Might have been. But there are dozens of us.

In this case, the enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy. Nothing more.

Always has been. Sometimes my enemy’s enemy and I want the same thing for a little while.

Maxim 29.

If everything is a national emergency, nothing is.

I am appalled at how well “flood the zone” and “move fast and break things” works to destroy a nation. If sanity ever returns, the response to either action needs to be the death penalty. I don’t know how to properly write a law for that, but it is clear to me that any lesser response will only cause the bastard to back up, and try again.

What do the rules of professional conduct say about a client who repeatedly and aggressively ignores the law and the orders of the court?

Not being sarcastic here, I’m honestly curious. The lawyer can’t control the client, so what do?

We have no guidance or direction on what we need to do,

Wrong. You have plenty of guidance. It’s called “the law” and you went to school to learn how to understand it. If your people get instructions to violate the law, the instructions are invalid.

This is not complicated.

I think is milenials are still good. For a few more years. Also, we are the only generation that can save files, and know where they went.

But more youngsters would be nice.

President Miller, you mean?

Have you seen his competition?

If this was true, there would be no reason not to vote on it all together.

This happened under Biden. (Schumer then, too, I belive) Separated a bill, passed the parts the Republicans wanted, then the Republicans voted against the part the Democrat wanted.

Bend over, here it comes again.

I’m not sure I’d call that “unfortunate.” I’ve said for ages that if we can just get more people to vote, it will be good for the democrats. Work the rise of MAGA, I’ve included that if we can get them to think before they vote, that will be even better.

Congratulations on getting what you voted for.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Are we expecting the Democratic party to actually support him? Seems the national leadership would rather see someone else in his spot.

I’m trying to determine if we are using words to mean the same things. It seems we are not.

Since I don’t take issue with your goals, only your vocabulary, I suppose that continuing to discuss it is pointless.

Would you claim that the soap box failed of no-one spoke against him?

Would you claim the jury box failed if he was never brought to trial?

What liberty are you talking about? The liberty of approved leaders? It’s a failure because we voted for a bad leader?

We got the leader we voted for. The failure is in the people.

That’s not my idea of liberty at all. But you can’t say the ballot box failed, just because the people elected the worst president in the history of people in suits.

So, you propose to enforce liberty by not letting us choose our own leaders? Democracy, as long as your approve our choices?

This is an abomination.

Put it in the pile with the others.