mstrobel.bsky.social
13 posts
15 followers
8 following
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
Normally, yes. Though when you have two branches of government abandoning the rules-based system we chose over beating each other with sticks, why should they still be entitled to protection from the sticks? That was part of the agreement they abrogated.
comment in response to
post
Right, that was my take as well. Given the choices of lying, oath breaking, and abrogating duty to client, he basically threw his client under the bus. And to your other comment—you may be right, and when his hopes failed to materialize, he may even have hoped for *this* outcome.
comment in response to
post
And when faced with such a choice, the smart and ethical move is simply not to play.
comment in response to
post
Without having read the entire exchange or any of the briefs, I think the problem isn’t that be actually broke his oath, but that he put himself in a position where he would likely have to choose between breaking his oath or his duty to his client. It looks to me like he chose the second option.
comment in response to
post
He certainly has a style. To the extent that I, a non-lawyer who reads a handful of briefs a year for “fun”, could have identified him as the author even without his obnoxious letterhead.
comment in response to
post
Too much cruft. I found Jonathan V. Last’s writeup to be a much more concise and damning summary of the death of the American empire:
www.thebulwark.com/p/the-americ...
comment in response to
post
Petition to rename as “Trump’s Folly”
comment in response to
post
Thank you for the coverage, good sir!
comment in response to
post
She’s a lady, but she appreciates the sentiment all the same 🐈
comment in response to
post
It’s working. Every day it becomes more difficult to keep track of all the batshit things this administration has been up to.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
In his position, I would have just joined in the emoji exchange and otherwise said nothing. Wait and see if anyone even noticed.
comment in response to
post
No matter how I approach the problem, it feels impossible to design a government that is truly immune to bad faith actors. At least not without also overhauling our voting system so it doesn’t encourage two-party control (e.g. a RCV variant without an electoral college).