[Loughla]

>idiots like you do nothing.

That seems unnecessary ad hominem. Just completely uncalled for.

Also, you're assigning a values judgment to my statements that I genuinely thought I was clear about when I said "Not saying it's right or wrong, but it exists and is something to think about."

You have no idea what my stance is on literally anything. Trying to be superior to someone who has given you nothing to feel superior about seems sort of hateful?

Facts are facts, and consequences are consequences, regardless of right or wrong. That was my meaning. Agree with the outcomes or not, believe me or don't. That doesn't matter.

>If the recording is not tampered with it's unlikely a civil case will get anywhere.

How do you figure? If it is a surreptitious recording without consent, the person who was recorded has a pretty clear line to a civil case.