In alt.home.repair, on Thu, 22 Sep 2022 14:14:40 GMT,
sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>>OT Bad day at Black Rock
>>Okay, nothing to do with Black Rock. Bad day for Stumpie.
>>Him and 3 of his kids** sued by NYS for 250 million. 200 examples of
>>And then tonight, appeals court stays the part of Cannon's order which
>>the government had appealed, and in tactful terms, ridiculed what she
> "Here, the district court (ed. Cannon) concluded that Plaintiff (ed. Trump),
> did not show that the United States acted in callous disregard of his
> constitutional rights. (...) The absence of this "indispensab[le]"
> factor in the Richey analysis is reason enough to conclude that the
> district court abused its discretion in exercising equitable jurisdiction
Were you able to copy and paste out of this pdf file? I couldn't
highlight anything. (Or I might have included excerpts. I like the
one you picked.)
If you could highlight, what browser do you use? Or were you able to
turn off some protection the file/page has? If I'd downloaded it,
would I be able to highlight then?
One thing I find interesting is how clear, how easy to read and
understand the motions and rulings have been. (The text, that is. You
just have to learn to ignore the citations. When I was sojourning in
law school, they were such a distraction I had trouble reading more than
three or four pages of a decision. Finally I learned to ignore the
citations and then I found I was ignoring other things even in non-legal
>In other words, Judge Cannon didn't even have the jurisdiction to
>make her order. Expect her entire order to be overruled when the
>full appeal is heard.
So is a full appeal coming? I lost track. It would make sense that you
can appeal a part where time is more important first and other parts
later, but procedure is a big enough topic to have a course of its own
in law school.
But yeah, your right. Almost everything they said that explained why
what Cannon said did not apply to the 100 pages of classified documents
applied just as much to the other documents too. If it didn't appply,
it's because it was not applicable, not because the docs are not
It was interesting that in addtion to the 11,000 documents there were
1500 other things!!!
I wonder what Cannon thinks she did. Did she know she was bending too
far over backwards, or did she think she was bending the right amount,
or was she blinded by his majesty and thought she wasn't beding at all?
Was she looking for a promotion to appeals court and supreme court like
a couple cynics at MSNBC thought?
(BTW, I'm not recommending MSNBC. I have problems with MSNBC mostly**
unrelated to trump coverage, but I compromise and listen to it anyway,
sort of like I eat more cookies than I should. **Sometimes they make
vague or maybe less vague references to conclusions they seem to have
drawn which seem insufficiently supported by the facts, but I haven't
noticed them come right out and say something that is false, or reach a
conclusion that doesn't have some possible support by the facts.
They also have enormous number of commericals. I'd guess it's 20
minutes an hour, maybe more, and the same ones over and over and over
and over and over. YOu can pay $15 a month or so for prime but that has
its own problem. During most conmericals, instead they replay something
that happened earlier in the day. They stop that in the middle of a
sentence, in the middle of a word and jump back to live. it's
disconcerting for both reasons. Also they say every time they go back
or forward again that it's "commerical-free tune-in prime" which I
consider a commercial for tune-in. The contradiction, almost
hypocrisy, also annoys me.