Wrestleknownothing

I know I am cynical, but not even I thought they would say it was all about football in their press release.

That is when we will be most interested in your writing.

Heard Vincent Laguardia Gambini was unavailable and they had to go with Jerry Callo, with a C, instead.

The problem with that is that Stanford is both an AAU school and almost the only winner of the Director's Cup awarded to the school with the most national champions (they have won it 26 times in the award's 29 year history). Yet, they are somehow, at best, the Big 10's 5th choice from the Pac 12. It's about football, and football only. But the university presidents are in Washington telling Congress NIL is the problem.

Unless any of those patents are for new ways to score touchdowns, I am not sure what any of if has to do with conference realignment.

Some very wrong info here.

Obama did not take any records per NARA themselves.

Your answers are within: https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases/2022/nr22-001

Another way to think about it is that they want to create uncertainty about the actual date. It will probably be somewhere in the 2 week window, but who wants to organize protests on either side where the date of the protest is unknown? The logistics are just too difficult. People have daily lives. They can't just hit pause for 2 weeks, or be on constant call.

I wouldn't read too much into those motions. Legal tactics in the service of strategy. File every motion possible, regardless of the absurdity, to extend the timeline in the belief that buying time is in his best interests.

I remember when you were entertaining

I am aware. I am wondering what @Offthemat's point was.

?

Agreed. But only on here are people attempting to make this about just lying. There is a reason the whole "storm the capitol" is not part of the indictment.

"What about" one of the most effective defense strategies. It always worked with my parents, too.

It has never been legal to lie to induce someone to commit a crime. It is not even legal to tell the truth to induce someone to commit a crime. The indictment, that you have not read, says in the third paragraph "The Defendant had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won." The defense, and Jack Turley, want it to be a freedom of speech case. The prosecution does not believe it is a freedom of speech case. Either way, it is still illegal to lie to induce someone to commit a crime.

What you said and what Turley said are different. Turley said it is legal to lie. You said if this case succeeds then your words can get you convicted. Your words have always and everywhere been able to send you to jail. It is why wiretaps and other recordings are such compelling evidence.

Your words have always been able to send you to jail. It is at the heart of the legal concept of conspiracy.

I agree Nov. 2020 through Jan. 6, 2021 was a crime spree.

Prosecutorial discretion is a thing.

you left out a (highly recommended).

Entrapment by lack of police?

9/11, Iran Contra, Vietnam, Cuban Missile crisis are all international political events that involved the US. Assassinations, while abhorent, are less important than threats from within. They do not strike at the fundamemtals of our democracy. And this attempt to steal the election is significantly more consequential than Watergate.