Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    34434
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. What is kinda interesting is that what seemed to be a rather unique phenomenon relating to internet provided services or products is really just a near universal expression of entropy or something similar.
  2. Her sportsmanship, or complete lack of it, is astounding and virtually unparalleled in the world of sports. She never has a good word for an opposing coach or player. She's a sore loser and doesn't hide it. She’s arrogant and rude to opponents, officials, the press, and everyone in sight and defends the indefensiible from her players, who are generally dirty.
  3. This term butter biscuit is new to me, can you explain a bit of the etymology?
  4. So a guy that goes by Ace is nicknamed Boogie. I'd hate to see what a guy that goes by Boogie is nicknamed.
  5. Stock makes shitty collateral, see, eg, margin loans. Stock itself is not going to help Trump very much as its collateral value is less than half its current trade value if that.
  6. Sort of a general question. Do you guys make use of "skills areas"? There are several trails around town with various types of skills areas. I could use more skillz, but find them kind of boring and I guess I am not really sure what to do with them. I am not particularly interested learning to jump at my age, so those hold little interest. Also, any workout aspect (at least half of why I do this) gets repetitive, like running laps or doing sprints. There's a pump track at Katie Jackson that I think provides useful skills and is a workout, but it's in the midst of jumps and not well marked or delineated, so you start to get pumping and boom find yourself about to hit a gap jump. One thing I would like to do is get more comfortable with drops, but afaik, none of these skills areas have any sort of progression on drops.
  7. Well, if serious, this DWAC thing has a share value, based on pure speculation, that is mostly independent of TMTG except to the extent the speculation is based on acquiring TMTG. So like all speculation is stupid af. Then DWAC acquires TMTG and its share price becomes TMTGs share price along with it its shares. Then the reality of a shit acquisition target hits and the share price goes into the toilet. Meanwhile, the shares should be locked up from insider trading for six months while they assume what should be a realistic value,ie dogshit.
  8. Federal. This was contempt in a civil case.
  9. It is for attention horses.
  10. Well, in the scenario I envision, the government dismisses voluntarily to avoid going to trial on wrong jury instructions. The government doesn't have unfettered discretion to do that, it needs court permission. And, in some cases, the dismissal might be with prejudice (meaning can't be re-indicted). So this would be a last ditch strategery. Classically, "jeopardy" does not attach until the jury is sworn, meaning up until then, usually, any dismissal can be re-indicted. There's all kinds of dismissal types and outcomes, mistrials, voluntary, prosecutor misconduct, blah blah blah. The other possibility in the event of terrible instructions is a mandamus appeal, which is a kind of rare deal that I'm not even sure is available. Bad jury instructions, usually in a subtle way, are common in civil cases and a fruitful area for appeal. When you get stuck with shitty ones and you're the government in a criminal case, I'm not sure what you do.
  11. She seems to use a lot of anecdotes and stereotypes of dubious validity to prove her points, or actually generate outrage. Like her generalization about how US troops are treated for PTSD. Some of her points are probably valid to a degree, though. There is a lot of overindulgent parenting going on, but I don't think it is in any way exclusively a librul phenomenon or centered around polarizing ideas like gender identity or whether kids are getting good therapy.
  12. Theoretically, yes, but the vast majority of private-sector employees don't work in some competitive thunderdome. A whole hell of a lot of em just get by.
  13. That is some valuable perspective, right there.
  14. Agreed on reinventing the wheel. But, in this particular case, the wheel was never really invented in the first place because, again, we are looking at some novel legal questions. There's not much law on the interplay between the PRA and the courts and zero on the interplay between the PRA and Espionage Act. Not that either of these pose particularly difficult questions. She definitely seems overawed by the fact that this is the first presidential prosecution in history and seems to be wanting to find differences in this case and others that preceded it that don't really exist.
  15. Who fucking knows. Smith played the venue choice straight as an arrow to begin with: he went to the closest division within the SD Fla to Trump with a virtual certainty that she would get the case. I don't think he had to go by division, he could have filed anywhere in SD Fla and let Trump try to contest it. Obviously, he wouldn't want anything to do with Cannon again. Then again, he may be able to straighten her out on this and minimize any harm.
  16. She has most of the right creds, except judicial experience. I think I noticed she spent substantial time in the appellate section of the US Attorneys office, so she may be taking what my first mentor called a "law review" approach to trial issues that really aren't that juicy or complex.
  17. I have never not contended she is apparently stupid af. So stupid in fact that it camouflages any corruption and makes it damn near impossible to tell where one ends and the other begins.
  18. Yeah I don't know what interlocutory appeal options the government may have. Because she denied the vagueness motion to dismiss, but not the PRA, I initially thought this was some gambit to paint the government into a corner on it, making it easier to dismiss the indictment. But the "extended" idea of her giving really bad/wrong jury instructions didn't initially occur to me. One thing I believe I have seen is that despite the federal civil practice of lengthy and detailed jury questions, federal criminal questions are short and singular, generally. Here is an example of the questions in an espionage act case. https://knightcolumbia.org/documents/5c5cdc7f03 And here's what the instructions look like in a different case. https://knightcolumbia.org/documents/2f9194cd67
  19. Which I intended to use in my campaign...
  20. If she gave really bad/wrong jury instructions that force the jury to acquit on the classified information counts, we're looking at acquittal with no remedy. However, that would not affect the obstruction counts, where the evidence is maybe even stronger. The problem is that the government indicted on the section of 793 that requires that the defendant lack authority to possess the classified information in the first place, while they could have alleged the section that doesn't require that. She appears to want to instruct the jury that the PRA may initially have made his possession of these documents rightful, even after they had left the white house. And they have to make a finding on that. The PRA does no such thing. My initial read was that she was attempting to use this process to make it easier to grant Trump"s motion to dismiss on the PRA. But she could just be girding up to give bad jury instructions. For which the government has no remedy except to dismiss the case before a jury is sworn and bring it again. In that event, doing jury instructions early like this helps the government. If they were done after the jury was sworn as is more conventional, the government would have no remedy at all.
×
×
  • Create New...