Message from @V77
Discord ID: 463783914436034581
@V77 Thanks i just jumped in and trying to catch up. I am here at the same time as listening to soap box. Gotta live dual monitors
@Orion91 me too, lol
New Q
@Kiwi61Karma yes. But maybe also to allow the others to think they can talk to him. Idk. Maybe 🤔? plus they have listening devices as small as a pinhole
The Drains are Unclogged, Drain It
Q !CbboFOtcZs ID: aa0f22 No.2014318 📁 NEW
Jul 3 2018 13:59:38 (EST)
Add another to the list.
https://www.npr.org/2018/07/03/625581627/another-top-justice-department-lawyer-steps-down-following-earlier-departures📁
CONSPIRACY?
COINCIDENCE?
Q
Top Justice Department Lawyer Resigns, Latest To Step Down : NPR
https://www.npr.org/2018/07/03/625581627/another-top-justice-department-lawyer-steps-down-following-earlier-departures
And NPR is Liberal right ? Hmmm
US senators on rare visit to Moscow ahead of Putin-Trump summit | Arab News
http://www.arabnews.com/node/1332731/world
@everyone Reminder to post links into folders for all the mods to pick up our dives and sauce.
Carrie Underwood and Miranda Lambert song "something bad" keeps popping in my head, lol
Skull and bones
@Kiwi61Karma Where are the folders?
@V77 good luck on figuring out which to put what in. Those categories on the left.
Carrie and Miranda is in reference to Hillary and Huma, LMAO
Hey everyone!
Whats up
You have gained a rank @Tillman40Anon, you just advanced to 1 . Thanks for all you do Patriot!
Hello!
@V77 Above and below chat zone , in the headings of topic
Barrett, Amy Coney (2017). "Originalism and Stare Decisis" (PDF). Notre Dame Law Review.
Justice Scalia took neither tack: he neither articulated a theory attempting to reconcile adherence to nonoriginalist precedent with originalism nor argued that the original public meaning must always control. Instead, he treated stare decisis as a “pragmatic exception to [his originalist theory].”30 In his well-known essay, Originalism: The Lesser Evil, he described his position this way: I can be much more brief in describing what seems to me the second most serious objection to originalism: In its undiluted form, at least, it is medicine that seems too strong to swallow. Thus, almost every originalist would adulterate it with the doctrine of stare decisis—so that Marbury v. Madison would stand even if Professor Raoul Berger should demonstrate unassailably that it got the meaning of the Constitution wrong.
👆🏻
🕵️♀️
You have gained a rank @Kathryn44, you just advanced to 22 . Thanks for all you do Patriot!