Jump to content

TwiceHorn

Full Members
  • Posts

    37857
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by TwiceHorn

  1. Interesting on the unethical. It's illegal or unlawful because of FDA rules and laws. The most fundamental of those is that the FDA must approve medications for safety and efficacy. And that's ok. Secondarily, it must approve most manufacturing facilities for approved drugs. Ok, but we're getting a little further a field here. Where it gets fucky is that FDA also grants periods of post-approval exclusivity independent of the patent laws. That's getting downright dubious. So, as long as you are making "quality" drugs that follow the "recipe" of approved drugs in all material ways, it may be unlawful, but I don't think it's actually unethical in any grand moral sense. Maybe as a violation of pharmacist ethics, of which I am ignorant. But back to your situation, I suspect the illegality is sufficiently unclear (and their position is supported by opinion of counsel), that the whole situation is unfortunately easily characterized in a lawsuit as insubordinate/disgruntled employees rather than retaliatory action.
  2. That's where DoE functions were before 1979. Well, HEW.
  3. Well, the criminal case is not ripe for appeal and will not be until Trump is sentenced. Only then will there be a final judgment subject to appeal. I don't believe there were any interlocutory appeals.
  4. Well, if after granting POTUS, or this POTUS very strong immunity, it will at least be laughably ironic if they start cutting back everyone else's.
  5. Well, the AG normally isn't involved in prosecution, either for or against, other than to approve or disapprove certain prosecutorial decisions. The worry really is that the DOJ is the enforcement arm, mostly civil, for most of the agencies and things like civil and voting rights, etc. and it will therefore do a big fat nothing. Of course, if he runs off all the good "street level" lawyers, we'll have a problem.
  6. Prosecutors (and judges) have very strong (bigly, huuuge) immunity from civil and criminal action. Some of the shit that drove us nuts with Trump is about to prove its worth in the general case. Basically, the fact that the indictment was not dismissed, and the jury convicted, completely isolates them from civil and criminal liability.
  7. In a more rational timeline, those functions of DoE could be reassigned elsewhere in the bureaucracy, as they were prior to 1979. But not in this timeline, I'm afraid.
  8. I'm as depressed about the whole thing as anyone, but the whole mess seems so fucking inevitable in hindsight. I don't care what things you want to try to alter, the result was always going to be this, provided he was reelected. I am particularly disturbed that he won't be forced to take action to terminate the prosecutions.
  9. Sorry that's happening to you and your colleague. The first thing to look at for wrongful termination is any contract of employment, which could include an "employee handbook" or other employment terms that may not constitute or appear to be a contract in the traditional sense. You'd be looking for conditions that curtail their ability to terminate at will or without cause. The other avenue may be that this is a "retaliatory discharge" for bringing to the attention of management that they are engaged in illegal activity. But, usually those require (practically if not strictly legally), the reporting of the activity to authorities, otherwise it can be characterized as an "internal disagreement" and insubordination. In any event, you can be assured that it will be a long, agonizing process to pursue a wrongful termination claim. For more than generalized answers, you'd need to gather the materials you reference and consult with an employment discrimination lawyer.
  10. Popehat is so good.
  11. In a grotesque way, you are correct. It would be funny as fuck if we weren't talking bout the government of our country. We might hope we're going to find out how little department heads really matter in the grand scheme of things because civil servants do all the real work. But then there's that Schedule F/P2025 thing.
  12. Well, my point is, given that Garland and other sophisticated parties worried about the creation of the "weaponization" meme, which was significantly boosted if not entirely created based on Trump prosecutions, the counterbalance would have had to have been the likelihood of at least securing public trials of Trump, if not final convictions. And that likelihood was slim, and they knew that better than any of us. Turns out maybe they were onto something.
  13. There may have been one or two more public trials. Maybe. Maybe. And maybe that would have had some value, but it seems unlikely given the non-effect the NY convictions had on anything. And the federal trials would have relied solely on reporting, no cameras in courtroom. Turns out maybe you have more faith in that aspect of the justice system than even I do. And now we have this whole "weaponization of the justice system" notion running around, which is dangerous as fuck, even though highly fictitious. I have always said this wasn't going to happen on your timeframe. Even that was hopium on my part. It was entirely foreseeable and probable that it was going to go down this way if he was elected, even had he been indicted January 22, 2021. And, if the shoe goes onto the other foot, and people like Fauci are unjustly prosecuted in a real weaponization of the system, we're all going to be grateful for the delays inherent to due process.
  14. Shit, I had a cc change and my treefiddy status went away, I need to fix that. Anyway, for violent video games and music and such, even the most immature adolescent has a frame of reference for reality/non-reality and right/wrong. That is very much less true for sexual behavior and norms.
  15. As I have said, even assuming Trump was indicted on January 22, 2021, the earliest opportunity under existing laws and policies (and not feasible for a variety of reasons except in perhaps the state cases), we'd still be right where we are today, maybe with a couple of other non-final convictions, on appeal, and terminated because he won the election. Hoping for any other outcome, with an election win, was foolish. I admit that I was somewhat hopeful, but in retrospect, that was foolish. ETA: those with even greater understanding of the criminal justice system than I and other surl lawdogs probably more clearly recognized the difficulty/near impossibility of securing final convictions of an ex-President in a bit less than four years. That would include the AG and various DAGs making decisions.
  16. Ok. I'm interested because there's a dude that was a mountain bike "influencer" and racer that did good instructional videos with his girlfriend. https://www.ridemtb.com/ He got the vax and got some really weird symptoms including apparently myocarditis that destroyed his fitness, his ability to bike, his ability to make bike content, and his relationship. From the videos, he was a patient and kind soul. But, due to his misfortune, he became a tool or pawn of Covid nutbags. Sad story.
  17. I thought about adding a dryer in there somewhere. But seriously, I think porn and adolescent sexuality are a bad mix in ways more serious than other "bad influences."
  18. I might suppose that it is difficult to prove causation of, and in most cases, compensable injury (compensable meaning beyond sort of dignitary). And that's before you take into account Texas' med mal "reforms" that make it more difficult. An "ideal" med mal case has conduct falling below the standard of care that causes a serious and incapacitating physical injury, for a person at an age where their earning capacity is diminished or destroyed, preferably someone with an established potentially high earning capacity. And, with large lifetime care costs. Medical causation can be a sticky wicket in any case, but I'd imagine particularly so in psychiatric care, and a lot of the patients don't tend to meet the other criteria.
  19. Meh, he's so hysterical (Filipowski). They're withdrawing because Rudy is trying to get them to do shit that's unlawful or unethical or to make stupid sanctionable motions. There's really no such thing as incompetence in a civil case.
  20. Well, and sometimes they do talk to a girl, then brutally face fuck her, ass fuck her, and jizz in her face. It's all down hill from there.
  21. Bwahaha, he also shopped in his lats.
  22. Why is she a bad appointment, other than she's an icky trans? She's a 30-year practicing pediatrician. She was Physician General and Secretary of Health of Pennsylvania. Among other things she accomplished in PA was getting cops to carry naloxone. You can't point to anything wrong with this Assistant Secretary of Health, except that one thing. That shows you're a bit of a fuckhead.
×
×
  • Create New...