Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    40375
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Thank you. "Upholding the legal process," as noble as it sounds, is as subjective as it comes. And when you open up the process of disbarment to subjective criteria, as you note above, you open it up to abuse. To weaponization, as it were. And while that system, with a little added incompetence, lets some Sidney Powell's retain their licenses, as you note, the Paxtons and Patricks are dangerously close to taking over everything, and a more subjective system would put a lot more good guys in peril than bad.
  2. Back on the docket today, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, 1PM ET. https://apnews.com/article/kilmar-abrego-garcia-deportation-state-secrets-7a4d39f9a2013003b592efa94aa230ed This time apparently on the government's assertion of state secrets privilege. As we left it, the parties had agreed to stay discovery until April 30, which we thought might mean something good for Abrego Garcia. Apparently not. Discovery has resumed with a flurry of motions for KAG to take more depositions and the government actually produce a privilege log (listing of documents not produced with applicable privilege). And that lead us to the state secrets bullshit.
  3. Well, weird worked because we were four years removed from Trump. And clearly a whole lot of people forgot how weird and fucked up Trumpco really was. Now, harder words are appropriate. I think lied and liar should be near the top of the list. He lied to you about who paid tariffs, he lied to you about grocery prices and the stock market. He lies. Everyone knows that but considers them immaterial.
  4. A bit of an explainer on injunction scope. In the usual case, an injunction applies only to the parties to the case: the enjoined party cannot do unto the opposing party. Most court cases only have application as between the two parties, except as one form or another of precedential value (law of the case, claim or issue preclusion, persuasive precedent, or controlling precedent) on other cases. In a case where the government is a party, however, the injunction usually involve a determination that the government's action is invalid, and then, it's not so much the injunction, but the holding of invalidity that becomes the issue. How far does that extend? In the usual case, a district court holding has limited precedential value: it really only controls the parties before the court, and maybe (persuasive) other courts within the district. Once it is affirmed by the court of appeals, it becomes a binding precedent in that circuit, and whatever states comprise it. And becomes not controlling precedent, but "advisory" or persuasive to courts in other circuits If ruled upon and affirmed by SCOTUS, it's nationally controlling precedent. Which brings us back to the injunction. How far should the government be permitted to continue to enforce a law or policy that has been held invalid by only one court. Granted, that ruling in and of itself may cast the law or policy into serious doubt, but then there's Reed O'Connor. Without extending the holding beyond the parties, you get a different ruling from every district court considering, some enjoining some not, and on differing grounds. Once it makes it to courts of appeal, you get something like 11 variants, one for each circuit. You avoid that "chaos" by permitting either circuit-wide effect (11 variations) or national effect (no variations). Apart from the current crisis issues, it's an interesting question.
  5. Well, and you weren't raised by wolves, either your actual parents, or your peers. It is true that our juvenile system, a lot like the adult system, offers little rehabilitation and may likely actually be a crime school of sociopathy. Even if true, that doesn't completely undermine the justification of a juvenile system that is less punitive than the adult system.
  6. Right, miserable shit. But they're forcing decent humans to take a position on trans issues, again. And they're gonna cram it up our ass, again. I'm beginning to think many of them actually dgaf about being anti-trans, but are just keeping the issue alive for electoral purposes. Maybe it doesn't work so well outside of the "boys in girls sports" meme.
  7. I think bozo's point is that while Twatter may suck and us bystanders may want to get off, candidates, the party, and those that consider themselves thought leaders or persuaders need to stay on.
  8. And Oz, like most commonwealth countries, has a pretty draconian immigration set up, even for white males.
  9. And the GOP is pushing more anti-trans legislation everywhere. Which Ds will have to oppose because they're human beings, and that's going to feed that narrative again.
  10. So, how about Pete as head of DNC?
  11. “The Department of Homeland Security receives hundreds of television show pitches a year,” she said in a statement. “Each proposal undergoes a thorough vetting process prior to denial or approval.” Um what?
  12. Seems like ol Steve-o getting a healthy dose of thee is me here.
  13. I believe it's state regulation of AI that is prohibited. I'm not sure the feds can preempt without legislating in the field. And, amusing how all the white genocide blurb refers to "Kill The Boer," because a song is as close as there is to white genocide in SA.
  14. Look at that fuckwad's haircut. And he's wearing a blazer over a hoodie? And he doesn't know the difference between facts and opinions.
  15. And, I think one of the sort of uniquenesses of the US is that the rule of law was more or less established independent of a specific "top," That is, by the Constitution, before any leader or ruler was elected. That's a fairly common thing since, but was fairly unique at the time. There is, of course, the Magna Carta, but that was negotiated between a ruler and a set of nobles in the context of an existing monarchy and feudal system. So, I guess the rule of law is almost inevitably going to issue from some form of top.
  16. Not the first time either. https://www.argusleader.com/story/news/2021/08/05/south-dakota-governor-kristi-noem-plane/5505956001/ She has a luxury travel problem. https://www.yahoo.com/news/kristi-noem-refused-financed-her-040042859.html Also a fun article about ICE Barbie's cosplay. https://www.thedailybeast.com/now-ice-barbie-kristi-noem-wants-her-own-brand-new-50m-private-jet/
  17. My Mom made some form of midcentury casserole that was Ranch Style Beans, spaghetti, and ground beef, maybe with some cheese on top. Don't know much beyond that but it was pretty tasty.
  18. Thank you for your attention in this matter!
  19. I am aware that Haspel soft-pedaled Russian intelligence to Trump because he'd get pissed when it pertained to election and cultural interference here or elsewhere. And then Haspel, in turn, roasted Russia House regularly. I'm reading a spy novel where a political Director and DDO are feeding a Russian double agent's Intel to the White House, where it is loved. And the double agent is also running a mole in the CIA, whose identity has yet to be revealed. I'm going with the DDO, but that may be too obvious.
  20. Washing his balls is almost understandable. It's the gargling that follows that is so problematic.
  21. Some elaboration on the above. https://www.elsalvadornow.org/2025/04/26/container-seized-with-drugs-and-coffee-in-panama-departed-from-the-port-of-acajutla-contenedor-incautado-con-droga-y-cafe-en-panama-salio-del-puerto-de-acajutla/ Tl;Dr, the drogas were in a coffee shipment from ES's nationalized/government coffee seller, which Bukele's government touted.
  22. Ideology or Trumpology? I have a tough time calling anything Trump/MAGA subscribe to as an ideology. I guess ideologies don't have to be consistent or coherent.
  23. Seems a very odd thing. They walked across the border at TJ with suitcases?
×
×
  • Create New...