That's a damn clear shot of his face, though. They're going to ID this guy within 24 hours.

Backpack is different

The jacket details are the same in both photos.

over his right shoulder and it's black. The one that the shooter wore had white straps

law enforcement has cup he threw away at Starbucks & may have his DNA.

I am skeptical this is the guy. It would also be interesting he planned this like this and then showed his face for no reason.

But the uncovered picks today look like another famous celebrity.

Am I crazy?

The pic from yesterday looked straight at his fave looks like Tom Cruise. Part of that is that both these actors appear to be close to his height too.

the same thing about the nose and eyelashes. Eyelashes look thicker and darker in pics today. But, surely the NYPD has facial recognition software and comparison.

I need to step away for awhile. I've been watching too much NCIS

NYPD must have a reason to want to talk to this person. Do they think they have an ID and these are photos of the suspect at a different time?

Seems to me. Where is he in the pics from today? Looks institutional from the flooring.

Maybe they've been able to track him around the city and he changed clothes later in the day?

I've thought it's odd that he wore such a recognizable backpack to commit a murder.

At the same time, the jacket looks like it is OVER a whole lot of other clothes.

If I'm honest, the nose seems off as well between the pics from yesterday (narrow at the top) and today (looks like a guy who's had some fistfights/ boxer). Yesterday guy looks more northern Euro; today's guy more southern Euro.

Probably all just an artifact of the cameras. Surely NYPD isn't putting out recognizable pics of somebody if they're not sure, right?

"Person of interest" means they want to talk to him, for some reason, but that doesn't mean they think he's the shooter.

Do we know for sure that this Twitter account is actually the NYPD? It could be some rando posting photos?

for all those who say they see no one celebrating the shooting?

just a little more explicit than some others. Frankly I am more disturbed by the posts calling for more killings.

I know you are very invested in this.

are blinding us to our values slipping away. It is entirely possible to point out the injustices of insurance driven healthcare while condemning cold-blooded murder.

If we simply become "Republican-lite", are we any better than the deplorables?

All over the world we're seeing people lash out. Voting for Trump was a form of lashing out. Cheering an assassin because of what the health insurance industry does is lashing out. The guys who attempted to assassinate Trump were lashing out.

Climate change, a global pandemic, a huge and increasing disparity between the ultra-wealthy and everybody else, a globalized economy that depends on workers who are greatly underpaid and abused.... it's all creating a lot of pressure and many humans aren't handling it well.

To extend your question... if we cheer assassins because the system is broken, how are we different from people who voted for Trump because they believe the system is broken?

Tbh, my response to this murder has made me more empathetic to Trump voters. A lot of us are sick to death of what's happening. We just have different ways of expressing it. I won't cheer an assassin but I can understand why some do.

the problem comes when we condone people illegally lashing out. If we accept murder as a solution to a grievance we cannot really complain when it happens to us in return.

Wrong is wrong regardless of the target.

Wrong and illegal are not at all identical. I hope I don't need to give you current and historical examples. The Nazis had a very intense need to put their actions on a 'legal' basis, for instance.

If you want to say the CEO getting popped shouldn't be condoned because there are practical consequences to society of letting vigilantes act, that is one thing.

If you want to say it is metaphysically 'wrong' to murder someone responsible for 1000's (at least) premature deaths due to corporate policies, that's a different lane. Murder in the latter case (or do you not want to call it murder? what do you call it then?) as a solution to increasing corporate profits means they can't complain when someone else murders as a response to their policies- by your own definition.

a major sticking point at the Wannsee Conference was to make sure the "Final Solution" was carried out legally, according to German law.

Murder is wrong. Murdering someone for a corporate policy is wrong and illegal.

If you want to try to twist it to be about profits, I ask what are the chances the new CEO is going to change the policy and say "just approve everything". I will place my bet on a number lower than 1.
Since the metaphysical wrong is still there, go ahead and murder the next one?

and oil companies destroy civilization, you can enjoy a sense of moral superiority.

That my ethics are not flexible. That view was once seen as a virtue.

and I guess their execs need to be concerned now about 2nd Amendment solutions.

However, no matter how bad I believe the policy is, I do not support killing anyone in the company over it. The solution to our healthcare woes is legislation, not assassination.

I think you are spot on! We are sick and tired of all the worrying. The bills, healthcare and can we afford it, affordable housing, fair treatment for everyone and the list goes on. I'm physically and emotionally drained.

I dont really care that a insurance ceo suffering from the pre-existing condition of being an asshole and making money in the backs of the suffering of the American people got unalived

The murder itself was seemingly performed calmly, but the motive could very well be anything but- evidence points to the opposite in fact.

is the definition of clod blooded. Motive does not change the definition.

If someone stealthily crept up and calmly shot hitler in the head, we would never call that a cold blooded murder. Language is always contextual.

With tons of suffering to endure before hand

one has been hidden...
Most of them have multiple recs

on this subject... I happen to agree and you put it so steadfastly Well.

so they have his dna

that can be traced to anyone in his family who has dna on file


also thom is currently reading a post from du from gopiscrap
about the insurance, illness, bankruptcies, prison, etc

Still not convinced that it's the shooter, but it is interesting how they are zeroing in on hostels.

....it's unused.

Pfft.

It's going to be epic.

.... wonder what happened to him to make him just toss away his future. 'Cause they WILL catch him. No tears for the shitty vicitim, though.

against him. It claims Thompson sold $15 million of United Health stock even though he knew the feds had an antitrust investigation ongoing...claiming he did not disclose this to the investors.


What an incredible tangle this mess seems to be.

Which also isn’t covered by UHC!

Fuck the police. Let them do their own job.

And not the shooter.