This certainly is an entertaining thread for a non-AA employee to read! 😀
Before I pose my one question, I would like to point out that The Dissident is 100% correct in his assertion that Democrats (esp liberal Dems) do tend to label folks they disagree with, but can't intelligently refute the issues they disagree with, as "racists". I have experienced this whenever I point to the fact that radical Muslims have been the source of virtually all major terrorism and passengers who apear to be Muslim (e.g. they're carrying passports from an Arab country or Pakistan, Iran, etc) should be screened a bit more carefully. I get blasted as a racist, like perhaps the next major terrorist act will be committed by a group of Swedish Lutherans, Southern Baptists, whatever. Yeah, right.
Anyway, my one question (for whomever of you has any legal knowledge): If a felony (embezzlement of millions of $$$ of company funds which is a fancy term for robbery) is committed, does the victim (in this case, AA) have to agree before prosecution can start, or can the authorities do so even though the victim is against such prosecution for various reasons (EEO law suit, etc)?