Imagine you’re already a slave and then someone curses your mother.

I think you severely misinterpreted my comment.

Don’t shoot the messenger. They’re telling you how it works (and they’re right btw), that doesn’t mean they like it, much less that it’s their fault.

You can only revert a transaction if it leaves a paper trail.

Yes, they leave a trail. That’s why you can revert them, because the banks know that the transaction actually happened and how much it was for.

I was under the imoression that Telegram was a better alternative to WhatsApp but even WhatsApp doesn’t have ads. What should I be using, then?

If they actually did that they’d go out of business really fast. They have to fight against your right to block ads instead.

This isn’t the typical case for an ex post facto law, though. The PROTECT Act didn’t criminalize any conduct that was previously legal. It simply changed the statute of limitations for conducts thatbwere already criminal. Since the basis for rejecting convictions based on ex post facto laws is the fact that nobody can be expected to act according to laws that didn’t exist at the time of their actions and posession of child pornography was very much a crime when R. Kelly posessed child porn, and since the expectation that the courts will fail to do their job on time does not enjoy any legal protection, there is nothing inherently wrong with applying the PROTECT Act to R. Kelly’s case.

This is my opinion as a lawyer, however I am not licensed to practice law in the USA specifically, so I may be 100% wrong.

The outrage is actually for the opposite reason: he wasn’t elected.

But yes, it is a ridiculous double standard regardless.

I love how you just assume people are “burgerlanders” when they disagree with you. Look at my username, comemierda.