... you can still be held liable for perjury in a civil trial, yes?
Because I'm fairly sure the judgement for the criminal trial will include the facts of the matter, so unless Grosskreutz is going to try and re-litigate a criminal trial in a civil setting, Rittenhouse is going to be able to bring in the judgment of a duly-constituted court to show that Grosskreutz is perjuring himself for profit.
I mean, if you look at the ideology, there kinda isn't.
Being on the left is fundamentally about knocking down barriers. That's why it's so beloved of paedophiles, because one of the barriers they want to knock down is the age of consent.
The moment you reach your own limit and say "Hang on a minute" you stop being "progressive" and become "reactionary". Doesn't matter what the barrier is, if you're a committed leftie, just that it's there.
If you want more detail you can always speak to Giz :D
They're letting a grown man play cricket with girls.
And he's bowling. Are they friggin' insane?
For I'm guessing the vast majority of you who aren't familiar with cricket, being on the receiving end of a cricket ball can be genuinely dangerous. It's entirely possible to break bones in your hand even with protective gloves on, because the ball's basically a rock and if the guy's a fast bowler it's coming at your face at 80-ish mph - fastest delivery on record is just over 100mph but I'm guessing some random dude won't be able to manage that.
To emphasise how dangerous it can be, there's been two deaths in the last decade. On both occasions, the batter took the hit from the cricket ball on the neck, which is difficult to protect with padding, and died as a result.
For some reason, the US doesn't do that. I'm not aware of any legal steps to revoke perjury for women, but then, that's not how socialists work, is it?
The law will stay exactly as it is, but the prosecutor will be picked to ensure that the correct agenda is followed.
The idea appears to be that the Biden administration will de facto revoke the second amendment by removing any and all places where you might purchase a firearm, and doing it using a Federal agency that isn't beholden to any kind of local pressure.
Bear in mind that the same people are also mulling quite how they can ban 80%ers without getting themselves a new orifice torn by the Supreme Court.
To be fair, the soon-to-be-Israelis weren't giving us a great deal of choice in the matter.
Zionist terrorists were busy slaughtering as many Palestinians as they could get their hands on and there were 100,000 troops there trying - and failing - to keep a lid on things.
I think what eventually did for it was the complete unwillingness of either side to negotiate. The government of the day had no money to spend on what would turn into a generational conflict and, honestly, had we stayed, I'm not sure we still wouldn't be sending British soldiers over there to get killed by Zionist terrorists to this day.
"Don't worry!" say the WEF, when confronted with the accusation that they're building a world where quasi-governmental civil servants will dominate your life in all areas, demanding "papers, please" for every facet of human existence.
"Don't worry! We don't need to ask for your papers, your mobile does that bit for us!"
The important question is: only political?
The AI's already demonstrated overt bias. How many answers does this politics-over-truth infest, even if only subtly?
Suppose some fool is using it to generate sample regulations at a university and it starts inserting CRT in there?
Suppose it's being used to model traffic and just happens to recommend the most punitive measures for cars to favour every other mode of transport?
That's the thing about bias, it's insidious and rarely stays in it's lane...