joshgoldberg7.bsky.social
Dad, husband, Chicago litigator.
2,169 posts
255 followers
488 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Opinion on the opinion pages what is going on
comment in response to
post
But nothing reported indicates it had anything to do with *Biden but rather was a line prosecutor decision?
comment in response to
post
Would love to edit this excellent piece to change the use of the Trump admin v Biden admin. There is good reason to say Trump admin because of the clear conflict in donations and contracts with dropping the case. The only reason to say Biden admin is for timing of the complaint.
comment in response to
post
To my understanding fordow is at least the short term ballgame.
comment in response to
post
Hi Cheryl. Can I ask where you saw the report about fordow because I saw something saying it had not been.
comment in response to
post
white dude who's spent some time in the ME
comment in response to
post
not sure where the disagreement is. That what I was saying. Simply about pure writing. Thats my recollection of the compliment. Could as well be a copywriter.
comment in response to
post
gonna get yelled at but my recollection was that the compliment was that he (and then Kagan) brought a clear writing style not that common to the court at that time, not that he was a great legal thinker...
comment in response to
post
I’d put this in the social media posts. www.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/36...
comment in response to
post
It’s a good distraction!
Poll from YouGov this AM finds Trump's actions re: LA underwater. Double-digit disapproval re sending Marines.
Reality check for those people arguing the protests inherently help Trump bc his immigration approval # is positive.
today.yougov.com/topics/polit...
comment in response to
post
Actually I think this is from the 70s
youtu.be/ct_33t9uuAc?...
comment in response to
post
Chuy Garcia would like a word. abc7chicago.com/amp/post/rep...
comment in response to
post
Not “an appeals court”. Naomi Rao and Greg Katsas. Both appointed for the sole purpose of serving Trump.
comment in response to
post
Not “an appeals court”. Naomi Rao and Greg Katsas. Both appointed for the sole purpose of serving Trump.
comment in response to
post
The great thing is that not enough voters and no one in any level of power thinks about you. Like, you not thinking about me is nothing. But the other is everything.
comment in response to
post
I feel bad for you.
comment in response to
post
I’ll take the em dash over the Oxford any day fight me
comment in response to
post
Depends. Was it publicly filed with the seventh circuit us court of appeals? Thats gonna need at least a half hour.
comment in response to
post
missed the byline: "Jack Goldsmith"
comment in response to
post
lol
comment in response to
post
Here's a tip. The world is not flat and vaccines actually do work.
comment in response to
post
My dude. You think a guy who actually lost an election would have won it. You’re either very dumb or trolling. The only thing unserious about me is I’m responding to your stupidity/intentional trolling for fun.
comment in response to
post
Those on the Round Planet Earth, who get vaccinated to avoid dying from measles, we know the point of elections is to win the most votes, and those who did not win the most votes not only could not have won, they actually did not win.
comment in response to
post
Oh I got the point. You think Trump won in 2020 and went to the Stop the Steal Rally. We get it, Boris
comment in response to
post
The election he needed to win to be the Democratic Party’s nominee for president. Not only could he not win, Mr Troll, he actually lost that election. Quite badly.
comment in response to
post
The only reason I’d quibble is it’s not that he would have or wouldn’t have. It’s that he actually did not win as a matter of fact.
comment in response to
post
Oh and your guy Trump won in 2020!!!
comment in response to
post
Oh. I get it. So he would have won if he didn’t have to win the votes he needed to win. I like that.
I WOULD HAVE WON!
This is fun.
comment in response to
post
But … he … didn’t?
comment in response to
post
Did you follow the Evanston mayoral election? All about this and *maybe? Density won. Maybe. We’ll see.
comment in response to
post
Can they both lose?
comment in response to
post
does the book have quotes from gop congressmen saying they would have switched their no's to yeses if the number had been higher? From Blue Dog Dems who said at the time they would have voted no if the number had been higher?
comment in response to
post
haven't read it but nothing in this says he could(Goolsbee says they could have gotten more mortgage relief, but not how). The votes were not there. Unless the book has a quote from all of congress saying they could have gotten more with no GOP votes, the answer is no, they could not have
comment in response to
post
it wasnt obama's pint sized stimulus. it was congress' and it was all they would give him (w zero gop votes).
comment in response to
post
they changed the format!
comment in response to
post
Myron Bolitar, eh?
comment in response to
post
was Three's Company a little different? That was always about one of the characters misinterpreting some innocent thing that the other characters knew about. Not just the running "Jack is gay," but basically whatever was happening in each episode.
comment in response to
post
Started for me with Curb Your Enthusiasm
comment in response to
post
Dudes name is Roderick hills jr. I have a theory about why he wrote it.