By coincidence, Mark Carney is heading to China next week to meet with Xi Jinping. I'm sure they'll have much to discuss.

Please do not.

Performative judgmentalism. Their need for you to know you’re wrong outweighs your right not to give a damn what they think.

Hmm. I’m inclined to say no, mostly for practical reasons — you’d need a separate empty offshore account for each onshore one, which would have to be maintained, closed when no longer needed, etc. A degree of complication well beyond law societies’ competence, resources, mission, etc.

With every unchallenged foreign incursion, he becomes more reckless and unhinged. He can’t march into Canada as easily as into Greenland, but he can bring down several economic hammers anytime he wants. There may be little for us to do at this point but prepare mentally/emotionally for disruption.

Charles and Camilla too.

This is almost certainly Rubio's boyhood dream. I expect it's the whole reason he's even in this administration. If he's remembered in national history as "the man who liberated Cuba," then every indignity he's suffered will have been worth it.

Not until after the World Cup is safely completed and Trump's cheques to FIFA have all cleared. Although that assumes other countries don't mount a boycott, à la Moscow 1980.

The ironclad rule of foreign adventurism that the US somehow never seems to learn: You break it, you bought it.

4. Time pressure on lawyers is brutal. Lawyer in this case called themselves lazy, and maybe so. But just as likely, they’re overworked, ill-prepared and under-supported. A lot of them are treading water out there.

None of that is an excuse. (Especially using Grok!) But maybe a partial explanation.

3. Underrated issue: Access to reliable legal data for research is expensive, and if you don’t work at a midsize or large firm, it’s a prohibitive cost. So some lawyers try to stickhandle with low/no-cost solutions like AI chatbots. Many times, it might work ok. But it only needs to go wrong once.

1. 1.3M lawyers in US. Volume alone accounts for some of the frequency.

2. Practical competence at point of licensure is low. Unlike Canada, US has no supervised practice requirement for licensure, so new lawyers have near-zero real-world experience, and it shows (though we’re not flawless here).

It's a legitimate concern. I'm quite unhappy with the now-established trend towards a judicial appointment marking another stepping stone in a legal career, rather than the capstone to one. I'd like to see more ethical restrictions on what ex-judges are allowed to do if they retire from the bench.

I have to assume this is the end of her judicial career. There's no way you can go back to being a judge (especially an appellate judge) once you've been Deputy AG -- you could never hear another case involving the federal government.