It actually happens a lot, but it’s not the judge who dismisses it, but the prosecutor’s office.

There are plenty of times where the prosecutor pursues bogus charges to intimidate a citizen into taking a plea deal of a lesser charge. And if the citizen fights to go to a jury trial, the prosecutor will drop the charges so it can’t go on record that they are clearly acting corruptly to protect their own.

Like this case where a citizen was arrested for calling a cop a dumbass and afterwards the prosecutor attempted to trump up the charges to aggravated assault and then dismissed charges like a week before his jury trial.

Looks like standard MVNO offerings (mint, boost, cricket, fi). $47+tax for talk, text, and data. Though it does look more expensive than others.

So the mobile company is called T1 Mobile. Doesn’t that infringe on the trademark of T Mobile? Seems like that would be confusing to a customer. Since it’s an MVNO, T1 Mobile is likely piggy backing off of T Mobile’s network.

Easy, you import a phone and case, and the “manufacturing” is a worker who puts the case onto the phone and places it in branded packaging, slap a made in America sticker, and there ya go.

If you can’t find a girlfriend, become the girlfriend

It’s always weird when conservatives happily post when someone on the other team gets hit with a gun charge.

Retired LEO arrested for carrying a gun while on Capitol hill? That’s a win?

Often times, I think of movies or stories as the story teller as translating for the audience. You don’t watch Troy and think it’s odd the characters are speaking English.

It’s acceptable to complain if the work is nonfiction and meant to be for education.

When a company sends fake phishing attempts, the links report back if they’ve been clicked. For them to get that report, their job would had to have sent it.

How else would they know she fell for the bait unless she actually did get phished months ago and their IT traced a recent attack back to her, in which they gave her training instead of firing her?

The immediacy of the follow up email indicates she was caught my a fake phishing attempt meant to catch employees before real attackers do.

It’s also the source of “L+ratio”, because you had an “L” take (loser take as opposed to a W take) and the ratio is there to “prove” it .

For online discussions, it can be worth it. You might not change the mind of the person you’re talking to, but there are more lurkers than posters. Your discussion is for them.

I think if you aren’t the one debating, you are more open to differing opinions.

I’m fine with them limiting what can be on personalized license plates, they don’t even have to offer them. If she got this as a bumper sticker or something, then I don’t think the government can force her to remove it.

She’s had this plate for 10 years, don’t know why they are rejecting her now.

Her plate is “69PWNDU”

But if someone wanted to kill you, isn’t that just part of God’s plan?

So I guess they don’t like that over 90% of immigrants return for their court hearing, so if they make it so ICE detains and deport people who return for their hearings, that percentage will go down and it’s another propaganda point that catch and release is a failure.

<3

Can you link me one time the government made a change google didn’t agree with, google continued operating as normal against the change, and challenged that change in court? That change being anything other than a new regulation that attempted to restrict some aspect of Google’s business?

The only thing I’m able to find is essentially anti-trust lawsuits related to google search being the default in iOS and Android. I’m basically looking for any legal challenge google “resisted” for some societal good.

(Edit: this isn’t like a challenge to your argument, I would just like to be better informed to see if google actually has partook in some sort of activism against the government other than fighting to continue their terrible business practices)

So in my city, the water bill would charge a fee for paying online, the only way to avoid the fee was to write a check and they had no auto pay options at all.

I would just overpay and write a check for 6-months of service. I knew it was time to write a new check when my balance stopped being negative.

I guess what I’m saying is it would have been incredibly convenient and not at all infuriating to have a fee-less auto pay option.

What are you talking about? I said that google should show what is fact, not their opinion. Pretending the US’s official name for the body of water is the gulf of Mexico is denying the truth of what is happening. Other people outside the US report that the gulf hasn’t been renamed for their location, this is a US problem.

And yet he does with no consequences because of the Republican administration (and frankly, the non-progressive Democrats). It’s not Google’s job to be a check on the government. If the US government department that manages natural landmark names has that set in their records, that’s what should be reported.

First off fuck trump

But my hot take is that google should show it as gulf of america and remove holidays from the calendar. Google should be a source of fact and the fact is the Republican administration has officially renamed the gulf of Mexico and removed those as federally recognized holidays.

Google shouldn’t be “protesting”, the blame here is on the US government. I dont want Google’s “opinion” on things when I search. Be mad at Google when they also refuse to do black history doodles on their front page (like, right now I think)

The New Orleans police department is the government