Jump to content

ChuckNorrisActionJeans

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    1672
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ChuckNorrisActionJeans

  1. ah the good old days when there was little to no access to contraception and also, marital rape was a-ok
  2. Nice. Would be great to hear less of the Ray Epps fed conspiracy talking point. He should sue Ted Cruz too.
  3. has a dog named Margaret Thatcher. What a douchebag.
  4. His rationale for many other vetoes was equally flaccid. I see what they did there and I like it
  5. tell it to state Dem chair Gilbert Hinojosa and his shitty (non)-strategy with Hispanics .... as they turn to the R party
  6. my guess would be that Eckhardt did not want to wait until September to get this shitshow going, but who knows.
  7. Right, I was reading that rule and wondered what the point of recusal is in this type of situation. JFC
  8. Does RFK Jr. have an actual mental illness, because it seems like it.
  9. Gah Elmo has become such a damned beating. Just a full-on conspiracy-theorist contrarian with nothing of value to say. A net-negative human being who could be doing some good in the world -- instead he's accelerating the destruction. What a waste.
  10. they may be on a different grid though? I know a friend in Longview was.
  11. I recently saw a band from Europe, and the singer's first interaction with the Austin audience was: "How do you people live here?? I would write ten albums a month because I'd never be able to go outside." Yep FML
  12. yes. He can't screw around with the venue anymore before trial. No favorable Collin Co. home trial for him -- Harris County it is. He can still appeal whether venue is proper there if convicted, however.
  13. I recommend Spanx for the midsection
  14. you didn't hear it from me, but look for something tasty to come out of the state judiciary on Paxton tomorrow
  15. Ron and Casey both have punchably smug faces. SUPER punchable. And I give her no credit and no benefit of the doubt on anything for hitching her wagon to that shitheel.
  16. This. The most accurate predictor of future behavior is past behavior. This judge already explicitly, literally ruled that Trump is entitled to special treatment. All bets are off with this hack. I'd be happy to be wrong.
  17. Flying through London next month, will visit family around England first. Then, plan to Eurostar to Paris and Amsterdam. Someone help me with "nice" places to stay in Paris and Amsterdam that won't murder my bank accounts? Or strategies on where to stay?
  18. I read this earlier, and it's an excellent overview. Perhaps some of the rurals should, I don't know, reconsider their continued votes for the dipshits who continually undermine them.
  19. all you have to do is spend a little time on Next Door to realize how full of regressive dipshits Austin is these days.
  20. everyone's been aware of his affair for forever now, and also she later drove the truck to help him evade being served in a lawsuit. She's a piece of shit enabler, so zero benefit of the doubt from me.
  21. Yep I'm interested to see him play. Unfortunately there's another opener before him that I just saw open for Sisters of Mercy and am not into. Anyway, it could be a late night.. stoked for it though.
  22. Any of you miscreants going / want to go to Clan of Xymox tonight at Elysium in Austin? My plus-one is out, so I have an extra (free) ticket.... Darkwave/goth is severely underrepresented here, but thought I'd give it a shot.
  23. A few points about the Crystal Mason case, maybe no one cares but: There was no jury. The trial was a bench trial. The judge was explicit that no knowledge of ineligibility was required. So the issue was never fully litigated and was not ruled upon. Court of Appeals said same -- knowledge not required. Court of Crim. Appeals said nah-- read the damn statute. So now it's back in the Court of Appeals to consider the issue of her knowledge. But how that's going to work, I don't understand. What is the standard of review for judging sufficiency when there was a conviction but the issue was never litigated-- de novo? And yes she signed the written oath but that's not dispositive. If she claims she didn't read or understand it (which by the way she had been released from prison AND from a halfway house), that's a credibility issue, no? Which is a matter the original fact-finder gets to assess, not an appellate court from a cold record. It would seem to me that a new trial is the proper remedy, which I guess the CoA could still say. DA's office should really drop this shit though --filled out a provisional ballot that was never counted SMDH.
×
×
  • Create New...