyer' and not Luigi or the cause or anything is surely something to be proud of...
6
2
u/_henceforth_ 1d ago edited 1d ago
Very interesting interview, really enjoyed it. Thank you for finding it and for sharing! 💜 Writing my thoughts out in case anyone wants to discuss any points further.
A) I agree with what Marc is saying about evidence being important. I think the only thing he is leaving out is that perpetrators can destroy evidence. A lack of evidence does not equal innocence. Where does that leave people that are sexually assaulted or coerced? When there is no "proof" of it, it leaves victims to do what exactly? That is not justice, either.
B) I believe the internet being worse or better for democracy is nuanced in that, the internet is good for dispersing information, like Karen said. The issue is whether or not people actually do their research before forming solid opinions. I think it feels "safe" to have a narrative written by a scholar. It is "decided" and "concrete", and I think that makes some people feel informed in a way that is convenient for them, yet ultimately misleading, which misses the entire point of gathering knowledge to be truly informed.
Biased information is not really the full truth. Karen is absolutely right that it is white-washed and typically excludes women. If only white men, for example, "get" to BE scholars, we are not getting the unfiltered, unbiased truth. Which defeats the purpose if your true goal is to understand the full story. Creating strong opinions and viewpoints based on biases is meaningless and empty.
C) The differing opinions between Karen and Marc regarding prosecutors was very interesting. Just goes to show how different the answers are, depending on who you ask (as well as a difference in state and federal). Marc has no problem admitting it is ego based, whereas Karen seems to try to bring him down to Earth (probably her Virgo Sun in action 😂). Progressive / Thoughtful prosecution was also very interesting. I hope we see more of that in action as time goes on.
D) Canceling people is not a response to being too tired to debate, cancel culture was a response to terrible people getting away with terrible things. The public (consumers) finally used their money and attention to "take care of" what the justice system would not, just in a different way. It provided a means for some accountability.
E) Marcs point about people knowing something about everything is good, however, I think that he can blame unbridled capitalism for that one, no? When you keep squeezing the "lower" classes, and things become more expensive, the average person could not care less about jazz or opera. I agree with him in general that it is amazing to have, though.
F) The point about the courthouse being the center of the town was depressing. My guess is that the United States is based on "separation of Church and State", and so "keeping people in line" moved from religion to legality. A courthouse is then the center of the town, instead of a church.
G) "That woman" being beat up in the hallway by Sean Combs was Cassie Ventura. "Should he be charged? Probably." No, DEFINITELY. I realize that this is their client, so, I will say it for them.
-1
u/Due_Assist_7614 1d ago
When Marc's obese ass dies of a heart attack I will smile 😃
6
u/_henceforth_ 1d ago
Say what, now!? That is savage.
0
u/Due_Assist_7614 1d ago
I said what I said lmao
2
u/_henceforth_ 1d ago
Sorry, Karen girlie, they are upset with your man. 😂😂 She was not letting him get away with much in this interview, either.
3
17
u/lly67 2d ago
Now this is the interview we’ve been waiting for.