Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 21, 2022 Share Posted September 21, 2022 5 hours ago, william.scherk said: Did Judge Dearie say the plaintiff lawyers, "You can't have your cake and eat it"? Yes. Did he tell the plaintiff lawyers that he had a 'prima facie case' of classified records before him -- and that "that's the end [of] it"? Yes, he did. William, Wow... The walls are closing in. Trump's a goner this time. He's toast. He's done. Oh my God!!! Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 21, 2022 Share Posted September 21, 2022 3 hours ago, Marc said: Oh boy here we go Marc (you little infant, you ), Imagine if Dr. Oz hadn't shown up in the last Trump rally in Pennsylvania about 3 weeks ago. Because of the clot-shot, nobody would have come, huh? Just look at all the people who showed up to see Dr. Oz. Here they are showing up for Dr. Oz. (Photos from here.) Just think, all that could have been Trump's. Say thank you, Dr. Oz. Trump should admit others made a fool out of him and maybe his audience will grow back to what it used to be. (It never ends, does it?...) Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 3 hours ago, Mark said: That the “vaccine” is a disaster is becoming mainstream. You can be sure that come 2024 the Democrats will be pushing the “Trump vaccine” line for all it’s worth. By 2024, we'll be having indications of long-term effects from the Jabs. I fear that the dimensions of the disaster are going to be huge, and I hope that Trump is going to start soon to remove the Jabs Albatross from his neck as best he can. Ellen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 (edited) On 9/17/2022 at 12:03 PM, william.scherk said: Another expected move -- The DOJ put a motion for a partial stay of Cannon's ruling before the 11th Circuit. Partial stay granted ... Edited September 22, 2022 by william.scherk Image linked to copy of 11th Circuit ruling; bigger image Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 Phew just in time too , Joe might need those codes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 I think the root of this is that the Master is chickenshit. He doesn't want to look at documents allegedly classified that the DoJ is barred from looking at. He's a Bush-era dude and he knows just how dirty the Deep State can play. It would be easy-peasy to make him a fall guy. All of this will end up being blah blah blah after the elections in November. Many people who are siding with the DoJ right now out of fear and/or sucking ass will side with MAGA out of fear and/or sucking ass once it is proven to them that MAGA will be in power. And like the saying goes, if you take a shot at the king, you better not miss. They keep missing. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: ... out of fear and/or sucking ass... I'm a bit out of sorts right now (body, not politics), so today I had a bit of an attack of vulgar. Sorry about that. Nothing a good night's sleep won't cure. Michael EDIT: But I still feel cantankerous. So here's a present for William. Oh my God! What are we going to do? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 2 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said: ... I hope that Trump is going to start soon to remove the Jabs Albatross from his neck as best he can. Ellen, I am not worried about that. I'm worried about something far worse. I hope Trump doesn't try to prove he was right all along and let evil people persuade him again, and then bad things happen as a result. But I am only a tiny bit worried. In fact, I think that possibility is remote since Trump always learns from his failures. But a tiny worry is still there. After all, he's a germaphobe. I want Trump to get away from mNRA jabs altogether. In reality. Completely. Done. Over and out. Nevermore. I don't care about Trump's public image for that topic. I am pretty sure he knows how to handle the public image department, jab or no jab. Incidentally, It's coming out, by Bill Gates's own admission, that Gates was the one who convinced Trump to not listen to Robert Kennedy Jr. back in 2017. So, for this go around, if we see Gates anywhere near Trump's people once power starts getting back into the hands of MAGA, I, for one, will reevaluate some things. But if we see some make-up efforts with Robert Kennedy Jr., I will see that as a sign that all is well. Even more. Since Bannon promoted the hell out of Kennedy's book, I fully expect to see Kennedy in some official capacity in 2025. I have my own list of several such signs. And they fall within deeds not words. For example, Trump groveling in public is not on my radar as a sign. To start with, It's never going to happen. And, election-wise, it's a stupid idea anyway. Public groveling is not an election strategy. That's a strategy for losing elections. (I'm not saying you are proposing that, but someone else is.) I have always found that an agglomeration of deeds is far more important than an agglomeration of words for indicating the true intentions of a person. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 6 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: All of this will end up being blah blah blah after the elections in November. Actually, it will probably end up in SCOTUS, then turn into blah blah blah. But if not, here's a warning shot about a potential massive clean-up. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 On 9/19/2022 at 10:03 PM, Ellen Stuttle said: If you want an unvarnished view of William's opinion of Trump supporters, take a look at this crud William retweeted... Ellen, Let me add some crud he might like to retweet (not the tweet below, but information about the event). I know you don't do video, but this one bears a listen if you can bear it. It is frigging unbelievable. Colleen Shogan looks scared as all hell. She blatantly says she does not believe the information in an article she herself wrote and published about how stupid and anti-intellectual Republican Presidents are--and she included those who vote for them. In addition to being a smarmy idiot, she's an in-your-face liar who looks off to her left in smug satisfaction with each answer she gave Senator Hawley. Here is the article she wrote where she claims the point of the article had nothing to do with denigrating Republicans. And, of course, she would NEVER weaponize the National Archives to go after political opponents... She's bipartisan. She says so. Right there on that video. She said so while she was discussing her article with Senator Josh Hawley. I had to look for a copy that is not behind a bunch of hoops to jump through, but I found one if anyone wants to read it. Anti-Intellectualism in the Modern Presidency: A Republican Populism by Colleen J. Shogan If that link stops working (note, it is sloggy so be patient), just use a search engine on the title. But don't use Google or one of the normal ones. Use this search engine instead: Freespoke. I keep getting great results from it. Here's a news article on what happened: US Archivist Nominee Defends Denigrating Republican Presidents From the article: Quote President Joe Biden’s nominee to be the next U.S. archivist defended on Sept. 21 denigrating Republican presidents and asserted she can be nonpartisan if confirmed by the Senate. Colleen Shogan, the head of the White House Historical Association who was an aide for former Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), was confronted by Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) about her writings and social media posts during a confirmation hearing in Washington. In an article titled “Anti-Intellectualism in the Modern Presidency: A Republican Populism,” Shogan wrote that former President Ronald Reagan had “less than impressive intellectual capabilities” and “it is widely accepted that George W. Bush was less intelligent than his challenger, Al Gore.” . . . Shogan repeated that she would be apolitical if confirmed. Hawley was not convinced. “You wrote an article basically saying that Republican voters are stupid, that Republican presidents deliberately appeal to anti-intellectualism. You roll it all up in Republican populism, yet you’re trying to present yourself as a nonpartisan,” he said. “In fact, you’re an extreme partisan, and your record shows that. You’re someone who has denigrated Republican presidents—every two-term Republican president since the Second World War and their voters in this lengthy article.” I doubt William will want to retweet what Hawley did, but he might want to retweet the mainstream news accounts of it. He's also free to retweet Shogan's article. It is so him when he takes his shoes off... Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellen Stuttle Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: I doubt William will want to retweet what Hawley did, but he might want to retweet the mainstream news accounts of it. He's also free to retweet Shogan's article. It is so him when he takes his shoes off... Michael I haven’t read the article yet, but I was thinking the same reading your description of it. About "anti-intellectualism" - consider the kind of swill intellectuals in the main produce, swill they’re trained to produce, swill they're almost required to produce in order to get Ph.D.s. Being anti that stuff is sane. Re William, I suspect that he'd like to be one of the technos in Great Reset Paradise. Ellen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 13 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: EDIT: But I still feel cantankerous. So here's a present for William. Oh my God! What are we going to do? Oh my G-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-gooooooooooooooddd!!! It's getting worse!!! Oops... I meant a different kind of emoji... The link at Drudge goes to the following article. ‘He’s done’: how Donald Trump’s legal woes have just gotten a lot worse | Donald Trump | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM New York civil lawsuit accusing Trump family of ‘staggering’ fraud could derail presidential bid, experts say It's about the NY case and the crazy lady (Letitia James). Quote Donald Trump’s legal perils have become insurmountable and could snuff out the former US president’s hopes of an election-winning comeback, according to political analysts and legal experts. Wow. Dayaamm! They have political analysts and legal experts. That's some serious shit. Er... How come this isn't trending on Twitter? And where is Michael Avenatti when you need the likes of him to take Trump down a peg or two? I mean the press went apeshit over that dude with the same rhetoric. Trump's done. The walls are closing in. Trump is going to jail. Day after day. Months on end. Oh... Avenatti is in prison you say? Psssssssssst to the anti-Trump crowd. You're shooting your wad too soon. And it's not much of a wad. They can't even get Bill Barr on board with this one. Bill Barr: NY Attorney General's Lawsuit Against Trump, Trump Family a "Gross Overreach" Barr's own words: Quote It's hard for me not to conclude it's a political hit job. And this is a woman who campaigned for office saying that -- promising she was going to go after Trump, which I think is a tremendous abuse of office to go head-hunting and targeting individuals. So, I think she was targeting Trump. And this is, after three years, a civil lawsuit, the gist of which is that, when the Trump Organization borrowed money, Trump personally guaranteed those loans. And to support that, she's claiming that he inflated his assets on his financial statements. Now, I'm not even sure she has a good case against Trump himself. But what ultimately persuades me that this is a political hit job is, she grossly overreaches when she tries to drag the children into the -- this. Yes, they had roles in the business, but this was his personal financial statement. It was prepared by the CFO. Accounting firms were involved in it. The children aren't going to know the details of that and be able -- and nor are they expected in the real world to do their own due diligence and have it reviewed independently. And so this -- this, to me, looks like gross overreach, which I think is going to end up backfiring on them, because I think it will make people sympathetic for Trump, that this is another example of people piling on because of Trump derangement syndrome, this strong desire to punish him. . . . ... for one thing, she brought this as a civil case. This is not a criminal case. And I -- to me, that says that she doesn't have the evidence to make a criminal case. So she's setting a lower bar and bringing this civil case. I don't think it's going to go any further. Now, it's over 200 pages long with a lot of details about the valuation of properties. But the fact of the matter is that real estate valuation of a complex real estate company like this is inherently very subjective. It depends what kinds of assumptions are used. Values can swing, depending on whether it's viewed as a property that's going to be split up or one that's kept together and so forth. So it's not an exact science. And the fact is that banks, sophisticated banks, don't rely on every jot and tittle in the financial statements. They do their own assessments. They make themselves comfortable. Sometimes, they automatically discount that kind of submission. And they didn't -- no one -- the loans were paid back. These were successful investments. And the banks were paid back. So, to have spent three years on this, seems to me, her trying to make good on a campaign promise that she was going to bring Trump down. Not that Barr's word means much these days. But for him to bash the lawsuit as harshly as he did right after he published a book bashing Trump, we're moving into clown world, folks. I guess Barr is trying to stay relevant and be the adult in the room or sumpin. And the crazy lady is trying to make a name for herself Avenatti-style. And the corners of the mainstream media hawking this story are trying to get back their audiences. But it ain't working anymore. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 And then, there's the question 14 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: So, for this go around, if we see Gates anywhere near Trump's people once power starts getting back into the hands of MAGA, I, for one, will reevaluate some things. But if we see some make-up efforts with Robert Kennedy Jr., I will see that as a sign that all is well. And then, there's the issue of the presence of Jared Kushner... 'Very troubling to me': Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner attacks Ron DeSantis over migrant stunt Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner attacks Ron DeSantis - Louder With Crowder WWW.LOUDERWITHCROWDER.COM Kushner was not a fan of the stunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted September 22, 2022 Share Posted September 22, 2022 DJT was on Hannity last night , Sean asked how/why his lawyers proposed Dearie as a special master (don't remember off hand if Hannity actually said he was a judge with the FISA courts and signed off on the warrants for Page) but DJT's response was quite thought provoking. In essence he said to remember that Dearie was 'burned' by someone pushing knowingly false information to him that precipitated his actions. So either Dearie is still 'in on' taking "Trump out" , which would be an admission of guilt of knowingly using false information or now he has a chance at redemption( which works for him even if he was 'in on' it , cuz he can burn them by now pretending to have been naive, a position protected by the fact that the only way for the Feds to scream 'he knew' begs the question , "knew what"?) Just look at all these tangled webs ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted September 23, 2022 Share Posted September 23, 2022 (edited) On 9/21/2022 at 3:13 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: On 9/21/2022 at 10:35 AM, william.scherk said: Did he tell the plaintiff lawyers that he had a 'prima facie case' of classified records before him -- and that "that's the end [of] it"? Yes, he did. Wow... The walls are closing in. Trump's a goner this time. He's toast. He's done. I didn't think that. And even if I don't think that the Special Master is chickenshit or that his legal opinion is worth chickenshit, the full set of Trump concerns are still being looked at very closely. Dearie may well have been happy that the 11th Circuit by its own explicit legal reasoning reached the same conclusion about the 100-odd set-aside 'marked classified' documents as he did. But he is still charged by Judge Cannon to obey her orders -- which the docket today shows were updated in response to the granting of a partial stay by the 11th. The most important of Cannon's orders today concerned an updated "Case Management Plan" for the other ~11,000 items to be examined for exclusion or one of two kinds of privilege or/and type of personal/presidential document or record or item. Elsewhere, on the topic of 'marked classified' but hey-ho, the marking is deceptive ... The usual suspects with full-blown you know what have seized on a small segment from Sean Hannity's interview with President Trump that went out last night on FoxNews. -- there might be an issue under there -- that instantly-declassified documents do/do not require any formal procedure following that executive decision. Trump may be proved entirely right to insist on his powers. I would have insisted on a big rubber DE-CLASSIFIED stamp somewhere between the original subpoena and the lawyerly declaration that everything that belonged to the government had been returned after a careful inventory. But I also would be glad that my lawyers don't consider my TV talking to be sworn testimony. As before, Cannon does not mess around ... Edited September 23, 2022 by william.scherk Not Judge Bannon after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted September 23, 2022 Share Posted September 23, 2022 17 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Oh my G-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-gooooooooooooooddd!!! It's getting worse!!! Oops... I meant a different kind of emoji... The link at Drudge goes to the following article. ‘He’s done’: how Donald Trump’s legal woes have just gotten a lot worse | Donald Trump | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM New York civil lawsuit accusing Trump family of ‘staggering’ fraud could... It's about the NY case and the crazy lady (Letitia James). Wow. Dayaamm! They have political analysts and legal experts. That's some serious shit. Er... How come this isn't trending on Twitter? And where is Michael Avenatti when you need the likes of him to take Trump down a peg or two? I mean the press went apeshit over that dude with the same rhetoric. Trump's done. The walls are closing in. Trump is going to jail. Day after day. Months on end. Oh... Avenatti is in prison you say? Psssssssssst to the anti-Trump crowd. You're shooting your wad too soon. And it's not much of a wad. They can't even get Bill Barr on board with this one. Bill Barr: NY Attorney General's Lawsuit Against Trump, Trump Family a "Gross Overreach" Barr's own words: Not that Barr's word means much these days. But for him to bash the lawsuit as harshly as he did right after he published a book bashing Trump, we're moving into clown world, folks. I guess Barr is trying to stay relevant and be the adult in the room or sumpin. And the crazy lady is trying to make a name for herself Avenatti-style. And the corners of the mainstream media hawking this story are trying to get back their audiences. But it ain't working anymore. Michael No ground game and mean tweets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 23, 2022 Share Posted September 23, 2022 9 hours ago, william.scherk said: I didn't think that. William, So why keep harping on the details of what is ultimately a frivolous lawsuit by the DoJ? I don't ever see you keep harping on legal details when the left abuses power--over and over. You sometimes might mention a detail, but nonstop harping? Heh. It is absent when it involves the left, no matter how blatant the abuse of power is and how current the legal cases are. So, I see you SAY you don't think Trump is done, he's a goner, the walls are closing in, and so on. But when I look at what you DO, I find it disingenuous to believe the harping in one direction only is due to nonpartisan curiosity about legalities. In short, I constantly see you harp on minutia when the issue is frivolous and technical while ignoring the fundamentals when they are not convenient for the left--even when they are big and honking. For example. You had great fun harping on and on about the legal minutia of attempts of Trump's lawyers to bring evidence of voting malfeasance to the courts, but had practically nothing to say say about the fact that ALL of the courts were refusing to allow the evidence to get into the court records. Even when others repeatedly brought it up to you, all you gave was silence as you presented more court records of technicalities about standing and so on. And you championed that snake, Marc Elias, for the longest time as the pinnacle of legal counsel (just like you championed Nate Silver in polling until his polls crashed and burned too many times). But there's this. I don't think you are being dishonest when you say you don't think Trump is toast and all that stuff. And I get it. It is hard for someone who has mocked as much as you have to own up to a position that is being widely mocked right now, even though it might be a secret pleasure for contemplation. With the sheer amount of public mockery about "Trump's a goner this time," I realize it's a pain point best to be shoved aside. I do think, however, your own self-awareness is lacking in a big honking way. To put it more clearly, your words say you don't think that stuff. Your deeds say you do. And, from what I can tell, you don't even realize it. Michael 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strictlylogical Posted September 23, 2022 Share Posted September 23, 2022 The left… with its authoritarian flavor has always indulged in a sort of collective cult of personality. It mattered more who the “Great Revolutionary Leader” was, than the kind of life he promised. This appeals to people who tend to want someone to follow, and someone to tell them what to do. So we are now seeing a desperate attack on the person, the literal straw man, instead of a repudiation of the ideas behind his popularity. Will it be successful? The play from the left and the predator class is premised on the idea that the mixed economy populist or more importantly “centrist” or “independent” types are ALSO somewhat of a cult of personality…( at first blush the invocation of the person as the movement would tend to bear our such a premise. )But although the person himself may have tapped into such a mechanism, I think there are large swathes of principled people or at least people with a strong enough sense of life for freedom who see that the person is not someone to follow but a standard bearer of a certain kind of promised life around whom to rally. l can only hope centrists and independents as well as freedom lovers are smart enough to vote based on policy and not personality… and see the strawman attack for what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted September 23, 2022 Share Posted September 23, 2022 48 minutes ago, william.scherk said: The most important of Cannon's orders today concerned an updated "Case Management Plan" for the other ~11,000 items to be examined for exclusion or one of two kinds of privilege or/and type of personal/presidential document or record or item. Cannon likes things to keep moving. Dearie was fairly fast off the mark once he had read the plan. Meet the new guy, Orenstein. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted September 24, 2022 Share Posted September 24, 2022 (edited) In re Trump v. United States ... On 9/22/2022 at 6:15 PM, william.scherk said: But [Dearie] is still charged by Judge Cannon to obey her orders -- which the docket today shows were updated in response to the granting of a partial stay by the 11th. The 'docket today' link goes to the full docket as collated by Court Listener, where you can -- if interested -- keep track of the entire case proceedings. Direct link: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/64911367/trump-v-united-states/ Trump v. United States, 9:22-cv-81294 – CourtListener.com WWW.COURTLISTENER.COM Docket for Trump v. United States, 9:22-cv-81294 — Brought to you by the RECAP Initiative and Free Law Project, a non-profit dedicated to creating high quality open legal information. On 9/22/2022 at 6:15 PM, william.scherk said: The most important of Cannon's orders today concerned an updated "Case Management Plan" for the other ~11,000 items to be examined for exclusion or one of two kinds of privilege or/and type of personal/presidential document or record or item. Here's a couple of items from commentator Styxhexenhammer666. Two videos from Bitchute and Rumble were processed in Descript, rendering a readable transcript. Except for a bad-taste mention of Melania's underwear, Styx apprises his watchers of his general attitude towards a "three forked" DOJ strategy, and adds in pertinent detai. The longer Descript video has been lightly edited to remove ums and uhs and to remove duplicate words. The shorter video renders only the mentions of the Mar-a-Lago raid and aftermath. Styx has some particularly intriguing opinions on the strategy of Trump lawyers -- how to avoid providing particularity or sworn testimony to any procedure for declassification that Trump may have used. Most legal nerds, lit, woke, freaked, syndromal or not, patriots or or not, agree that it would be nuts. Next up, what the "Leftoids" reacted to from the Hannity interview ... hey-ho. On 9/22/2022 at 6:15 PM, william.scherk said: Elsewhere, on the topic of 'marked classified' but hey-ho, the marking is deceptive ... The usual suspects with full-blown you know what have seized on a small segment from Sean Hannity's interview with President Trump that went out last night on FoxNews. Cued to the triggering segment: I'll now look for the most bizarre and/or syndromal reaction from the suspects. Following up ... On 9/23/2022 at 3:14 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: On 9/22/2022 at 6:15 PM, william.scherk said: I didn't think that. So why keep harping on the details of what is ultimately a frivolous lawsuit by the DoJ? I don't know what is meant by "what is ultimately a frivolous lawsuit by the DOJ". The DOJ search and seizure warrant was executed at Mar-a-Lago -- and the FBI carted away documents that fell under the warrant. The warrant was signed by the Magistrate Judge Reinhart. Two weeks later Movant/Plaintiff asked for "judicial oversight and relief" before the District Court that procedurally has jurisdiction over magistrates. That's Judge Aileen Cannon's court. Cannon ruled quickly on the motion and was inclined to favour the arguments of the plaintiff, insofar as granting an independent review of seized items -- preventing the government from using any of the items for any of their investigating. No carve-outs for the 'special 100' documents flagged by the DOJ as dealing with national security. She intended to appoint a Special Master and charged the parties with providing nominees. Cannon then dealt with a DOJ motion for a partial stay pending appeal. She denied that motion -- and then set up the Special Master and the parties with a preliminary schedule as a "case management plan." Then, the USA/DOJ moved in her court for a partial stay -- arguing that any marked documents needed to be excluded and that inter-agency review must proceed. Cannon denied the motion and the DOJ filed a motion with the Circuit Court that supervises her district. The DOJ motion was immediately granted by the 11th Circuit Court, the carve-out was restored, so the DOJ along with "national security" quangos now continues its investigation using those documents. Cannon immediately updated/deleted the carve-out language from her orders and ... basically left the Special Master to do the work assigned. The "case management plan" is speedy. If anyone wants to apprise themselves of the reporting stages and deadlines, you can have a gander at the schedule. Edited September 24, 2022 by william.scherk Syndromal, syndromes, synonyms; added a quick summary of the Mar-a-Lago case/s, on a dare; 'bad tast'; added precision to 'particularity' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 24, 2022 Share Posted September 24, 2022 3 hours ago, william.scherk said: I don't know what is meant by "what is ultimately a frivolous lawsuit by the DOJ". William, Don't worry about it. I'm talking about the legal premises and you are talking about the sports match and the referees. I'm not sure you will ever know what is meant by that. But, framing it in language you might understand (but I'm not sure), I suppose I could have said this is a frivolous sports match. If you don't believe me, watch what happens. Or maybe I could have tried this: It's a big fucking waste of money, taxpayer and otherwise. Just like the impeachments that used bad legal premises and all the rest. Or maybe I could have said lawfare in the place of neutral justice informed by the constitution. And incompetent lawfare at that. If you don't get it, that's fine. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 25, 2022 Share Posted September 25, 2022 4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: If you don't get it, that's fine. From Business Insider: Liz Cheney says if Trump wins a 2024 presidential nomination she 'won't be a Republican' . . . Bazinga! Oh. You got it? joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted September 26, 2022 Share Posted September 26, 2022 28 minutes ago, Marc said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now