OK, fine. Sure, whatever.

https://www.justice.gov/usao/resources/crime-victims-rights-ombudsman/victims-rights-act

"A crime victim has the following rights:

(2) The right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused.

(4) The right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding.

(9) The right to be informed in a timely manner of any plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement."

The crime victims were not given those rights. This agreement was clearly illegal.

Also, the defendant isn’t being punished. The defendant is dead.

1. It is the defendant’s fault because he is a criminal who chose to make a deal that protected other criminals while stealing justice from victims. Also, the guy is dead.

2. He made a deal on the behalf of other people, not himself. Those other people did not agree to this deal. The person who did agree to the deal is dead. The government honored the illegal deal until he died.

3. You say my murder example is stupid because “that’s clearly an illegal act.” This deal is clearly an illegal act. It is illegal to make this deal. Period. Just because the lawyers agreed to the deal does not make it any less illegal. It is and was illegal. You say “honor your deal” but ignore that the deal was illegal. In the US Justice system, illegal deals are not binding.

I’m not arguing just to argue. This is important stuff. The basis of our legal system isn’t “honoring handshake agreements.” There are real reasons why we have laws and don’t go by backroom deals. The justice system is a deal between the government and the people to protect victims and deliver justice. Honoring this illegal deal is breaking the agreement between the victims and their government.

And nice try making me out to the some kind of bad guy and saying I don’t keep my word. What kind of ignorant argument is that? If the government said my word was illegal then I would be forced by law to go back on my word. That is the case here. One party made an illegal agreement that cannot be legally held.

If you made an agreement to buy a car from someone, but that someone actually sold you a stolen car, guess what happens. The answer is not that you get to keep the stolen car because the person who broke the law needs to keep his side of the bargain. The person who had their car stolen gets it back (hopefully).

In this case, one of the parties who made the agreement is dead. The other party broke the law in making the agreement. The people who are being protected by the agreement never agreed to it in the first place. So it makes no sense to honor an agreement between a dead guy and a criminal lawyer in order to protect other criminals.

Again, this was an illegal deal that hurts victims and protects a guilty defendant. There is a reason why this kind of deal is illegal.

You are saying quite clearly that you don’t care if the government broke the law to protect a defendant and hurt victims, as long as they keep their word. You care more about keeping promises than you do about why the laws are there in the first place. The defendant actually is at fault here, and they are making a deal to keep their friends safe after breaking different laws. If that deal is illegal, why should it be honored? To protect a criminal?

If I make a deal to have the prosecutor murder the person who accused me of my crimes in exchange for giving up information to convict someone more important, are you OK with the prosecutor making and honoring that deal?

Or… “He was only having sex with young women, not boys. 16 is still legal in some states. 14 is still legal in some countries. He was just confused on how the laws applied on a private island.”

Specifically 20 non-R others.

So let me get this straight: you are OK with a prosecutor making illegal deals that hurt victims as long as it benefits the defendant?

Ah, so a Trump appointee made an illegal deal that was supposed to keep everything hidden from the victims and public at large… It’s almost like Trump had a vested interest in keeping stuff related to the case hidden.

But you know that won’t happen.

And she was CEO of that.

I will bet you a dollar that she would speak at charity dinners talking about how her company creates safe living spaces for low income women or some shit. She would say anything to spin the fact that she made the world a worse place for hundreds of thousands of people.

A Marine who spouts right wing talking points… definitely not a very political person.

Do you stuff them with like mushrooms and cheese?

So she was CEO of a company that owns 61,000 single family homes as rental properties that has been investigated multiple times for how they treat their tenants. They also own over 22,000 apartments.

She made her money running a company that removes 61,000 homes from the market as available for normal people to buy as their primary home.

EDIT: want to be clear that she didn’t deserve to die for the work she did, just that she wasn’t just some strong woman who made it in business by working hard.

No, just around half of the voting block are MAGA Nazis. 20% of the US is not even of voting age. Then around half of what’s left is too busy being overworked and/or undereducated to even know what MAGA is, let alone voting for anyone at all.

So really only 31% of the US voting-eligible population voted for Trump, and only 22% of the US population did.

Thanks for wasting taxpayer money on an obviously bad lawsuit. There are only three possible outcomes from this waste of money:

1. They lose in the quickest possible dismissal for obvious reason after paying lawyers on both sides to create briefs to the judge.

2. They somehow find a judge that allows this to go to trial and spend MUCH more lawyer time to get to the obvious loss.

3. They somehow win and cause complete anarchy across the US as large blue states can start prosecuting people in red states for stuff like gun laws and denying health care to trans people and denying health care to women with non-viable pregnancies.

It might. I rented a car for one day in Belgium from. A week after I got back to the US I got a letter saying I had badly scraped the rims and was being charged $1500. I emailed them and challenged it, and they said, “oh that was a paperwork error on our part, don’t pay it.” Not sure what would have happened if they had tried to fight me.

I went to the game’s website to see how they portrayed the game as opposed to taking whatever cherry-picked similarities Sony chose to use as their argument.

Wow. It is fucking identical. Maybe the gameplay is different, but the art is indistinguishable.

The police lieutenant said they needed to be held accountable in a court of law for their crimes…

Dude, they are 13 year olds making a video about a traumatic childhood reality, not threatening anyone or even making jokes about it. If you really think they were threatening a mass shooting, then you deal with that in an appropriate investigation. If you think they were joking about something bad… they are 13-year-olds, that’s what they do!!

EDIT: This lieutenant is the kind of guy who thinks it is justifiable to shoot your gun at people toilet-papering your house, which is a real event that killed a kid at the highschool I went to.

No, because phones don’t show the URL you are going to. I can go to a restaurant and scan the menu, but the link that it shows me is “qrl.io/asccand…” because A) the restaurant used a URL shortener, and B) the phone truncates the URL to fit in the space.

Flight Crew, including pilots, are 100% checking their phones in the air.