There was a time when @RichLowry writing something this nakedly despicable would have been unthinkable. Accusing a man of helping provoke a crime via something he wrote FOUR YEARS BEFOREHAND is the kind of ethics you want Buckley's life's work to be associated with, Rich? Really?

Trump on climate: I don't believe it. Trump on Khashoggi: I don't believe it. Trump on Russia: I don't believe it. Idiocy? A canny game? Doesn't really matter as much as the underlying intellectual autocracy. In this administration only one opinion matters.

It's an assault on facts and reason. It's an assault on good governance. It's an assault on the bureaucracies that are being discounted. It's an assault on science and history. But it is also an assault on one of the underpinnings of democracy.

We live in a system that is grounded on the idea of collaborative government. Leaders may have a final word but even then, there are typically checks and balances. Hopefully, in this case, such checks and balances may work. But they also are being tested.

The president's position that he is smarter than all the world's scientists, than the entire intelligence community, than experts who have studied any issue all their lives, is, of course, asinine. But his belief that government turns solely on his opinion, is monarchic.

Louis XIV reportedly said, "L'etat est moi." That he was the state. Trump asserting that he knows better than all, discounts all advice, that his brain is enough to chart the course for America alone, is essentially saying the same thing.

Election Litigation Update - Gohmert.

Reply brief is in. Let's have a look. They are, mercifully, underlength. They had 50 pages available, the PDF is 43 and some of that is cover page, signatures,

Interesting table of contents. Looks like they're packing a lot in, until you realize that much of the material that's important - like their response to the "you sued the wrong person" material and "injury in fact" take up very little space.

Looks like they decided to skip the table of authorities. Presumably GoogleDocWord ate it too bad for them to fix. This will certainly further endear them to the judge.

This is going to be interesting - leading off a reply brief with a "here's what our cause is about" is certainly a strategy. It's even a bold strategy.

Shall we dig deeper, Cotton?

"We live in a democratic republic in which the Vice President, who will more often than not be a candidate in the election, has the sole and unchallengeable power to decide who wins the election" is a hellofa take.

Much of Twitter is misunderstanding Bruce Castor’s speech at Trump’s impeachment trial because much of Twitter is absolutely NOT Bruce Castor’s audience.

This man is on it. He knows he only needs to keep *over 1/3 with him. Then more so, he needs the American nation on his side.

Honestly, Twitter misunderstanding what Bruce Castor is doing right now is like Twitter misunderstanding how Brexit & Trump won back then

“Why fear the people who were smart enough to pick you?” (*Listen*)

And yes, ditto for David Schoen. He knows who his audience is.

And he’s on target.

Two different audiences
1) Castor: public opinion
2) Schoen: the law

Oooooh, he held up the Red book. OUCH 😖😆