"A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."
M: I came here for a good argument.
A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
M: An argument isn't just contradiction.
A: It can be.
M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A: No it isn't.
M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
A: Yes it is!
M: No it isn't!
Now that the dude has gone, does that mean this thread is now defunct?
dneal (January 25th, 2021)
He may still be a maniac, and he may be gone; but according to the SC today he wasn't corrupt.
There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth, but hey... the courts have ruled! Right?
Supreme Court dismisses Trump DC hotel emoluments clause case
"A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."
The SC did not rule that Trump was not corrupt.
I'm going to quote the article here, to avoid being accused of putting words in other people's mouths:
"The Supreme Court dismissed the case and vacated the lower court ruling against Trump because now that he is no longer president, he doesn't stand to benefit from his hotel's placement near the White House."
by Nicholas Rowan, Staff Writer | January 25, 2021 10:38 AM
Bold emphasis mine. Trump's actions while in office almost certainly contravened the emoluments clause.
Last edited by Empty_of_Clouds; January 25th, 2021 at 05:48 PM.
Last edited by dneal; January 25th, 2021 at 05:50 PM.
"A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."
Jeez Louise, can't you read? That WAS the court's decision - and I can accept, on one level, that the case is now moot. You do know what that means, yes? It does not mean that the SC considers him innocent of corruption with regards to the emolument clause.
Oh, and zing. I can see you're good at this. ^^
Last edited by Empty_of_Clouds; January 25th, 2021 at 05:53 PM.
Just in case anyone gives a monkey's about any of this.
20-330
TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF U.S. V. CREW, ET AL.
The motion of Scholar Seth Barrett Tillman, et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted. The motion of Professor Lawrence A. Hamermesh for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.
See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).
20-331
TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF U.S. V. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ET AL.
The motion of Scholar Seth Barrett Tillman, et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.
See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).
Definition of moot (from Merriam Webster 2021)
1a : open to question : debatable
1b : subjected to discussion : disputed
2 : deprived of practical significance : made abstract or purely academic
Definition #2 is the meaning that the SC use in their rulings quoted above.
A case being rendered moot does not mean the accused was innocent of the original charges.
The rulings above are direct quotes from the Order List of the Supreme Court, US.
Last edited by Empty_of_Clouds; January 25th, 2021 at 06:15 PM.
Now look up "standing" and "laches", two other procedural methods for dismissing cases without considering the merits.
"A truth does not mind being questioned. A lie does not like being challenged."
A damaged book seller and a REMF. The Proud ... punks ... whippersnappers ... ... dudes ... boys ... tadpoles
Still a good thing me and the boys were not on security that faithful day.....Tap Tap Tap ...
You boys have a very interestin' hobby....Keep blowin' that Kazoo . Kazoo law.
Still your friend and his,
Fred
Bookmarks