Mystal now synonymous with "left-wing idiot"

 

 

The left-wing magazine The Nation took it from there, calling on the Democrat-controlled House to impeach Kavanaugh. Even if impeachment were constitutionally possible for pre-confirmation actions, Republican control of the Senate would make it a pointless but potentially disastrous gesture.

                                                   

But the author of the article, Elie Mystal, was undeterred: “I know some Democrats will say that bringing charges against Brett Kavanaugh—impeaching him—is pointless. Some "Democrats insist on living in a country where nothing is ‘worth it’ unless Republicans are likely to agree. I refuse to live in that world. If I waited for Republican approval before I tried something, I’d be shining shoes at Grand Central, as would befit my station.”

— Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court by Mollie Ziegler Hemingway 

Georgia bar goes after Lin Wood's license

 The Georgia bar is less than amused with Lin Wood's post-election litigation and related press statements.

It is not only looking into Wood's continued mental competency to practice law but the implications of Wood filing serial, meritless lawsuits in multiple states to overturn the 2020 election, The Hill newspaper reports.

Georgia bar officials are also examining a few of Wood's more inflammatory statements:

The complaint also cites Wood’s numerous inflammatory comments, including calling then-Vice President Pence a “TRAITOR, a Communist Sympathizer & a Child Molester” and that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts conspired to assassinate the late Justice Antonin Scalia. It also references his promotion of conspiracy theories that no one died in the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, which he claimed without evidence was carried out by “Antifa dressed as Trump people.”

The insanity angle seems plausible at this point. 

Google now gives racists a way to avoid black owned businesses

 Search results based on race? Really?

At least he wasn't Toobin'

 https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjpmgp/i-am-not-a-cat-lawyer-using-zoom-cat-filter-tells-judge

 

If you can't eat your plant-based meat substitute, you can't have any gluten free pudding.

I rarely have much interest for anything the New Yorker publishes these days, but this Q&A with San Francisco's School Board president, Gabriela Lopez, is fascinating, to say the least. As you may have heard, the board recently voted to rename a number of its schools due to their allegedly problematic namesakes, such as Paul Revere, Abraham Lincoln, and even good old Diane Feinstein.

Whether you think the name changes are warranted (and whether you think it's even an appropriate subject to which to devote time and resources, in light of ongoing school closures), Ms. Lopez's comments are remarkable not so much for their substantive content, if any, but for their vapid expression. Her answers are a bizarre melange of bureaucratic platitudes about "processes," New Agey happy-talk about "experiences" and "conversations," and authoritarian defensiveness over whether being factually accurate is tantamount to "discrediting" the hard work done by the committee responsible for the renaming. It's all topped with a thick layer of Millennial rhetorical nerfing, e.g., lots of for-mes and I-understand-buts. I have not done sufficient research to determine whether Ms. Lopez, 30, is herself a product of an American public school system in the 21st Century. But I know the New Yorker does not often publish interviews with news-makers in question-and-answer format, unless the exact words are worth parsing for one reason or another.

I've pasted a sample here, but the whole interview must be read to fully appreciate the absurdism. Though I cannot confirm that Ms. Lopez speaks with the famous San Francisco "uptalk," it helps if you imagine her every sentence ending with a question mark.

[Q:] So none of the errors that I read to you about previous entries made you worried that maybe this was done in a slightly haphazard way?

[A:] No, because I’ve already shared with you that the people who have contributed to this process are also part of a community that is taking it as seriously as we would want them to. And they’re contributing through diverse perspectives and experiences that are often not included, and that we need to acknowledge.

[Q:] I’m not quite sure what that means when we are talking about things that did or didn’t happen.

[A:] I think what you’re pointing to and what I keep hearing is you’re trying to undermine the work that has been done through this process. And I’m moving away from the idea that it was haphazard.

 

 

Quote of the day from Trump’s lawyers, Bruce Castor and David Schoen

 

“Insufficient evidence exists upon which a reasonable jurist could conclude that the 45th president’s statements were accurate or not, and he therefore denies they were false,” Castor and Schoen wrote, adding that Trump “denies” it is false to say he won the election “in a landslide.”

Link