Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Aug 29, 2020 4 tweets 2 min read Read on X
What is misleading is your tweet, @nprpolitics. Differences of opinion, differences in emphasis, & complicating or even competing facts don’t make things “false” or “misleading.” /1
What is misleading is your assertion that Biden has not called to defund the police. Although he has rejected that language subsequently, he gave an interview in which he agreed with “redirecting” police funding, a difference of semantics only. See link in next tweet. /2
At a minimum it’s a fair interpretation that he endorsed some defunding of police in this interview & should have to clarify what he means by his comment in this interview if that’s not what it is. /4

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸

Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @McAdooGordon

May 12
Nothing Judge Cannon has done is judicial misconduct.

Falsely accusing a judge of misconduct & encouraging others to do so IS misconduct by a lawyer, however, in most jurisdictions.
In DC, where this fool practiced, that rule (8.2(a)), is not in the bar rules.

8.2(a) IS in the FLA rules, however.

Glenn could be disciplined potentially by the bar in FLA or in DC for disparaging Judge Cannon’s integrity under FLA’s rule.
So here are links if you want to file a complaint against Glenn in either jurisdiction.

FLA:
floridabar.org/public/acap/
Read 4 tweets
Apr 26
Now that we all know what DEI is, I want to talk to the Right of Center about reclaiming the correct meaning of “equity.”

Equity is a legal word. It is contrasted with “law” in legal understanding.
The English common law developed the concept of “equity” as a means of avoiding the harsh and unjust outcomes that a strict application of “the law” sometimes produces.
This would be stuff like a lease where a couple made all payments except the last one was one day late because the husband died & the widow could not access to their account for a few days and the landlord would foreclose on the entire property. Technically allowed; still BS.
Read 12 tweets
Apr 26
Bribery has always been private conduct.

Ruling impartially on a case is a judge’s official duty. Taking money to rule for one side is not. But notice that the judge doesn’t benefit from the ruling, but from the bribe. Same for public officials.
Similarly, where a public official does benefit directly and personally from their own official act, esp if that is not disclosed, we’ve deemed that a conflict of interest, which is also private conduct that invalidates the public act.
These private acts are entirely different from cases where a govt official receives no personal financial benefit but gets an indirect non-monetary benefit - popularity, future votes, legacy - and (like everyone else) may benefit from the substantive official act (eg tax cuts.)
Read 9 tweets
Apr 25
DJT SCOTUS case on immunity starting now.

Sauer arguing for DJT. Doing his opening statement now.
He's making the point that prosecuting POTUS after office undermines the POTUS while POTUS.
Thomas - source of immunity? Sauer - vesting clause.

Thomas - how?
Read 141 tweets
Apr 21
The test for whether spoken words are free speech or not is called the Brandenburg test from a SCOTUS case in 1969. It is also called the "imminent lawless action" test. ONLY if the speech rises to that level does it fall outside of the protection of the First Amendment.
In essence the speech must be the kind that does or inexorably is known to lead to "imminent disorder." (This standard is from another SCOTUS case in 1973, Hess.)

This is a very high bar & effectively renders almost all speech that doesn't actually result in violence, protected.
The "speech" in Brandenburg took place at a KKK rally, disparaged Blacks & Jews, suggested "revengance" should be had against the Congress for "suppressing" whites, & explained there would be a "march on Congress" on July 4th of 400,000, followed by marches in FL & MS.
Read 7 tweets
Apr 16
Listening to Fischer argument now. Govt arguing 2nd.

Sounds to me like the 3 liberal justices are in favor of the govt‘s position.

So far, I have 3 of the conservatives in favor of Fischer - Chief Roberts, Alito & Thomas.

Not sure yet on Barrett, Gorsuch & Kavanaugh.
Robert’s really arguing with the SG - that doesn’t usually happen.
Gorsuch is definitely for Fischer. He’s scorching the SG.
Read 13 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(