I’m trying not to think about -- to game -- what SCOTGOP will do with or to the Colorado case but...
Seeking fraudulent acts in two and of course inciting J6 which wouldn’t have happened but for Trump’s acts -- the only legitimate way Colorado gets reversed is by saying Tricky Dick Nixon was not just right, in this case, that a POTUS can subvert an election for no better reason than his ego and it’s legal. Not going to say the case won’t get reversed but I can’t see Roberts going for it.
And speaking of fPOTUS: ridiculous as a lot of his representation is because retained are allowing the client to call the shots when he knows approximately nothing relevant. His experience is nearly all commercial crap where he sues a vendor or vice versa and the kind of cases landlords attract. So that immunity motion in Carroll II: the issue was previously dealt with in Carroll I and the only reason to move now is to delay it.
2008 was the start of the decline for NRA revenues? That’s interesting, especially considering that 2008 was also the year that the so-called originalist supremes decided for the first time in the nation’s history that an individual right to bear arms existed. Which would be news to gun toters 1789-2007, but hey ho I’m completely sure that was totally not ahistorical or anything.
I'm sooooo upset to hear the Great Patriots at the NRA may be forced to go out and obtain gainful employment. (and if you believe that, come check out this bridge property you won't be able to say "no" to)
My daily early a.m. read, David...pleased that you will be soldiering on in a normally dead period for online reporting.
I’m trying not to think about -- to game -- what SCOTGOP will do with or to the Colorado case but...
Seeking fraudulent acts in two and of course inciting J6 which wouldn’t have happened but for Trump’s acts -- the only legitimate way Colorado gets reversed is by saying Tricky Dick Nixon was not just right, in this case, that a POTUS can subvert an election for no better reason than his ego and it’s legal. Not going to say the case won’t get reversed but I can’t see Roberts going for it.
And speaking of fPOTUS: ridiculous as a lot of his representation is because retained are allowing the client to call the shots when he knows approximately nothing relevant. His experience is nearly all commercial crap where he sues a vendor or vice versa and the kind of cases landlords attract. So that immunity motion in Carroll II: the issue was previously dealt with in Carroll I and the only reason to move now is to delay it.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing again in expectation of a different outcome."
But we already knew he was nuts long ago.
He’s far, far worse than nuts.
And that definition of insanity is irrelevant here because the primary purpose of it is to delay the case.
2008 was the start of the decline for NRA revenues? That’s interesting, especially considering that 2008 was also the year that the so-called originalist supremes decided for the first time in the nation’s history that an individual right to bear arms existed. Which would be news to gun toters 1789-2007, but hey ho I’m completely sure that was totally not ahistorical or anything.
I'm sooooo upset to hear the Great Patriots at the NRA may be forced to go out and obtain gainful employment. (and if you believe that, come check out this bridge property you won't be able to say "no" to)
Spun webs are sticky, even for the former Ps who spin them. They can get stuck
and the more they struggle
to get out, the more they're
trapped by their own silky
spin. 😉
I'm still betting on a different definition of "engage" but the court makes a good case about why it applies.
DOJ is friggin worthless. Rule of law my ass.