This is how a federal court deals with Rudy quality nonsense...
Judge Brann is a 1987 graduate from the University of Notre Dame.
Link: Welcome to the world of real lawyers
Replies to: This is how a federal court deals with Rudy quality nonsense...
These cases strike me as running afoul of FRCP Rule 11 too.
But I’m not up to date on that jurisprudence. Do you have an opinion on that?
I only handle criminal cases, but my understanding is that Rule 11 sanctions are seldom enforced.
(no message)
My impression is that it is pretty difficult to get a Rule 11 decision against a plaintiff.
I'm not an in-court civil litigator, and I will defer to them (I don't believe conor is a federal court civil litigator), but I've managed a fair number of federal litigations (as the client), and the courts seem to bend over backwards to entertain the craziest arguments. The bar is set quite low. The courts clearly lean towards "access to the courts" and away from punishing frivolous lawsuits. Until we get "loser pays" this will always be a problem. Rule 11 seems to solve maybe 10-20% of cases I would call frivolous. Just my impression. I would welcome a federal civil litigator to comment.
What happened to Russian interference we've been hearing about the last 4 years?
(no message)
Whatabout Russia?
(no message)
Yeah. Exactly. Suddenly, not a problem.
(no message)
What? Sure it’s a problem. Ghouliani has already admitted that there is a 50% possibility that he
was working with a Russian intelligence agent over the Hunter nonsense. The problem though pales when we have a nutso, mad king king prez who won’t acknowledge he lost the election.
You better talk to Chris about that then. Maybe we can all agree we need more investigations.
(no message)
The Russians were thwarted in 2020.
One of the Americans who kept a watchful eye was Chris Krebs.
Trump fired Krebs for being diligent and honest.
And feel free to read about the Russian interference that transpired in 2016. Your post suggests otherwise.
Link: For those who think the 2016 Russian interference was a hoax
Hehe.
(no message)
Nothing. It moved on to Hunter Biden. Guliani was working with a Russian intelligence asset.
(no message)
He’s a no BS guy. Flooding the zone with garbage arguments and zero evidence isn’t a good strategy
with him.
Reads like the ND '87 judge gave Rudy a real ass whupping.
(no message)
und67, Hank, and Baron insist we should wait for “the evidence.”
(no message)
just curious... if there is evidence, why wouldn't everyone with a brain be willing to wait for it?
if there is material evidence (and i am not implying or stipulating there is, so don't misquote me again), you should want to get a ruling on it. by suppressing it, you invite doubt about your own motives and the legality of your own claims. all we're saying is let the system decide so there will be no doubt going forward.
Because the evidence would have already surfaced. Time to respect the verdict.
(no message)
Swamp insiders do not have our best interest at heart. They actually despise us.
(no message)
"Legal arguments w/out merit & speculative accusations" stitched "like Frankenstein's monster." Says
it all.
