Interesting. So the (explicit?) quid pro quo didn’t actually have anything to do with the funds or military aid. “Merely” about a visit to the white house?

Thank you, CNN had a headline about the explicit quid pro quo but when you clicked on the link it you just went to the live updates that were Sondland saying there was no stated quid pro quo on the Biden investigation, he just presumed there was. (which is like the opposite of explicit)

Problems arise when a police officer can say “he had a gun, therefore I can kill him any time based on the assumption that he is about to go on a shooting spree”

Sorry, but this is a bad take. One, “break-ins” normally mean “Car break-ins”

Sure, and talking on the phone (or at least looking like it) is exactly what I would expect a (bad) lookout to be doing.

But if she was an even more recent hire than you, and in a non-technical management position, why would they care that she didn’t understand the issue, and why would they expect her to?

3: People who have only ever heard it as a phrase and had never given significant thought about the etymology/individual words?

But the thing about monarchy is you can’t fire a prince.

There are going to be people coming and going and milling about in that space all the fucking time, at all hours of the day or night. There’s nothing “suspicious” about being in a hotel parking lot.

Additional rent/mortgage for a place with a large enough additional empty area to play VR games in?

Defendant in the court of public opinion, maybe. In terms of the proposed defamation lawsuit though, No. Becky would be the one suing Will-i-am for defamation.

From quick google search, in Australia, unlike in the U.S., the defendant has to prove what they said is true in a defamation suit. Becky doesn’t have to prove she isn’t racist. Will-i-am would have to prove she is.

To be fair. It’s entirely probable the dad WAS the manager. Would make a whole lot more sense than some near minimum-wage employee bringing his son in to work to help out with the rush.

Depends on the work. I was ~12 when I started working for my Dad.

Previously, Buckingham Palace has denied all allegations concerning Andrew and “any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors,” according to The Guardian.

Except the problem in your scenario isn’t the black boy getting shot. It’s the white boy not getting shot. And, sorry, white boys DO get justifiably shot pulling stupid crap like this. It just doesn’t make the news much because people can’t pull the racism card.

The only “further context” I need is that said suspected firearm-carrying person was flagrantly ignoring lawful police orders by fleeing.

I think you’re referring to the Supreme court ruling of Tennessee v. Garner

Duh?  If you’re right up against the wall of course a good chunk of your body will be past the corner before your view is.  People are just figuring this out now?

People who are happy with the way things are, and think that stupid people will be too stupid to get anything done and thus leave things the way they are?