Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

The judge in the highly watched abortion pill case tried to keep the hearing for public arguments a secret until the very last minute. Someone leaked it anyways to the Post, probably the DOJ or the company that makes the drug, considering the newspaper. He told them all the hearing would be Wednesday but he would not inform the public about it until late Tuesday because of threats and the fear there would be protests.

Very unusual step. Borderline unethical. It's not his role to "minimize protest" outside the courthouse.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/03/11/texas-abortion-pill-hearing-kacsmaryk/

[Dr. Strangelove]

Pence's sharpest criticism of Trump and Jan 6th apologists to date

https://deadline.com/2023/03/mike-pence-condemns-tucker-carlson-january-6th-hold-trump-accountable-1235286382/

[CGVT]

The judge in the highly watched abortion pill case tried to keep the hearing for public arguments a secret until the very last minute. Someone leaked it anyways to the Post, probably the DOJ or the company that makes the drug, considering the newspaper. He told them all the hearing would be Wednesday but he would not inform the public about it until late Tuesday because of threats and the fear there would be protests.

Very unusual step. Borderline unethical. It's not his role to "minimize protest" outside the courthouse.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ing-kacsmaryk/

What happened to "Let the Staaaaaaaaaaates deciiiiiiiiide?"

Fucking right wing jackasses.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Yellen said this morning no bailout is coming for SVB but suggested there could be relief for depositors who had over 250k in the bank.

I go back and forth on how I feel about that. The truth is those people and companies won't be truly shit out of luck once the Feds start selling off SVB's assets. If they can recover 80% of what they had in the bank, do the taxpayers really need to step in and cover the rest? I'm inclined to say no.

[iam416]

The judge in the highly watched abortion pill case tried to keep the hearing for public arguments a secret until the very last minute. Someone leaked it anyways to the Post, probably the DOJ or the company that makes the drug, considering the newspaper. He told them all the hearing would be Wednesday but he would not inform the public about it until late Tuesday because of threats and the fear there would be protests.

Very unusual step. Borderline unethical. It's not his role to "minimize protest" outside the courthouse.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ing-kacsmaryk/

District Court judges are wildly hit and miss. Just this week an Obama appointee invalidated a Missouri gun law and in so doing completely fucked it up and ignored Missouri's central argument (anti-commandeering) that absolutely controls. These shitty orders get overturned and we move on. The nationwide injunctions, though -- that was shit that came to the forefront when The Resistance was doing anything it could to stymie DJT. Including a shitass district court order issuing a nationwide injunction on the immigration order -- which was eventually found constiutional because it was blindingly obvious that it was Constitutional.

As for judges feeling tense on this issue -- yeah -- go ahead and take a look at what you and your comprades say about the judiciary and the best response to rulings they don't like. You asshats seem to think threats of violene are the best way to win your cases. Especially in the abortion area where an COMPLETELY UNETHICAL leaking opinion stoked public outrage and the words you and your compadres led diretly to a guy showing up in front of Kav's house with the plan of killing him.

The forthcoming ruling on the abortion pill will be trash and eventually overturned. That's the way it goes. That's what my major focus would be. Minimizing risk to the judiciary and others, meh. It doesn't affect, in the fucking least, the actual hearing. Both sides make their arguments. He rules. It ain't borderline unethical.

[iam416]

And, to be clear, the states can ban these pills as much as they want. Whatever.

What the judge can't do is say the FDA fucked up in their assessment clearing them for the market and then issue a national injunction based thereon. That's straight out of a trash Prog justie ruling.

[Dr. Strangelove]

District Court judges are wildly hit and miss. Just this week an Obama appointee invalidated a Missouri gun law and in so doing completely fucked it up and ignored Missouri's central argument (anti-commandeering) that absolutely controls. These shitty orders get overturned and we move on. The nationwide injunctions, though -- that was shit that came to the forefront when The Resistance was doing anything it could to stymie DJT. Including a shitass district court order issuing a nationwide injunction on the immigration order -- which was eventually found constiutional because it was blindingly obvious that it was Constitutional.

As for judges feeling tense on this issue -- yeah -- go ahead and take a look at what you and your comprades say about the judiciary and the best response to rulings they don't like. You asshats seem to think threats of violene are the best way to win your cases. Especially in the abortion area where an COMPLETELY UNETHICAL leaking opinion stoked public outrage and the words you and your compadres led diretly to a guy showing up in front of Kav's house with the plan of killing him.

The forthcoming ruling on the abortion pill will be trash and eventually overturned. That's the way it goes. That's what my major focus would be. Minimizing risk to the judiciary and others, meh. It doesn't affect, in the fucking least, the actual hearing. Both sides make their arguments. He rules. It ain't borderline unethical.

The AG of Texas files nearly all these shit lawsuits in either Lubbock or Amarillo (never in Texas's 4 biggest cities) because he knows each of those Dust Bowl shitholes have but one Federal judge each and they're both avowedly conservative activist judges. Judge Kacsmaryk has made no secret that he vigorously opposes abortion.

So the Plaintiffs court-shopped. Period. Then to add to that, the judge tried to conduct the hearings in as close to a veil of secrecy as he could without crossing a line. If you want people to respect process then they have to feel like no one's thumb is on the scale.

[THE_WIZARD_]

...FB_IMG_1678633048613.jpg

[iam416]

The AG of Texas files nearly all these shit lawsuits in either Lubbock or Amarillo (never in Texas's 4 biggest cities) because he knows each of those Dust Bowl shitholes have but one Federal judge each and they're both avowedly conservative activist judges. Judge Kacsmaryk has made no secret that he vigorously opposes abortion.

So the Plaintiffs court-shopped. Period. Then to add to that, the judge tried to conduct the hearings in as close to a veil of secrecy as he could without crossing a line. If you want people to respect process then they have to feel like no one's thumb is on the scale.

Of course he fucking forum-shopped. If that was your concern then, yeah..sure...and BFD. Why in the name of fuck do you think DJT's immigration order was trashed in the 9th Circuit? Why? JFC.

All interested parties are at the hearing. Everyone who gets to have a say gets to have a say. There is a transcript. There is a written ruling. Calling this a "veil of secrecy" is a massive stretch. Yeah, if you want "peaceful protestors" to show up with the veiled threat of violence, yeah -- then you have an issue.

But, if you want people to respect the process then you can't resort to threats and violence to get your way. And, honestly, LMMFAO at any notion that a you and your compadres would respect any process that results in a decision you don't like, especially on abortion. I've seen this play. And, JFC -- LMMFAO at the notion you and your compadres actually care about process. I mean seriously.

This is will be another joke ruling we add to the pile and it'll get overturned. But please, don't pretend you and your side care about process. That's laughable.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Of course he fucking forum-shopped. If that was your concern then, yeah..sure...and BFD. Why in the name of fuck do you think DJT's immigration order was trashed in the 9th Circuit? Why? JFC.

All interested parties are at the hearing. Everyone who gets to have a say gets to have a say. There is a transcript. There is a written ruling. Calling this a "veil of secrecy" is a massive stretch. Yeah, if you want "peaceful protestors" to show up with the veiled threat of violence, yeah -- then you have an issue.

But, if you want people to respect the process then you can't resort to threats and violence to get your way. And, honestly, LMMFAO at any notion that a you and your compadres would respect any process that results in a decision you don't like, especially on abortion. I've seen this play. And, JFC -- LMMFAO at the notion you and your compadres actually care about process. I mean seriously.

This is will be another joke ruling we add to the pile and it'll get overturned. But please, don't pretend you and your side care about process. That's laughable.

Why should I respect the process when by your own admission the ruling will be a total joke?

Also, the public is an interested party too. Might as well conduct all trials and hearing in secrecy if that's not true.

[iam416]

Why should I respect the process when by your own admission the ruling will be a total joke?

Also, the public is an interested party too. Might as well conduct all trials and hearing in secrecy if that's not true.

Yes, democracy hangs by a thread. "Peaceful protesters" may not be able to threaten violence with as much force as they would otherwise. Outside the courthouse. OUTSIDE. THE. COURTHOUSE (so, fuck your stupid ass jury trial analogy -- JFC -- and btw, these courtrooms seat about 50...and it will be filled, so, whatever). Such a super secret proceeding. And the public is NOT A PARTY. JFC.

You don't respect process and you never will. You don't value it. And never will. You pull it out as a gimmick when things aren't going your way, but has all the sincerity of an apology from The Wizard. For you, ends will always win. Always.

I actually respect process. And the process for this issue is that a bad district court ruling gets overturned by the Circuit Court or, less likely, the Supreme Court (only b/c the Circuit Court will almost assuredly address it). The Missouri judge (obviously forum-shopped, btw) and the ruling on the Missouri gun law is bad, but our system will resolve it. As it did with the joke rulings on DJT's immigration order.

As I said, I agree with you if you call the substantive decision garbage (assuming it is what it is), but the histrionics about "borderline" ethical violence and "secrecy" is trash. For the reasons I've outlined.

If you want to parrot your prog bullshit hear on legal issues then fuck that. I ain't letting it pass.

[iam416]

Meanwhile, The Chairman issued a ban on immigration coverage (photos/videos) for a significant period -- I dunno, it may still be in place -- and the Democracy Dies in Darkness, KIDS IN CAGES!!!! Progs, including DSL and his ilk, said nothing. Just a nice golf clap. And that was freedom of the press to cover an important issue. So, yeah, Progs always going to Progs. The ends are all that matter.

[iam416]

Also, I wouldn't mind if this case got to the Supreme Court on the issue of nationwide vacateurs. Those are garbage. District Courts should have injunctive power within their district (or maybe Circuit) and no more. If this case somehow produced that outcome then it'd a total victory. Maybe one of the student loan cases will produce it (which would mean my policy side loses).

But they suck. They suck as a matter of separation of powers and Constitutional order, which some of us still care about.

[Jeff Buchanan]

The NYT is running a series of opinion pieces dealing with the question of, "Are We Prepared for the Next Pandemic?" The first opinion piece appearing today was thoughtful but had one terrible idea: "The CDC should be legislatively granted more authoritative control." NO, full-stop. What needs to happen is that the federation of public health entities within the states needs to be beefed up. Cutting the CDC's budget and allocating it by federal grants to state public health entities would allow for recognition that outbreaks of viral pathogens are regional and vary in their character. Put the skilled epidemiologist and virologists in state, not federal jobs. Early recognition and appropriate responses to emerging diseases that are viral in nature and spread through human to human contact are best accomplished by public health officials on the ground locally, not in DC. Here's an example of how that might work: Build the infrastructure to produce test kits at a national level then distribute them to the states that have the data to demonstrate state x has a higher need for wide spread testing than state Y, conserving resources in the process. If something like this had been done within the first months of SARS2 introduction in the US, I'd argue none of the bull-shit lock downs of businesses, travel, schools would have been necessary.

There may be some need for centralized data collection and logistics that involve PPE, test kits, vaccines, etc. but that's it. COVID exposed the stunning inability of the CDC to develop and publish national guidelines that are clear and understandable. What a cluster-fuck. A spin, even now, through the COVID sections of the CDC website will lead one to the same conclusion - unreadable. Because of this reality, the CDC has shot its proverbial wad over it's response to COVID. Who is going to listen to the next Fauci? No one. All one needs to do to get behind a federated response to the next pandemic is to look at how Desantis and the state of FL responded to it.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Jeff, read the room