Mike Lindell declares victory, despite losing; Michael Avenatti gets his sentence reduced; a Real Housewife's deported ex-husband provides a useful lesson in the law of defamation by implication.
A question - wasn't part of the amount for Dominion have to do with potential lost income due to how trashing their business would pretty permanently cost them over the years?
A lot of what's going on in the executive seems to rely on its ability to make up facts, e.g. alien enemies, invasions, and fentanyl pouring in from places like Canada and Penguin Island. Are there any guiding laws or Supreme Court decisions that address the judiciary's ability to review the opinions of the executive? Or have we simply been relying on normalcy for 250 years?
More importantly, you mentioned that accusations of erectile dysfunction are more likely to be subject to a successful lawsuit if there is some impact to the litigant's profession. How extensive is the record on people being awarded damages because an accusation of ED threatened their income?
Normalcy was supposed to be enforced by "checks and balances" where the legislative would review the facts asserted that unlock whatever powers specified in whatever law. This is what the "political" doctrine assumes - a working Congressional spine.
What makes it ironic is that the conservative wing of Supreme Court just killed "Chevron Deference". We've replaced the doctrine of "assume the Executive knows what its doing" with "just let the Executive lie to us".
I love the show so much! But as a geography major, I hope Ken never says the word archipelago again.
Right? That took me out 🤣
Does Ken count as a long-suffering cohost after this?
Thank you guys, this episode was very good for my mental health.
I humbly submit a title suggestion for Michael Avenatti's future podcast "Living Rent Free: my life disbarred and behind bars."
Of course the trouble with any case about erectile dysfunction is it's so very difficult to get standing
...
Thanks. Ken and Josh. You supply the highest laughs:$ ratio in podcasting.
I'm happy people are able to provide topics for Ken's new upcoming blog about trending reality show legal topics, PopeHaut.
A question - wasn't part of the amount for Dominion have to do with potential lost income due to how trashing their business would pretty permanently cost them over the years?
arc-a-pa-LIE-go?
Fabulous show yet again - never missed an episode since you guys started all those years ago!
Trump must be beside himself that there's a federal fraud crimer he could pardon, but it would make his head explode.
Appreciate the show.
A lot of what's going on in the executive seems to rely on its ability to make up facts, e.g. alien enemies, invasions, and fentanyl pouring in from places like Canada and Penguin Island. Are there any guiding laws or Supreme Court decisions that address the judiciary's ability to review the opinions of the executive? Or have we simply been relying on normalcy for 250 years?
More importantly, you mentioned that accusations of erectile dysfunction are more likely to be subject to a successful lawsuit if there is some impact to the litigant's profession. How extensive is the record on people being awarded damages because an accusation of ED threatened their income?
Thank you, excellent episode.
Normalcy was supposed to be enforced by "checks and balances" where the legislative would review the facts asserted that unlock whatever powers specified in whatever law. This is what the "political" doctrine assumes - a working Congressional spine.
What makes it ironic is that the conservative wing of Supreme Court just killed "Chevron Deference". We've replaced the doctrine of "assume the Executive knows what its doing" with "just let the Executive lie to us".