quindraco

That's not true. You don't have to ask someone to stop committing defamation before suing them for defamation.

Does it count as a tell when it's irrelevant? Everything Trump says is a lie. You can tell he's lying because his lips are moving. The addition of the word "Sir" doesn't change anything.

It's fine, provided it's not a plot hole - i.e. your fantasy setting needs to not have abolished blindness as a realistic malady, which some settings do. E.g. LOTR 100% has blind people, while the Harry Potter universe only has very poor blind people, since solving blindness is as trivial as a polyjuice potion, even if nothing else works (and something more effective is bound to work).

The government can ban tobacco, but it's undeniably tyrannical to ban a drug because you don't like the consequences people are choosing for themselves.

He couldn't remember if he did or not, is the joke.

The claim that hating the Israeli government is anti-Semitic is deeply anti-Semitic. Trump leveled the same core idea at Col. Alexander Vindman, that as a jew, his true loyalty must be to Israel. It's an all too common anti-Semitic trope.

Speaking as someone who knows the definition (or more accurately, that there isn't one), it is not a first amendment issue.

They do, in fact, have a legal leg to stand in. As shareholders, they can sue their board of directors for mismanagement.

Gerrymandering is legal, as is mentioned in the article. What's not legal is racial gerrymandering. If all a court does is find a map to be gerrymandered, it won't send it to anyone to be redrawn.

Banning specific guns is pure theater, even if it passes. There's zero real safety in it.

Your question makes very little sense. How do you think prosecutors work, exactly?

The order of operations for going to prison is:

1. Cop wants to arrest you. If the cop has no genuine excuse to do so, this arrest won't go anywhere (they can still lock you up for up to 24 hours at will). If you've just committed a crime in front of the cop, well, that's easy, the cop just puts you away; skip to step 3. If this is an investigation, the cop goes to step 2.

2. Cop gets permission from a judge to arrest you. This is called an arrest warrant.

3. Cop arrests you and puts you in jail. At this point you should lawyer up, but as that is not compulsory, it is not a distinct step in this list.

4. Cop gives evidence to prosecutor. Because there is a time delay between 3 and 4, the cop may do additional investigating before this step.

5. Prosecutor decides to prosecute (they may choose to dismiss instead).

6. You go to court. Judge asks you how you plead. You plead not guilty. The media pretends this is notable, even though no-one pleads guilty ar this step (it is called arraignment).

7. The evidence against you is shown to you. The judge again asks you how you plead. This time you have a genuine choice in your answer.

8. Optional: if you pled not guilty, go to trial. Jury convicts you.

9. Judge sentences you to prison.

That's the basic pipeline.

Note that cops don't have to do their jobs at all, which is most likely why, as the article discusses, they don't. Why get paid to work when you can get paid to not work?

You're agreeing with the rich people in this case when you say that. They got none of those things in this case. They're being taxed on money they could theoretically get.