What I'm saying is, if Insurance Lawyer Lady hadn't left the building confident she'd done her thing, she could have caught the grand jury before they left and had them stay for a quick redo. But yeah, once they were out the door, she'd screwed the pooch.
November 20, 2025 at 6:28 AM
What I'm saying is, if Insurance Lawyer Lady hadn't left the building confident she'd done her thing, she could have caught the grand jury before they left and had them stay for a quick redo. But yeah, once they were out the door, she'd screwed the pooch.
In fairness, Smith is going after the judge who wrote the opinion. Though as the opinion of the court it's pretty clear the other judge signed off on it too.
November 20, 2025 at 12:31 AM
In fairness, Smith is going after the judge who wrote the opinion. Though as the opinion of the court it's pretty clear the other judge signed off on it too.
...a number of aspects of legal practice, especially in federal court, and the bigger problem is, she doesn't know what she doesn't know. That is, she not only doesn't know those details of practice, but she doesn't know they exist so that she can look them up.
November 19, 2025 at 7:38 PM
...a number of aspects of legal practice, especially in federal court, and the bigger problem is, she doesn't know what she doesn't know. That is, she not only doesn't know those details of practice, but she doesn't know they exist so that she can look them up.
I can't say stupidity so much as ignorance. I am (I say immodestly) categorically not stupid, but there are many subjects about which I'm totally ignorant. Halligan may or may not be stupid (I'm not sure she could have passed the bar if she were), but she's clearly ignorant of... 1/
November 19, 2025 at 7:38 PM
I can't say stupidity so much as ignorance. I am (I say immodestly) categorically not stupid, but there are many subjects about which I'm totally ignorant. Halligan may or may not be stupid (I'm not sure she could have passed the bar if she were), but she's clearly ignorant of... 1/
Because Insurance Lawyer Lady had literally never spent one minute on a prosecutorial team in any court, much less federal court, including handling an indictment for jaywalking. Absolutely clueless.
November 19, 2025 at 6:48 PM
Because Insurance Lawyer Lady had literally never spent one minute on a prosecutorial team in any court, much less federal court, including handling an indictment for jaywalking. Absolutely clueless.
Exactly, especially when there was an easy way to fix this in real time. Re-present the updated indictment with two counts, and ask them to vote again. If you're willing to cut corners when a few more minutes would have fixed it, imagine the corners they'd cut when it would be a lot more work.
November 19, 2025 at 6:41 PM
Exactly, especially when there was an easy way to fix this in real time. Re-present the updated indictment with two counts, and ask them to vote again. If you're willing to cut corners when a few more minutes would have fixed it, imagine the corners they'd cut when it would be a lot more work.
She had no idea what she was doing, couldn't get help to learn how to do it, so she just winged it. And now it's blowing up in her face like one of those Amazon bait packages for porch pirates.
November 19, 2025 at 6:27 PM
She had no idea what she was doing, couldn't get help to learn how to do it, so she just winged it. And now it's blowing up in her face like one of those Amazon bait packages for porch pirates.
Primarily because the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, who Trump and Bondi put in place specifically to bring this case before the deadline ran out, after no other attorneys in that office were willing to bring that case, has ZERO experience as a prosecutor. 1/
November 19, 2025 at 6:27 PM
Primarily because the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, who Trump and Bondi put in place specifically to bring this case before the deadline ran out, after no other attorneys in that office were willing to bring that case, has ZERO experience as a prosecutor. 1/
And (as you also know) this kind of decision is a direct appeal to the Supreme Court; no appellate court bypass, no seeking writs, just appeal directly.
November 18, 2025 at 8:30 PM
And (as you also know) this kind of decision is a direct appeal to the Supreme Court; no appellate court bypass, no seeking writs, just appeal directly.
If every House member voted the same way, it's more than enough to override a veto. But override votes sometimes do not attract as many votes as the original passage vote.
November 18, 2025 at 8:26 PM
If every House member voted the same way, it's more than enough to override a veto. But override votes sometimes do not attract as many votes as the original passage vote.
Should go without saying, but that's "can't come on your private property *without your permission* without judicial warrants. People need to be warned that they can absolutely refuse permission and in fact, should proactively TELL ICE that they are not permitted.
November 18, 2025 at 7:10 PM
Should go without saying, but that's "can't come on your private property *without your permission* without judicial warrants. People need to be warned that they can absolutely refuse permission and in fact, should proactively TELL ICE that they are not permitted.
Many of them rent *houses*, not *apartments*. A management company handles maintenance just like for an apartment, relieving the tenants of that responsibility. Were you unaware houses could be rented, "dude"?
November 9, 2025 at 7:44 PM
Many of them rent *houses*, not *apartments*. A management company handles maintenance just like for an apartment, relieving the tenants of that responsibility. Were you unaware houses could be rented, "dude"?
Do you think that millionaires are renting the same kind of houses and apartments that, say, a schoolteacher married to a social worker would be renting?
November 9, 2025 at 7:32 PM
Do you think that millionaires are renting the same kind of houses and apartments that, say, a schoolteacher married to a social worker would be renting?
And Kathryn - I know YOU know that history well; that's for our friend who wonders why we'd fight government having the power to require or prohibit some speech. I realized after I composed it that I should have been clearer who I was really addressing, despite the "reply" structure.
November 9, 2025 at 7:37 AM
And Kathryn - I know YOU know that history well; that's for our friend who wonders why we'd fight government having the power to require or prohibit some speech. I realized after I composed it that I should have been clearer who I was really addressing, despite the "reply" structure.