The home of South Carolina Circuit Court judge Diane Goodstein was set on fire after she had reportedly received death threats.

State law enforcement is investigating the house fire on Edisto Beach which began at around 11:30 a.m. E.T. on Saturday, sources told local news outlet FITSNews.

Goodstein was reportedly not at home at the time of the fire, but at least three members of her family, including her husband, former Democratic state senator Arnold Goodstein, and their son, have been hospitalized with serious injuries. According to the St. Paul’s Fire District, which responded to the scene, the occupants had to be rescued via kayak. Law enforcement have not disclosed whether the fire is being investigated as an arson attack.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 1 year ago (11 children)

Found Stephen Miller's account.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Im guessing you don’t work in programming, law or science. Would that be a correct presumption?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (9 children)

    That far right extremists keep perpetuating violence based on far right propaganda and that assuming this is one of those is along the same lines as assuming Kirk was intentionally shot and it wasn't just a random stray bullet.

    Sure, we should stay open to the possibility that it is unrelated. But automatically dismissing what is likely to be intentional is ridiculous. She had been receiving death threats, and this would be one way to follow through.

    I do work in web development and understand logic and assumptions. What are your credentials?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    arson is not the most frequent cause of house fires so presuming arson as the most likely cause in this case is foolish. It could be a coincidence. We have no idea why this happened and deciding it is political is not logical.

    Other than trying to fan the flames of discontent, and thus being part of the problem, what is the point of deciding this was political violence when you have no evidence at all to back any claim?

    The intelligent position is to make no claims until you have evidence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Saying you don't know is not dismissing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)