How convent to announce this the same week the president announced he would likely attend oral arguments in the tariffs case.

Are statements of fact representations made to courts that are obviously not true not grounds for referral for state bar disciplinary action? Legitimately asking not being hyperbolic. An admitted attorney can’t just say anything to the court.

Coaching is so important at the college level. It’s what, 2% of HS players who can play at D1 level. Not all but many of them have relied over their HS years on just being better than everyone else they played. That’s not true once the get to the collage level and coaches have a lot of work to do.

So you say it’s all smoke and mirrors and designed for headlines and not effectiveness. Never would’ve thought!!

Or the blackjack dealer who catches a six to get to 21!

I legitimately question how admitted attorneys can directly refute the ruling of the ultimate arbiter court in court filings without facing disbarment.

And of course Ukraine agreeing in principle at least to a peace negotiation they were excluded from which cedes huge portions of their sovereign territory with no guarantee of military support for when Russia inevitably. breaks the terms.

I think he is thankful and should be. But the meeting wasn’t to produce a show of fealty. It was another quid pro quo where Ukraine signs over mineral rights on exchange for continued support (more tepid under the new admin).
Zelensky refused to kiss the ring so JD and Trump thee a tantrum.

If given enough chances, Trump and his merry band of jingoists will eventually say the quiet part out loud.

Here, here!
Now gradually expand the court to 12 over multiple admins of different parties so that allowances may be made for conflicts, illness, or just so any parties to action before the court have a random pool of 9 and can’t necessarily choose what opinion they’re going to get

“Big govt is bad” except apparently when it is a backstop to prevent actual loss from a big swing. Make no mistake, if that swing connects the rewards aren’t shared. I too applaud the spirit of the risk takers but know that risks come with potential downside of actual loss.

That screams Midwest!

And please don’t confuse me, Jan. 6 prosecutions were not political. Those were indisputable crimes aimed at disrupting the transfer of power.

My take on this is the same as for prosecutions/any convictions related to Trump world. While I can absolutely concede the decisions to prosecute may have political motivation, the facts were fairly presented before courts of law, indicted, and adjudicated in accordance with applicable law.