Are they calling it a pride parade
June 7, 2025 at 11:26 PM
Are they calling it a pride parade
I dunno. I hate Trump. But I wonder if some of the things were ill advised and whether, for example, the NY AG did more harm than good. Do you doubt that the AG lawsuit re business practices was politically motivated? Of course it was. And I think it obscured more serious stuff. Steele Dossier too
May 30, 2025 at 8:42 PM
I dunno. I hate Trump. But I wonder if some of the things were ill advised and whether, for example, the NY AG did more harm than good. Do you doubt that the AG lawsuit re business practices was politically motivated? Of course it was. And I think it obscured more serious stuff. Steele Dossier too
“I asked the foreman, are these men skilled, as those you’d hire if you had to build?”
He laughed and said, “No indeed! Common labor is all I need. I can easily wreck in a day or two what took the builder years to do.”
He laughed and said, “No indeed! Common labor is all I need. I can easily wreck in a day or two what took the builder years to do.”
May 4, 2025 at 1:20 PM
“I asked the foreman, are these men skilled, as those you’d hire if you had to build?”
He laughed and said, “No indeed! Common labor is all I need. I can easily wreck in a day or two what took the builder years to do.”
He laughed and said, “No indeed! Common labor is all I need. I can easily wreck in a day or two what took the builder years to do.”
The builder-or-wrecker poem comes to mind.
May 4, 2025 at 1:18 PM
The builder-or-wrecker poem comes to mind.
As I have gotten older I have realized I’m always doing one or the other. Whether I’m aware of it or not. There is agency to choose if you conscientious about making the choice.
May 3, 2025 at 2:53 PM
As I have gotten older I have realized I’m always doing one or the other. Whether I’m aware of it or not. There is agency to choose if you conscientious about making the choice.
If I am insisting on paying for a dinner but the other person doesn’t want me to do that, I’m making them uncomfortable. Not good. If there is privilege in being a man, use it to help others who don’t have that cultural privilege and power.
May 3, 2025 at 2:51 PM
If I am insisting on paying for a dinner but the other person doesn’t want me to do that, I’m making them uncomfortable. Not good. If there is privilege in being a man, use it to help others who don’t have that cultural privilege and power.
Men can choose between two states of being. Either you are a man that makes space where others feel safe, secure and comfortable in their own skin, or you are a man that creates space where others feel unsafe, insecure, and uncomfortable. The former is the model for “manliness” we want, I think.
May 3, 2025 at 2:49 PM
Men can choose between two states of being. Either you are a man that makes space where others feel safe, secure and comfortable in their own skin, or you are a man that creates space where others feel unsafe, insecure, and uncomfortable. The former is the model for “manliness” we want, I think.
Also there are stores that sell dolls. They lose sales. How much of that can they afford? It has employees, will they lose jobs? When they sell 30 dolls vs 2, they ship more, need more truckers. So those jobs also shrink. And on and on. Clearly there is no thought process around this complexity
May 2, 2025 at 8:00 PM
Also there are stores that sell dolls. They lose sales. How much of that can they afford? It has employees, will they lose jobs? When they sell 30 dolls vs 2, they ship more, need more truckers. So those jobs also shrink. And on and on. Clearly there is no thought process around this complexity
This is getting g hard to follow. So not onshoring now?
April 29, 2025 at 5:55 PM
This is getting g hard to follow. So not onshoring now?
It seems to me the law firm “deals” in terms of the value of pro bono work being promised is symbolic. The symbolism matters and is bad. The bad practical consequence though is more that big law won’t take cases that are directly hostile to Trump, *not* that they will take cases he requests.
April 29, 2025 at 5:13 PM
It seems to me the law firm “deals” in terms of the value of pro bono work being promised is symbolic. The symbolism matters and is bad. The bad practical consequence though is more that big law won’t take cases that are directly hostile to Trump, *not* that they will take cases he requests.
100% agree. But I just don’t think it realistically can happen. Committing to pro bono work in areas like helping Veterans get VA benefits is not hard to do. A big firm will have people that want to do that. Much harder to get individual lawyers to work pro bono for causes they just don’t support.
April 29, 2025 at 5:06 PM
100% agree. But I just don’t think it realistically can happen. Committing to pro bono work in areas like helping Veterans get VA benefits is not hard to do. A big firm will have people that want to do that. Much harder to get individual lawyers to work pro bono for causes they just don’t support.
This feels like an SNL bit. It’s beyond parody
April 29, 2025 at 4:59 PM
This feels like an SNL bit. It’s beyond parody
No, I’m sure they will honor their deals. But I don’t think it’s a reasonable reading of the deals to think that taking *this case* is part of it. Taking specific cases is different than making a commitment to do X dollars in pro bono on general subjects. I think all the deals had lists of areas.
April 29, 2025 at 2:38 PM
No, I’m sure they will honor their deals. But I don’t think it’s a reasonable reading of the deals to think that taking *this case* is part of it. Taking specific cases is different than making a commitment to do X dollars in pro bono on general subjects. I think all the deals had lists of areas.
I don’t think the terms of the deal say that, I think it was a commitment to do pro bono work on issues of common ground. There were specific areas listed in the various deals. No one can make a lawyer handle a pro bono case they don’t want to do, and it’s even bad for the client.
April 29, 2025 at 2:32 PM
I don’t think the terms of the deal say that, I think it was a commitment to do pro bono work on issues of common ground. There were specific areas listed in the various deals. No one can make a lawyer handle a pro bono case they don’t want to do, and it’s even bad for the client.
Yes. I understand why people hate those deals but there is approximately zero chance that any firm does anything like this. They did the deals because of capitalism. They won’t take stuff like this on because of capitalism.
April 29, 2025 at 2:26 PM
Yes. I understand why people hate those deals but there is approximately zero chance that any firm does anything like this. They did the deals because of capitalism. They won’t take stuff like this on because of capitalism.
I mean, this is obviously not going to be handled by one of those firms on a pro bono basis or otherwise. So I don’t know what reason there is to post this.
April 29, 2025 at 2:15 PM
I mean, this is obviously not going to be handled by one of those firms on a pro bono basis or otherwise. So I don’t know what reason there is to post this.
It’s the bottomlessness of the stupidity.
April 29, 2025 at 1:58 PM
It’s the bottomlessness of the stupidity.
Is this updated? The people want to know!
April 28, 2025 at 5:15 PM
Is this updated? The people want to know!
Also, you can now easily hail yellow cabs again.
April 26, 2025 at 12:08 AM
Also, you can now easily hail yellow cabs again.
I mean this should be getting a lot more attention
April 18, 2025 at 10:19 PM
I mean this should be getting a lot more attention
There’s no immunity for that.
April 17, 2025 at 2:02 AM
There’s no immunity for that.
I’m curious why he doesn’t have a green card by virtue of being married to an American? Admin keeps saying he’ll be re deported but he’s married to a U.S. citizen so how and why?
April 16, 2025 at 1:59 PM
I’m curious why he doesn’t have a green card by virtue of being married to an American? Admin keeps saying he’ll be re deported but he’s married to a U.S. citizen so how and why?
I think it’s unfair to expect that everyone targeted by a bully is equally capable of fighting back without being irreparably maimed, even in good company. It is critical that there is push back. Good for Harvard. More is better. But if a university thinks it can’t survive the fight, should it?
April 15, 2025 at 8:24 PM
I think it’s unfair to expect that everyone targeted by a bully is equally capable of fighting back without being irreparably maimed, even in good company. It is critical that there is push back. Good for Harvard. More is better. But if a university thinks it can’t survive the fight, should it?
Why not impose a monetary contempt sanction on the lawyers every day they are non compliant - $10k per day
April 14, 2025 at 11:06 AM
Why not impose a monetary contempt sanction on the lawyers every day they are non compliant - $10k per day