ICC judge, the fact that he's French didn't have an impact. He's also far from being the only one.

In fact, the Executive Order that imposed these sanctions is very broad and gives "immunity" to pretty much everyone affiliated with the US. If the ICC tries to prosecute anyone from NATO or anyone from a "major non-NATO ally" (Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand), the current administration will put sanctions on those judges.

So there's 40 or so countries whose governments are effectively "immune" from being prosecuted from the ICC, but the president has authority to add literally any country to that list.

[flagged]

Fair comment.

Values are case-by-case basis depending if trump (GOP?) likes something (most like got paid cash) or not.

Case in point - full pardon for former Honduran president on drug trafficking, while at the same time they are trying to use drug trafficking as pretext on war with Venezuela.

Same thing with arabs/muslims/immigrants being bad (look at how they were during Mamdami campaign), though literal al-Qaeda members and murderers acting as arabian royalty are "great leaders" and "things (murders) happen".

Even on "simpler" issues like family values - they preach against queers, about "traditional family values", kids, etc. But most of them have 3+ divorces, multiple kids that they don't take care of, imported/immigrant trophy wives, numerous scandals of adultery, while destroying policies for children education/health/food, etc.

You say that, but over the past decade he's got around 50 percent of the vote. Like it or not, this is what America is.

Our values are whatever Trump says they should be!

An interviewer asked Trump in 2016 how people will know that America is great again. He replied: “cause I’m gonna tell em”. :)

https://youtu.be/6TuqNMIxMeI?si=oCkU2Rypuf9SOU8H

"If you uncover evidence an applicant was responsible for, or complicit in, censorship or attempted censorship of protected expression in the United States, you should pursue a finding that the applicant is ineligible"

If that sentence from the article is accurate, the parent poster's response makes complete and perfect sense. You don't have to like the current administration, to like a specific thing they are doing.

Now is this actually what is happening? I don't know. And of course, that's a different conversation, and not what the parent poster was talking about.

"Definitely weird to be "happy" that the government is cracking down on people who help prevent the propagation of fraud, scams, and CSAM."

Such self-descriptions are not necessarily accurate and honest.

We have had quite a few debates around Chat Control here. It is sold as a tool to prevent propagation of CSAM as well.

Those things are not protected expression in the US.

> Definitely weird to be "happy" that the government is cracking down on people who help prevent the propagation of CSAM.

I mean... This is HN... You should see people's reaction when Apple decided to do something about it...

Always took it to be synonymous with "enlightenment values", created in Europe and by Christians. (Who I believe were at least somewhat secular). I am unsure if we are, at present, a bastion of said values.

Spot on.

Christianity does not necessary implies fascism. And "our values" or "western values" here in this context do.

Pope is not like Vance, despite Vance pointificating about by values and pope beong christan.