Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.

When you’re in more danger from the IDF than from Russian shelling, that’s really bad.

This fight is for everything.

I was confident that someone would point it out and thought why not me.

Let us savor the impending downfall of lawless scoundrels who richly deserve the trouble barreling their way.

Come on, man.

Michigan is a great lesson for Dems everywhere: when you have power…use it!

…and a burning sense of injustice to juice the soul.

“But what about the lurkers?”

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

Usually wrong but never in doubt

Republicans don’t trust women.

There is no right way to do the wrong thing.

“That’s what the insurrection act is for!”

Hot air and ill-informed banter

Anyone who bans teaching American history has no right to shape America’s future.

He really is that stupid.

“woke” is the new caravan.

We know you aren’t a Democrat but since you seem confused let me help you.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

Donald Jessica Trump found guilty as fuck – May 30, 2024!

People really shouldn’t expect the government to help after they watched the GOP drown it in a bathtub.

The fundamental promise of conservatism all over the world is a return to an idealized past that never existed.

Fuck that bum, let’s go Joe!

You are here: Home / Open Threads / I’m Not Tired of Winning – Is Trump Tired of Losing?

I’m Not Tired of Winning – Is Trump Tired of Losing?

by | 98 Comments

This post is in: 

It’s long past time for Trump’s head to explode – he is not supposed to be losing!!!

MuellerSheWrote
@MuellerSheWrote (1 hour ago)
Trump’s immunity claim in the E Jean Carroll case is DENIED a re-hearing en banc (by the entire appeals court panel). Earlier, a three-judge panel DENIED his motion to stay the trial pending the outcome of this appeal. As of now, trial begins January 16th. 1/

Kyle Cheney
@kyledcheney

The federal appeals court in NY has *denied* Donald Trump’s request for the full bench to hear his civil immunity appeal. This could be moving ot SCOTUS imminently.

Totally open thread.

Reader Interactions

98Comments

  3. 3.

    Poe Larity

    What would it cost to print a million Dark Brandon stickers with “I did that!” to put on gas pumps?

    *Except CA/HI where gas will never be cheap again.

  4. 4.

    MazeDancer

    For those of you worried about Dione Warwick losing her mind and performing at an RFK jr fundraiser, as published recently, she just tweeted:

    “I don’t know anything about this event. I did not agree to it and I certainly won’t be there“

  7. 7.

    WaterGirl

    I seem to have missed the whole “Harvard President” scandal.  What’s it about?  Is she a good guy being unfairly hounded or a bad guy drowning in her own lies?  Or somewhere in between?

  11. 11.

    cain

    @WaterGirl:

    It’s about MAGA using zionism to attack anyone with anti-Semitism. Apparently, you can only be a zionist if you can’t then you are an antisemite.

    There was some talk about plagiarism but  I don’t know what that is about – there is a lot of stuff out there but it’s hard to determine what the core thing is.

    But this is a Chris Rufo initiated shit show so there you go.

  12. 12.

    billcinsd

    @WaterGirl: Well, she isn’t really either of your two options. She responded truthfully to a setup question from Elise Stefanik and then a friend of Chris Rufo, who lost a job for lying about some stuff accused her of plagiarism. The NYT ran a whole slew of articles about her and she resigned. She is probably not a great person and was not necessarily completely innocent of the charges, although they were way overblown.

  13. 13.

    New Deal democrat

    As an aside to this thread, I imagine sooner or later there will be a discussion about the mechanics of *how* the 14th Amendment’s disqualification clause ought to be enforced. Before jumping to any conclusions, put the shoe on the other foot and imagine how your preferred method would be used by the GOP against Democratic candidates.

  14. 14.

    MattF

    Needless to say, when Trump loses the Presidential election in November, he’ll claim victory and that the voting was rigged. Considering that he now claims to have won every state in 2020, being defeated at the polls, however decisively, won’t shut him up. At least, he won’t be able to invoke the Insurrection Act.

  15. 15.

    Splitting Image

    Every day Trump loses a legal fight, I wake up to “I Got You Babe” on the radio.

  16. 16.

    bbleh

    @WaterGirl: mobbed by Republican Congress-critters at a hearing about how students who support Israel are for sure actually being TERRORIZED at (surprisingly only) Ivy League campuses and then derailed by accusations of plagiarism that happen not to be relevant to her scholarship but IT’S THE PRINCIPLE, and also because Harvard which makes her an Elitist, and NOT AT ALL about her being a Black woman.

    … ie what hueyplong said at 9

    ETA: the fact that she resigned on the first business day of the year suggests to me that it was a plan agreed some time ago by her and the Corporation to calm the waters and get back to the business of Harvarding.  She got caught in a bad place by some very bad actors, and one trusts her landing will not be hard.  (She was also poorly prepped, so one also trusts that law firm WILL have a hard landing.)

  17. 17.

    Ksmiami

    I am so sick of him. I hope he melts away or disintegrates like a Halloween pumpkin left out til Thanksgiving. Gfc

  18. 18.

    Kay

    @WaterGirl:

    instawajahat

    Regarding Claudine Gay’s resignation from Harvard: Chris Rufo, a bad faith right wing propagandist, has openly told America his Bond villain plan to manipulate and distort the meaning of CRT and DEI to launder his agenda to attack liberals and progress and equality. And every mainstream institution keeps falling for it.

  19. 19.

    TS

    Money buys justice – or supposed money buys justice – it seems the SCOTUS is the personal court of TFG

  20. 20.

    bbleh

    @New Deal democrat: first, like any other qualification established by the Constitution, eg you gotta be 35 and a natural-born citizen, and second, where there is any question of fact (eg is a candidate someone who “engaged in insurrection”) by a proper trier of fact.

  21. 21.

    SpaceUnit

    I hope the court has a giant full-page rubber stamp to mark all the documents in huge block letters.  DENIED

    And I hope they then threw those documents right in trump’s face.  A fella can wish.

  22. 22.

    kindness

    The Supreme Court tried to slow it down for Donald.  That didn’t work out very well for them, eh?

  23. 23.

    Eyeroller

    @Kay: I do not believe they “fall for it.”  I believe what others have written–they know what they are doing and this is what they want.

  25. 25.

    Matt McIrvin

    @WaterGirl: Basically, if you’re a Black woman and you piss off right-wingers, you had better have been perfect in your every past action or they’re going to hound you to oblivion, and it’s likely nobody will have your back.

    Apparently Neil Gorsuch has done similar things and skated on it.

  26. 26.

    trollhattan

    Here’s a we’re sorry in advance. Newest Young Republican Power Power Couple will at some point be in your face, bigly. [retchhhhh]

    Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley, R-Rocklin, got married in Auburn on Dec. 30 to Chelsee Gardner, a former children’s pastor at Rocklin’s controversial Destiny Church.

    Gardner, 28, currently works as the Communications and Content Manager for Agape International Missions, a Roseville-based Christian organization whose vision is to join “God’s global movement to rescue, heal, and transform those impacted by sex trafficking.” Gardner is the sister of Tiffany Saathoff, president of the Rocklin Unified School District who was also a Destiny Church pastor before stepping down to become Republican Assemblyman Joe Patterson’s Chief of Staff.

    Destiny is known for its political, conservative-leaning sermons and pastors. Saathoff was elected to the RUSD board in 2020, and more recently, she was elected president of the RUSD board amid community protests over the parental notification policy she and four other board members passed in September.

    Kiley is a conservative who was endorsed by President Donald Trump in 2022, is a member of the House Education & Workforce Committee, which considers school-related issues. Kiley has been particularly critical of lower reading levels at many California schools.
    https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article283754843.html#storylink=cpy

    Can’t say I didn’t warn you.

  27. 27.

    bbleh

    @SpaceUnit: I hope the oral hearing features little but guffaws from the bench every time the Trump lawyer opens his(?) mouth.

    “Wait … wait, lemme read from your … uh … brief [snerk] … where it says … hahaha … that based on an, um, report by … hahahahaha … that … ahahahaahahaaa! omg somebody else take over hahahahaahahahaaa!”

  28. 28.

    Brachiator

    Trump’s immunity claim in the E Jean Carroll case is DENIED a re-hearing en banc (by the entire appeals court panel). Earlier, a three-judge panel DENIED his motion to stay the trial pending the outcome of this appeal. As of now, trial begins January 16th.

    Trump is delusional. Unfortunately, his condition is incurable.

    His legal setbacks just push him deeper into crazy land. It’s tiresome, but he continues to drag the country through this nonsense.

  30. 30.

    trollhattan

    Can I get the Tiny String Quintet in here?

    A former clerk who refused to give a marriage licence to same-sex couples has been ordered by a judge to pay legal fees to one couple’s lawyers.

    Kim Davis was found guilty by a jury last year of violating the Kentucky couple’s constitutional rights. On Tuesday she was ordered to pay $260,000 (£205,896) in fees plus $100,000 damages she already owed them.

    Ms Davis was briefly jailed in 2015 for ignoring the US Supreme Court’s ruling that legalised same-sex marriage. She said she did not comply with the couple’s request for a marriage licence because she believes marriage is between a man and woman, citing her religious beliefs as an evangelical Christian.

    Her lawyers argued in court that the legal expenses were excessive, but the judge saw it differently, saying Ms Davis must pay since they won the lawsuit.

    “They sought to vindicate their fundamental right to marry and obtain marriage licences and they did so,” Judge David Bunning said, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader.

    Judge Bunning is the same judge who ordered her jail time in 2015 over her marriage licence refusal, which was deemed contempt of court. She was only released from jail after her staff issued the licences on her behalf.

  32. 32.

    Jackie

    @trollhattan: That was NINE yrs ago? It seems like just yesterday. Seeing her name brought it all back. She was/is a vile creature.

    Edited to add I’m elated to know her life on earth is still hell.

  33. 33.

    bbleh

    @trollhattan: @Jackie: BOOYAH! The arc of the universe is long etc.  She was in jail briefly too.  And I don’t feel one tiny Appalachian mite of a scintilla of an iota sorry for her either, cuz the wingnut-o-sphere are already GoFundMe-ing

    That deserves another beer, resolutions be damned.

  40. 40.

    Splitting Image

    @trollhattan:

    A former clerk who refused to give a marriage licence to same-sex couples has been ordered by a judge to pay legal fees to one couple’s lawyers.

    Kim Davis was found guilty by a jury last year of violating the Kentucky couple’s constitutional rights. On Tuesday she was ordered to pay $260,000 (£205,896) in fees plus $100,000 damages she already owed them.

    When I was young, I learned that it was mean and cruel to rejoice in other people’s misfortunes.

    As I matured, I learned that every rule tends to have a fair number of exceptions.

  42. 42.

    Ken

    @billcinsd: Would not the Dem needed to do something somewhat close to sedition?

    Asked and answered, surely, when you identify the culprit as “the Dem”.

  43. 43.

    WaterGirl

    @trollhattan:

    She said she did not comply with the couple’s request for a marriage licence because she believes marriage is between a man and woman, citing her religious beliefs as an evangelical Christian.

    Then quit your fucking job if it requires you to do something you believe is wrong.

  45. 45.

    Jackie

    Per Political Wire:

    The names of up to 150 people tied to Jeffrey Epstein were released as part of a massive document dump involving the late sex trafficker.

    The documents are now being reviewed by the news media.

    So much for a quiet news evening…

  47. 47.

    Urza

    @billcinsd: No, obviously facts are not relevant.  If they were, they wouldn’t be trying to impeach Biden using all sorts of easily disprovable conspiracy theories.

  48. 48.

    WaterGirl

    I appreciate all the explanations about the Harvard President.  I think we should get rid of Acorn again, just for the hell of it. //

    Right after I think “Harvard President, oh no!” I think about all the shit people we have recently been exposed to with degrees from Harvard.  That institution isn’t what it used to be.

  49. 49.

    wjca

    @Ken: But they haven’t even tried electroshock or lobotomy.

    Electroshock might have merit.  But wouldn’t a lobotomy require finding something not it evidence?

  50. 50.

    Quadrillipede

    I’m actually not sure which is more pathetic actually: either TFG keeps legit losing to Democrats, or otherwise he keeps letting them steal elections out from under him. Sad! Weak! L-word!

  54. 54.

    JaySinWA

    @WaterGirl: It has annoyed me that I hadn’t seen any examples in the sources that sided with or against the charges.

    I finally got around finding some of the allegedly plagiarized  qoutes, from the Washington Free Beacon that the NY Times claims was the front runner for the attacks.

    I am not an academic, but I don’t see these as plagiarism, but more like boilerplate (as even the NY Times put it). It might help to see how others used language to describe this material, to see how it could have been written differently, but they are talking about sentences and sentence fragments in some cases, a paragraph or so in what looks like a natural flow in summarizing another document.

    Here’s a link to one of the Free Beacon articles. https://freebeacon.com/campus/harvard-president-claudine-gay-hit-with-six-new-charges-of-plagiarism/

  56. 56.

    RaflW

    @WaterGirl: It’s the NYT being in cahoots with Rufo & Co.

    And more broadly, the deep misogynoir that gets unleashed when a black woman ascends to a place of power that too many still see as a white man’s place.

  59. 59.

    BethanyAnne

    @New Deal democrat: No. You are wrong. We need to do exactly the opposite. It is long past time for Democrats to stop cowering and avoiding taking a stand because of what might happen later. We have done that for 50 years, and the Right wing just keeps amping up the crazy. There is zero evidence that us being principled bipartisan citizens encourages good behavior on their part, and time after time after time of evidence that, in the absence of a legitimate grievance, they’ll make one up and speed ahead. And he committed an insurrection. That requires justice. It is craven to avoid justice because it might make the perpetrators angry.

  62. 62.

    lowtechcyclist

    @Splitting Image:

    Every day Trump loses a legal fight, I wake up to “I Got You Babe” on the radio.

    “It’s cold out there this morning.”

    “It’s cold out there every morning!”

  63. 63.

    New Deal democrat

    @billcinsd:

    Would not the Dem needed to do something somewhat close to sedition?

    What constitutes sedition?

    Who decides the issue?
    By what burden of proof does it has to be proven?

    For example, could the GOP Congress in 2016 have decided that Hillary Clinton engaged in sedition, and was ineligible to run?

    What’s that, you say? Absurd? Whaddaya gonna do about it?
    heh heh heh

  65. 65.

    New Deal democrat

    @TBone: You and BethanyAnne are invited to contemplate my comment just above.

    Have a very nice un cowardly evening.

  69. 69.

    RaflW

    Also, re: Harvard, this:

    Don Moynihan
    @donmoyn.bsky.social
    The NY Times and other media that treated Gay’s academic misconduct as a national story were an essential part of the right wing campaign to have her removed. Compare how they treated the President of Stanford, who faced much more serious accusations of academic misconduct.

    He goes on to show how very little the same people cared about Stanford’s chief’s bullshit. A tad of that is east coast snobbiness, I suspect. But mostly it’s about certain characteristics of the two leaders. See if anyone can guess….

  70. 70.

    bbleh

    @New Deal democrat: per 20 above, the Constitutional language is “engaged in insurrection,” which is a question of fact.  Seems to me that, apart from monkeyshines like saying those words don’t apply in this particular case because of that particular twist on this particular modern interpretation of that particular word, it then becomes a question of who is a legitimate trier of fact?  And as to that in general, there’s a lot of procedure and law and precedent.

    And as to the argument that “well, it’s political, so everything’s political,” I can say only, then there’s no point to a Constitutional provision at all.  If the people want a 30-year-old pop star for President, they should have her, right?

    ETA: oh and no, imo the 2016 Congress could NOT so have decided, because they’re not a trier of fact (other than the Senate in an impeachment) and they didn’t have jurisdiction even if the issue had been raised (which it wasn’t).

  71. 71.

    BethanyAnne

    @New Deal democrat: I already made my argument. We’ve tried the bipartisan, good-faith, upstanding, play-by-the rules good citizen route for 50 years. We’ve had our clocks cleaned for 50 years. If you don’t see that you are advocating more of the same, I can’t make it make sense to you.

    Address your specific concerns? Nope! Go sea lion elsewhere. JAQing off is of no value and I answer only to belittle you. Piss up a rope.

  72. 72.

    New Deal democrat

    @BethanyAnne:

    Who is empowered to decide that a candidate engaged in insurrection? Congress? The Courts? States’ Secretaries of States? Governors? Local election officials! Goddess BethanyAnne?

    By what standard of proof must it be shown? More likely than not? Beyond reasonable doubt? Because Goddess BethanyAnne felt like it?

  73. 73.

    New Deal democrat

    @bbleh:

    “engaged in insurrection,” which is a question of fact.  Seems to me that, apart from monkeyshines like saying those words don’t apply in this particular case because of that particular twist on this particular modern interpretation of that particular word, it then becomes a question of who is a legitimate trier of fact?

    Okay we’re getting somewhere. Who is/are/ought to be the triers of that fact under the 14th Amendment? What’s the burden of proof?

  74. 74.

    bbleh

    @New Deal democrat: one court has already done so.  Generally, trial courts are triers of fact.  Executive officials make judgments within their statutory remit, but those can be appealed to the courts.  As noted above, other than the peculiar case of impeachment (which is not a legal proceeding), Congress is not a trier of fact.

    And as to “blah,” funny how it’s exactly the question you posed in #72.

    This trier of fact concludes therefrom you are not engaged in serious discussion.  Thank you for your time.

  77. 77.

    New Deal democrat

    @bbleh:

    is one local court or Secretary of State sufficient? Is it okay for a federal Constitutional standard to be decided on a state by state basis?

    As to Congress, they can find facts for lawmaking purposes and for contempt of Congress cases. So Congress is or can be a trier of fact if the Constitution implies that it is or can be.

  78. 78.

    Joseph Patrick Lurker

    @WaterGirl:

    These columns sum up my feelings about Claudine Gay.

    Her multiple instances of plagiarism were indefensible and she had to resign. Gay is not entitled to a pass simply because her accusers are reprehensible human beings.  Gay has only herself to blame for her downfall.  In her resignation letter she takes no personal responsibility and simply whines about being a victim.

    James Joyner:

    It is simultaneously true that Gay has been the target of a vicious, politically-motivated smear campaign and that she has committed multiple violations of the basic norms of academic integrity and was therefore not fit to serve as the leader of what is arguably the foremost institution of higher learning in the United States. Indeed, that she will remain as a tenured member of Harvard’s faculty is highly problematic.

    As the scandal has unfolded, I’ve been dismayed to see the academics who have spoken out on the matter (mostly on social media) almost universally back Gay, dismissing her plagiarism as manufactured. As loathsome as I find The Daily Beacon, Christopher Rufo, and others behind the attacks, the evidence is the evidence. To be sure, the critics did themselves no favors by citing things like boilerplate fluff in the Acknowledgements of her dissertation as examples of plagiarism. But the other examples were legion. Almost all of which them would have earned a freshman at most colleges and universities in the country a failing grade and placed before an academic review board.

    https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/claudine-gay-resigns-harvard-president/

    Tom Nichols:

    Stefanik and [conservative activist Christopher] Rufo did not write Gay’s dissertation, and they did not co-author her scholarly articles. Feel free to deplore the messengers, their vulturine creepiness, and their gleeful opportunism. Their own failings still do not make what they found any less true. In the real world, truth sometimes comes from terrible people with dishonorable motives; if we were to purity-test the motives of every defector who handed us documents during the Cold War, we’d have had to shred incredibly valuable information on the silly grounds that the people who gave it to us weren’t very nice.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2024/01/claudine-gays-resignation-was-overdue/676999/

    Tyler Austin Harper:

    The true scandal of the Claudine Gay affair is not a Harvard president and her plagiarism. The true scandal is that so many journalists and academics were willing, are still willing, to redefine plagiarism to suit their politics. Gay’s boosters have consistently resorted to Orwellian doublespeak—“duplicative language” and academic “sloppiness” and “technical attribution issues”—in a desperate effort to insist that lifting entire paragraphs of another scholar’s work, nearly word for word, without quotation or citation, isn’t plagiarism. Or that if it is plagiarism, it’s merely a technicality. Or that we all do it. (Soon after Rufo and Brunet made their initial accusations last month, Gay issued a statement saying, “I stand by the integrity of my scholarship.” She did not address those or subsequent plagiarism allegations in her resignation letter.)

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/01/claudine-gay-harvard-plagiarism/677007/

     

     

  79. 79.

    New Deal democrat

    @BethanyAnne: Nice factual reply.

    Have a very nice evening untroubled by thought.

     

    ETA: and as to SeaLioning, I didn’t intrude and pick this fight. *You* did.

  82. 82.

    Geminid

    @New Deal democrat: You may think this is an unpopular argument now, but wait ’til the Supreme Court uses it to throw out these ballot exclusion lawsuits. It will be pitchfork time for sure!

  83. 83.

    New Deal democrat

    @Geminid: And I’m not even wedded to the argument. I can just see a basketful of issues that might be raised, some of which might come back to bite the “good guys” later.

  84. 84.

    RaflW

    @New Deal democrat: “Is it okay for a federal Constitutional standard to be decided on a state by state basis?”

    Our infinitely brilliant* founders decided that the individual states would determine facets of election law. One of the reasons that some states demand photo ID, and others don’t.

    If that can stand in our very kludgy system, why can’t a federal standard be decided by state courts in different locales. And with possibly different results? The CO supremes seem to think it was their remit. We’ll see what Scotus says on that

    *yeah, right

  85. 85.

    RaflW

    @New Deal democrat: And on this, I will join those who say we’ve pissed away a lot of power over decades of worry about the lines the GOP would cross “if we took action”, and then the GOP crosses that line even when we didn’t.

    I’d argue that letting Bush Jr. lie his ass off to get us into the second Iraq war, and letting that just sliiiiiide was a serious part of the undoing of our country.

  86. 86.

    New Deal democrat

    @RaflW: You may be absolutely right. As I wrote Geminid above, there are a basketful of issues here, some of which may come back to bite certain proponents later.

  87. 87.

    jonas

    @RaflW:Compare how they treated the President of Stanford, who faced much more serious accusations of academic misconduct.

    As it happens, the student journalist who blew the whistle on the Stanford president’s misconduct was none other than Peter Baker’s son.

  88. 88.

    Bill Arnold

    @Joseph Patrick Lurker:

    Her multiple instances of plagiarism were indefensible and she had to resign. Gay is not entitled to a pass simply because her accusers are reprehensible human beings. Gay has only herself to blame for her downfall. In her resignation letter she takes no personal responsibility and simply whines about being a victim.

    Via chatgpt, a respectably powerful Plagiarism Machine. (I made a single minor edit to the chatGPT output.)

    [my prompt] Reword this so that it is not plagiarism: Her multiple instances of plagiarism were indefensible and she had to resign. Gay is not entitled to a pass simply because her accusers are reprehensible human beings. Gay has only herself to blame for her downfall. In her resignation letter she takes no personal responsibility and simply whines about being a victim.

    ChatGPT
    She faced numerous allegations of plagiarism, which were deemed indefensible, leading to her resignation. It’s important to note that receiving leniency should not be automatic, even if the accusers are morally questionable individuals. Gay is solely responsible for her own downfall, as reflected in her resignation letter where she fails to acknowledge personal accountability and instead portrays herself as a victim.

  89. 89.

    Ruckus

    @Ken:

    But they haven’t even tried electroshock or lobotomy.

    Do you really think electroshock or lobotomy will change one iota of ShitForBrains? Maybe a container ship full of TP would be able to clean up that mess. Maybe. But I am doubtful….. Sulfuric Acid might do it.

  91. 91.

    catclub

    @New Deal democrat: Is it okay for a federal Constitutional standard to be decided on a state by state basis?

     

    It is if there is a constitutional sheriff involved, and either tassels or no tassels on the flag.

  92. 92.

    Bill Arnold

    @Ruckus:
    You’re looking for piranha solution. One of the best solutions for [the problem of] removal of unwanted organic material.
    (To very roughly paraphrase Trump’s (Miller’s?) revolting language about permanently eliminating his verminous enemies.)

  94. 94.

    The "I Want" Song

    @Bill Arnold: Strictly speaking, I believe this would still be considered plagiarism. Rewording doesn’t address the fact that the content and structure are basically unchanged. (Just recalling the briefing I got as a grad student decades ago, so my memory may be a little rusty…)

  96. 96.

    Fair Economist

    @New Deal democrat:

    By what standard of proof must it be shown? More likely than not? Beyond reasonable doubt? Because Goddess BethanyAnne felt like it?

    Currently, the standard is “per the judgement of either a judge or relevant state official, subject to approval of the appropriate state Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court.”
    That’s pretty reasonable, really.

  97. 97.

    Fair Economist

    @Joseph Patrick Lurker: The actual evidence doesn’t bear out these claims. The examples cited are, at most, two separated sentences with rewording, on well-covered topics, never even a paragraph. By those standards there’s scarcely a person on the planet who writes nonfiction who isn’t guilty of “plagiarism” – including journalists.

  98. 98.

    randal sexton

    @New Deal democrat: me. I heard him advocate it, I watched it happen and I know what I witnessed. It’s on me to show up to stop this every time. Me. Not some black robed sack of credentials.  Me.

Comments are closed.