Alright, I’ve seen enough “But why?!?” quotes of this I’m going to give the world a quick primer on *one part* of how the DoD works.
To the pedants out there, it’s late where I am, I’m tired, I’m gonna go fast and oversimplify so the basic point gets across in less than six DAWIA courses.
Random juice jar on the Gracie Mansion table. Mayor's wife with exposed navel on what is supposed to be a very important Muslim holy day (and holy breaking of the fast). Islam sees modesty in dress as being linked to spiritual purity. More physical chemistry between these two than this newlywed and her husband. Everyone on this administration's calendar happens to revile both Jews and America. None none none of it adds up.
Just the weirdest fucking people.
goddammit
this thread is so bleak
America First Refining, fuck yeah America...funded by a "a 9-figure investment from a global supermajor at a 10-figure valuation" that neglects to mention who gave them billions but Trump may have let it slip that it's India's Reliance energy company? How is it that this already feels shady?
Putting an attorney with no experience at all in this type of case in an obvious intent to tank it actually feels worse than the DOJ just ignoring it
even if this were true, which it isn't, using a SNAP card is just like using a debit card! i probably haven't used cash to buy groceries in a decade, but it doesn't mean i don't understand cash. absolutely idiotic bigoted nonsense.
every bigot has the just-offscreen minority friend who has anonymously blessed their bigotry. this is just "I have a Black friend so I can't be racist" but leftishly
even the fucking posters and DVD sleeve have Bad German Nazi with Totenkopf on hat front and center!!
lollll
i don't know a single attorney who wouldn't simply die rather than go thru this hearing
"Susan Collins voted to send me to Iraq" what the actual fuck, man. platner brags about how hot he was to volunteer on his campaign website but now somehow Collins made him do it?
The US has, in slightly over a year, torched what was once one of the best repositories of legal talent (the DOJ) in favor of...uh...total hacks now struggling under an impossible workload made all the more impossible by an administration that is acting without even the faintest color of law.
judges have clerks! judges have westlaw! judges have the fancy westlaw where you can just run the briefs and your opinion draft through Quick Check and see that cases and quotes don't come up! what are we doing here? we spent ages on cite checking when i clerked.
i've fixated on this for awhile, because at some point there will be hallucinated cases in an opinion that don't get caught, and people will cite to the opinion and rely on the underlying hallucinated cases and i have no idea how we stop that sort of cite-to-a-cite problem from happening.
epic...escort? how can an escort be epic? i mean, an escort (noun) can def be epic, i am sure, but escort (verb) doesn't really seem like a thing that gets epic??
pro se litigant has fake cases. court uses those fake cases in its order (?!!!) but decides no harm no foul, because the cases came from the pro se litigant and he didn't object or tell the court they were fake.
vums womat Joan Pablo Torres Campos (Torres) appeals from a family court order denying his request for shared custody and visitation of a dog. He contends the court committed error by citing and relying on fictitious case authorities in its order. We agree the court so erred, but we conclude Torres forfeited this claim by drafting and submitting the very order he now challenges and failing to object or alert the court that the cited authorities were fake. We
everything is so dumb
www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/u...
it's so, so bad.
hello hi i have unsolicited advice on this because we get absolute swarms in the house and couldn't take it any longer. lmk if you want advice as to what we settled on so we did not lose our minds.
i did laugh at how easily the DOJ threw a 30-year line attorney under the bus over their errors in court but has strove mightily to protect the incredibly dumb, possibly illegal, acts by Halligan.
he might have had a shot at just being perceived as a dumbass rather than nefarious, but it seems that all the things he misstated only went one way, favorable to the government's position, which seems pretty deliberate. but come on, you were going to get caught?!
appropriate and proportional response tbh
of course! i think most lawyers are most freaked out about the part where the lawyer explained that the reason he put quotation marks around things that were not quotes, it was a technique he said he used to "liven up the prose." Buddy, what?
hearing over the fed prosecutor who had fabricated quotes in a court filing and basically admitted that he had fake cases, altered quotes, used AI to draft his document. absolutely brutal
"This was a writing technique to liven up the prose."
what on earth how do you practice for 30 years and think "i'll put something in quotations that isn't actually a quote because that will make my prose lively"??
when i got to the point where you learn that this lawyer has been in practice FOR 30 YEARS and still did this, i thought my brain would explode
HEY PORTLAND. we are playing a show thursday night at twilight club with a bunch of other fine folks. it starts early; doors at 7:30, we go on at 8, $12 at the door, come hang out with old people who need to get home early on a work night.
i had to stop reading the thread multiple times because my brain was screaming
i had a MSJ memo where i included a doc from the plaintiff, but i got it from my co-defendant, not in discovery. i was a baby and didn't get that i couldn't use it. opposing counsel called me yelling and i had to do a call with the court and even though the judge said basically nbd, i wanted to die
