It means the FBI UCR data is really only useful for quantifying the job performance of U.S. police agencies.
Since Senator Biden's 1990s crime bill - which uses federal funds to bribe state and local agencies to increase personnel - the job performance of police agencies across the country has consistently declined.
As the number of cases has continued to decline and the number of officers has continued to increase - clearance rates have somehow gone down instead of up (clearance = solved cases)
Maybe you didn't know this happened at a courthouse - that he was there on the court's notice to appear?
"Out on 2 other bonds" doesn't increase the bond that's set in another new case.
If this were a case with zero publicity (i.e. if it were MOST cases) - the fact of being "out on 2 other bonds" would be grounds for relief (a reduced bond or release) under the same circumstances.
All the court cares about (in normal non-publicized cases) - is making sure you come back to court when you're scheduled to appear.
@Leo081563801@Epsteinfiles1@TaylerUSA Bail is excessive in cases that are getting national publicity
This happens because the difference between two completely unrelated things - a bond and a sentence - is just too confusing for the general public.
@RightousBro1@JessH171717@hodgetwins the way you said: "THROUGH A FARA UNDER THE ISRAELI FOREIGN MINISTRY"
๐คฆ๐ผ lol
And no - no one but Salem Media is controlling Salem Media.
@StickyFingaz47@Hughmungusdik@TheBrancaShow *'after he's punching you.'
"You just can't claim self defense if you shoot him [after he's punching you]."
You forgot to finish typing your sentence.
๐คท๐ผ It happens.
Bucket: "saying nigger isn't a fighting word"
You: "courts say otherwise"
Just a heads up - in these examples courts Do Not say otherwise ๐ซค
worse, still? They say *exactly* what Bucket said ๐คท๐ผ
How did you get yourself into this accident?
Well, to support your claim you relied on screenshots of 2 cases in which, idk, your internet searched words "nigger" and "fighting words" appeared?
Instead of bothering to *read those cases.
For Liebenguth...
1. Tunneled in on the "cherry" you'd picked because you *thought it says what you wanted to hear...
You accidentally posted a screenshot that's also got highlighted the elements you're ignoring without realizing they're the elements that *actually matter.
(the specific words themselves never do)
2. You didn't read it so you didn't know it articulated *exactly what Bucket said
Here's another screenshot from that case. It's the important part: it's where SCOTUS plainly articulates there are NO words that are 'fighting words'
there are no "fighting words" = 'nigger' is not "fighting words"
wdym "if Chud is found [*guilty of] harassment"?
When playing the "moving the goalposts" game - maybe don't rely on a goalpost that exists only in your imagination
1. you're literally saying "if" he's found guilty of an offense that's he's not even being (nor WILL he be) charged with ๐คฆ๐ผ
No charge = No "if"
2. You've misread meaning that does not exist - into the word "communicate" as it's used in TN's 'harassment' statute
Would you like the *correct citation for the statute so you can read it again more carefully and find your error yourself? ๐
@LummisofLA@iAnonPatriot The problem with unidentified snippets: we don't know if the context is even "Earth's climate." How do we know the context isn't, say, "social climate" or "workplace climate"?
Erica Viegas has hosted forum panels specifically on the topic of gender parity in workplaces.
@QStacheIII@MicahBeckwith@jstewartIndy No. No one will be sued for this rumor.
The Indy Star is simply exercising its protected First Amendment freedom of the press to delete the context Beckwith was replying to. ๐๐ผ๐ฏ