Amateur Hour Continues

Is it best to limit one's criming to one state?
Yes. It is also best, when one’s criming results in additional civil litigation, to hire an attorney and ask that court to stay proceedings so one does not have to testify about said criming during the civil proceedings.

But maybe they couldn’t find a lawyer that they hadn’t tried to frame for sexual assault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Velo Vol
There’s a really simple solution to this, IMO.

Pre-Trump Virus, every week a jury pool is summoned from among the electorate.

Every recusal motion that isn’t agreed to ought to be considered by 9 random people selected from that panel.

You’d accomplish 2 things: 1. Impartial panel breaks a stalemate over refusal. 2. Judge refusing to recuse gets potentially embarrassed by having their poor judgment put in front of 9 voters. You don’t want To encourage frivolous motions, but the biggest deterrent against frivolous recusal motions is that you piss off the judge and they don’t recuse. So that’s still there. Seems simple and easy to me.
 
What do you mean? I've listened to a few of his podcasts recently and I think he does a pretty good job of framing what's going on.

In this episode he and the guest debunk the 2020 = 2016 redux narrative.
I feel like he waters things down for subscribers. I needed an example. I think I got it.

Check out the first 25 minutes of his podcast from Friday where he defends his thoughts on Mitch McConnel. He’s like “oh I got some pushback from our democratic listerners...” then he spends several minutes doing what I feel is watering down his take.

Then he moves on to defending his take on Hunter Biden and does the same thing.

I think, in the end, he sticks on his main points, but he inserts a bunch of caveats and kind of apologizes for it and tries to find common ground to show how nonpartisan he is.

He does that a lot now in response to both sides. I think it’s to try to keep subscribers. I get it, I just liked him better when he was at NR and didn’t have to worry about it if he pissed people off.

He barely talked about the impeachment because of The Dispatch. When he did, he was incredibly insightful. Maybe because he didn’t talk about it all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Velo Vol
He does that a lot now in response to both sides. I think it’s to try to keep subscribers. I get it, I just liked him better when he was at NR and didn’t have to worry about it if he pissed people off.
I didn't hear him much at NR, but now he's pretty clearly trying to go for a broad audience if people like me aren't getting worked up. The fact that it's more middle of the road doesn't mean it can't be interesting/insightful, though. I get more out of someone who weighs the merits of both sides than simply tells the audience what to think.

I like reading/hearing the thoughts of anti-Trump conservatives, as they're less prone to go overboard with their criticisms.
 
As a super-savvy businessman does.

El1tM0EXYAIdI9Y
 
Texas GOP just got paddled with the belt and the suspenders while trying to throw out drive-thru votes in Harris County. (Thread)



Texas Supreme Court already wiped their asses with this suit. Be interesting to see if the 5th Circuit takes it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
When the story came out that Trump paid $750 in taxes, his defenders were all abuzz about how smart he is in using deductions.

So why is he paying millions in advance?
Didn’t I just answer that? If you use one of the tax payment programs have you never seen the prepayment coupons it gives you? Can you not read?
 
When the story came out that Trump paid $750 in taxes, his defenders were all abuzz about how smart he is in using deductions.

So why is he paying millions in advance?

The $750 is for the extension.

The majority of Trump supporters know jack squat about tax law the same as those that are anti Trump.
 
Texas GOP just got paddled with the belt and the suspenders while trying to throw out drive-thru votes in Harris County. (Thread)



Texas Supreme Court already wiped their asses with this suit. Be interesting to see if the 5th Circuit takes it up.

Fifth Circuit Panel also rejected this case.

The GOP lawyers, apparently gluttons for punishment, have asked for an en banc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
Fifth Circuit Panel also rejected this case.

The GOP lawyers, apparently gluttons for punishment, have asked for an en banc.
Honestly, I don’t even know what they’re appealing at this point. They dropped their bid to throw out the votes when they got to the 5th circuit and Harris County limited drive-thru voting today to the Toyota Center, based on Hanen’s ruling yesterday. This would seem to moot the case as there’s surely no dispute about whether the Toyota Center is a “permanent structure.”
 
Honestly, I don’t even know what they’re appealing at this point. They dropped their bid to throw out the votes when they got to the 5th circuit and Harris County limited drive-thru voting today to the Toyota Center, based on Hanen’s ruling yesterday. This would seem to moot the case as there’s surely no dispute about whether the Toyota Center is a “permanent structure.”
Quoting yourself by quoting yourself, by quoting yourself.

Quite an accomplishment!

Seriously though, I appreciate this information. Lawyers are going to lawyer no matter the odds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb and hog88
Advertisement

Back
Top