(Business Insider): “A little-known law could determine whether the DOJ would represent Trump in a Capitol-riot lawsuit or if he has to fend for himself.” 1/4 tinyurl.com/yftnflj8
Furthermore: action that attempts to undermine the certification of electoral results (in clear violation of the oath to enforce the laws) cries out, not just for placing such action outside the tort protection of the Westfall Act, but for federal *prosecution* as well. 2/4
That is the legal case that I am convinced federal prosecutors must be building--and they appear to be doing it very, very carefully and thoroughly. 3/4
The news today--news to us, not to federal prosecutors--that Trump told the DOJ to claim (without a shred of evidence yet) that the election was corrupt and “to leave the rest to him” is just more grist for the mill.
So far, everyone has been weighing in about the implications of today’s news for tfg, but so far they have failed to notice the implications for R members of Congress like Jim Jordan and Kevin McCarthy. 1/14
Jordan admitted on Fox News that he did have at least one phone conversation with tfg on Jan 6. McCarthy disclosed that he had as well back in January. 2/14
Ingraham’s reference was to Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), in which the Supreme Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. (wiki) 1/3
(Note, too, that the present controversy is not about mandatory vaccinations at all, but rather over existing and proposed laws and private actions burdening the unvaccinated.) 2/3
The most important and timely opinion piece and political analysis of the day (by the formidable Jennifer Rubin)--about “Red Dog” Rs who are leaving the party in response to the anti-democratic turn of the GOP. 1/5 tinyurl.com/yg7dxfhu
Why should your medical insurance premiums go up because some of your co-workers refuse to be vaxxed?
Likewise, why should your premiums go up if you are in a private plan with members who refuse to be vaxxed? 1/3 tinyurl.com/yhvk3e34
Over 99% of the very costly medical care required for covid patients is incurred now by the unvaxxed. Insurance companies should start raising medical insurance premiums on the unvaxxed to reflect this fact. 2/3
Companies pay for their employees’ medical insurance on a monthly basis. These companies will then start requiring vaccination by their employees and start pressuring R politicians. Same for people in private plans.
(The cost differential can be calculated by actuaries.) 3/3
"Trump is described as an 'impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex.'”
There is also apparent confirmation that the Kremlin possesses kompromat. tinyurl.com/yh2g2jaq
This appeared only days after the news broke that the leading Russia- (and Putin-) supported ransomware outfit was taken offline.
A leak (very risky there) would show a serious rift w Putin, by moderates who feel strong enough to challenge Putin's aggression against the U.S.
Some have questioned why this story appeared in The Guardian and not WaPo, NYT etc. Easily explained. The Guardian claims that other Western intelligence agencies have seen the doc, but the *media* leak came from M16 via Steele (who still has contacts there) and then Harding.
@tribelaw Massive student and faculty non-operation will sink the survey. A 1A case defending a state institution would be very strong, but *individuals* cannot be forced to disclose their voting behavior and political views. DeSantis hasn't thought this through and will regret it.
@tribelaw Does the U.S. Census ask individuals to disclose their political party affiliation or their political views?
No.
Would it be unconstitutional for the U.S. Census to include such questions?
Yes.
@tribelaw Public opinion surveys (e.g. by Gallup, Fox News) ask such questions. (Responses are voluntary.)
Could a state government or a public university do so constitutionally?
Of course not--especially (but not only) if such disclosure is made a condition for receiving state benefits.