Luigi did nothing wrong. He didn't kill that guy either.
this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
813 points (99.2% liked)
Luigi Mangione
1894 readers
18 users here now
A community to post anything related to Luigi Mangione.
This is not a pro-murder community. Please respect Lemmy.world ToS.
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
I have a feeling for a while that Luigi is absolutely innocent... and you know what? If, and hopefully when, he is acquitted (no need for jury nullification, I am convinced that he really didn't do it), that would mean the real shooter got away with it.
And that is kinda nice to hear that you can off a powerful shitbag individual and escape in the 21st century. Assassinations of major figures by people who escape are so rare I can count them on one hand. One of them was literally the first ever murder by firearm in London. A16th century assassination of a nobleman who remains undiscovered.
I think the real Luigi likely trainhopped or otherwise entered the homeless underground, which would make him pretty untraceable. Many homeless are absolute masters on how to disappear/travel cross country for free.
Did anyone else notice on Reddit that whenever Luigi was mentioned there were a bunch of the same comments saying "this is old news if there were any updates we'd know about it". Meanwhile Luigi was getting censored super heavily. Starting to think those were all bots.
Reddit is an absolute hive of bot accounts and influencer accounts.
This is old news if there were any updates we'd know about it.
The bots are massive, it probably was a mix of bots and people who parrot bots thinking they are with the group
I stopped posting at reddit. I deleted all but one account that I use for porn and extremely niche shit. I don't use it to post in political stuff there because fuck them.
This is the way
I hope lemme gets a Sims and Sonic board
And one for the weird bodyswap caption porn that was on reddit
Holy shit can you guys imagine if the jury rules “not guilty, because you got the wrong fucking guy”? Luigi could probably run in 2028 and win.
He isn't old enough.
The oblique implication in my comment is that if orangeboi (illegally) runs for a third term, then it also does not matter if Luigi (illegally) runs when he’s too young
Why not? He already illegally ran in 2024, and was illegally inaugurated...
14th Amendment violater
lol wow uh… you know, I guess you do have a point there 🫠
Lmao this guy thinks there will still be elections
There will still be elections -- they just won't be fair and legitimate elections.
50 States all went to the GOP... crazy how that happens now that Elon Musk counts the vote
He'd never defeat the Democrats' list of very strong candidates.
checks list
its just hillary again
Am I dumb or is AOC not an option
She is 100% an option, but not for the current Democrat party. They will push her our like they did Sanders.
They'd vote Trump before voting for AOC. At least that's my take from abroad.
And mine from not abroad.
The Dems are controlled opposition who are funded by the billionaires just like the Rs.
load more comments
(7 replies)
After Kamala there's no way they'll have another female candidate. The American people would rather vote for all the adjectives that describe Trump than a woman.
That's exactly why they would run another woman candidate. You don't think the dems are trying to win, do you?
Clinton and Harris are just fake smiles on a status quo neoliberal platform. Of course that didn't go anywhere. Elizabeth Warren might have stood a chance. AOC is outright popular now but I don't think she would have won, yet.
The "Fight Oligarchy" rallies and "Hands Off" protests need to get bigger. Then she could be popular enough.
After Kamala there’s no way they’ll have another female candidate.
Which is extra funny given that candidates like Gretchen Witmer, Liz Warren, and AOC are some of their most popular candidates the party still has to offer.
Gruesome Newsom is going to clinch then nomination on a platform of "America is a fundamentally misogynistic nation" and liberals are going to waltz into 2028 screaming "Vote for us! We hate women more than the Republicans!"
Naw Gavin's career is sunk. That podcast sank him
I'll believe it when I see it. He's still got the Getty fortune and the Lib half of California media firmly behind him
True, but he's burned his bridges with the Left via transphobia and trying to court the Right, and with the Right by inviting Right Wingers to the podcast and then calling them Bible Thumpers while trying to court them.
He's got a life raft that'll prevent him from drowning overnight, but he took a swing at the big time and missed.
he’s burned his bridges with the Left via transphobia
He burned it with The Left when he came after the homeless way back during his San Fransisco mayorship. That hasn't really hurt him, because liberals continue to love the guy.
He’s got a life raft that’ll prevent him from drowning overnight
He's the Andrew Cuomo of the West Coast. He'll never drown. Like a fat turd, he'll always float to the top.
If that's the lesson dems took from the election, dems are going to lose again.
Stop pushing far right republicans as the dem nominees, regardless of their supposed genitals.
It was quite a blow to my "all humans are inherently good" mindset, I'm now going with "all humans probably have some deeply rooted cultural biases".
all humans are inherently good
Why the fuck would you have thought this to begin with?
Because babies aren't racist, sexist, etc. We're not perfect, and we get some weird ideas as we go through life, but in general I think most people are generally just trying to get by and do their best.
But also yeah sometimes you have to do a violence or whatever.
Maternal instincts, the lived experience of kindness between friends and neighbors, and the last 10,000 years of gradual but undeniable improvements in social equity could argue this point.
I might also argue that humans are fundamentally good, but still highly mutable. So a few bad apples really can spoil the bunch.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Not 35 years of age or older enough
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
It's a threat to the poors. You hurt the rich, you'll be treated the same.
Sounds like they are saying we have nothing to lose.
I don't see a threat. I see permission.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It feels like they should be doing everything to avoid a mistrial.
Maybe less embarrassing than a not guilty verdict?
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›