Old news to all of you who follow Popehat, but I don’t usually read twitter unless it’s from a link, and these stories are worth linking.
Computers is such a boring field. I have more stories from one summer working at a recycling plant than ~15 years in IT.
“It was designed to look like a banana in nature,” Schrader said. “There is no artistic twist.”
Opposing counsel Alexis Arena disputed meanwhile that Rasta’s banana costume is uninspired.
“There are so many ways to conceive a design of a banana,” said Arena, of Flaster Greenberg law firm. “And they conceived it exactly as ours.”
“The shape has to be a banana, otherwise it’s not a banana costume,” Judge Hardiman pushed back.
Full Avenatti 35-count indictment is out, and it is…something. Wow. He could get as much as 335 years if convicted on all counts (He won’t get nearly that even if, but that should provide an idea for how serious the charges against him are.)
What an absolute sidewalk fecal smear of a human being Avenatti appears to be.
That dude is going to prison.
Kind of funny considering he made his name by exposing illicit payments to shell companies controlled by a dodgy lawyer. Takes one to know one.
Fight dumpster fire with dumpster fire.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in a first-of-its-kind decision, ruled that marking a car’s tires to gather information is a form of trespass requiring a warrant, similar to police attaching a GPS to a vehicle to track a suspected drug dealer.
TY ShivaX --I think I will use that ruling tomorrow. Literally.
By this logic, a boot is even more illegal. I don’t expect this one to last.
Um, no. A boot gets applied after you offend, while a tire gets marked before you offend.
I think that the difference is that a boot is applied after you have already broken the law.
Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Especially if the boot was applied as a result of chalk marks (illegal trespass)… ;)
Signs are pointing to the SCOTUS blasting the last of their credibility by supporting the citizenship question on the census
I saw the words “Preview Endgame” and thought… hey, man, no spoilers!
Perfectly OK to interpret the Framers’ words and intent if it furthers the power of Republicans. Keep your mits off the 2nd, though.
My guess is that he’ll propose that illegal immigrants should be counted as 3/5ths of a person for census/representational counts.
0/5ths more likely.
I’m not a fan of Trump’s motives, but there is actually a decent argument that the government has an obligation to count the number of citizens:
I’m not at all sure that argument works. The number of male citizens becomes important only in the case that a state is denying the right to vote in Federal elections for male citizens 21 years or older. Since no state denies that right, the number is irrelevant. In any event, isn’t it a bit anachronistic, since it applied at a time when women weren’t guaranteed the vote, and 18-year-olds weren’t guaranteed the vote?
It’s part of the Constitution, so it still applies whether we like it or not. It’s also been (implicitly) amended subsequently, so we now need to know the number of 18+ year old citizens, male and female.
I’m also not convinced by the counterargument that all states are currently in compliance. It would only take an act of Congress and an act of the Alabama state legislature to restrict the vote in Alabama to people who earn at least $1 million a year.
What are the odds of the GOP trying to pull a stunt like that? I suspect the main thing standing in their way is the immediate loss of representation mandated by the 14th amendment.