Any Garland Defenders Watching Rachel

[usonian]

41. Apologies if I goofed.

Uncle Leo defense.

I was referencing a deleted thread, so I was working from memory, which has its flaws.

I *believe* that it included the link to "servants of the mafia" substack. I have no way of vetting that substack post, so I posted the disclaimer on it.

I open links in a new tab, and there was the substack post, with the now-deleted OP in the adjoining tab.

And I concluded that the criticism in the substack OP was beyond DU rules. I COULD BE WRONG.

If the similarity is in calling out Garland, that's what I concluded. I never call posters out. My rules. I might send a DM instead, so no criticism of your OP was intended.

As with all my posts, corrections are welcome. And if I post something that confuses people, I delete it.

I really just wanted to post a link to the substack post in case it was obliterated. And the disclaimer says to "judge it yourself"

I thought that your OP might be deleted for the same reasons, and saved it. Quite the opposite of asking it to be deleted.

And if my post is misconstrued or confusing, I'll gladly delete it. On Hacker News, after a short time, one can't edit or delete a post.