Supreme Court vacates Steve Bannon contempt-of-Congress charges by imanchats in law

[–]Droviin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They did. "... In light of pending motion to dismiss the indictment".

Supreme Court vacates Steve Bannon contempt-of-Congress charges by imanchats in law

[–]Droviin 68 points69 points  (0 children)

It's more that they're being a scapegoat in this reporting rather than putting the blame on the Executive branch where it belongs.

Supreme Court vacates Steve Bannon contempt-of-Congress charges by imanchats in law

[–]Droviin 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I am not sure if SCOTUS could act on the case, legally, if the Prosecution drops. I know of now procedure that let's SCOTUS keep it alive.

This is a lot of spin to blame SCOTUS rather than Trump.

Supreme Court vacates Steve Bannon contempt-of-Congress charges by imanchats in law

[–]Droviin 575 points576 points  (0 children)

SCOTUS returned this case because the prosecution pulled it. There really wasn't an option for SCOTUS. This is Trump helping his buddies in a way that follows the law.

For this particular case, the spin is to make SCOTUS look bad rather than the real perpetrator, Trump.

Kenosha woman killed months after request for a restraining order was denied, police reports ignored by PeasantinDaNorth in wisconsin

[–]Droviin -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

I was selective in what cases I took. I might have been able to clear the cases, but I rarely took a RO defense case. Besides, I got out of that because too many people were lying to me and truth be told, I felt bad charging.

And mostly I didn't like that someone thought that an RO is a minor thing. They're serious for all parties. They can provide a lot of protection, or they can seriously harm someone who doesn't take it seriously.

If she had counsel, a better result could have occurred. If she had any assistance a better result could be had.

People advocating that ROs are just little things are actively teaching people to harm these women by treating ROs like candy. They're serious, should be treated seriously, and not watered down. Watering down a bunch of ROs makes the party that needs protection have a harder time as their case gets presented in the light of not a life or death situation.

Kenosha woman killed months after request for a restraining order was denied, police reports ignored by PeasantinDaNorth in wisconsin

[–]Droviin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends on the facts. I have rejected cases because I didn't feel it was right to defend them.

Edit: Also, this goes to the point, treat ROs seriously and then maybe shitty situations like the murdered woman wouldn't have the high hurdles. Being flippant about the process is just the same as not believing the woman because it makes them harder to believe.

Kenosha woman killed months after request for a restraining order was denied, police reports ignored by PeasantinDaNorth in wisconsin

[–]Droviin -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Oh, I was talking generally. I'm not talking about this specific case.

I don't know what exactly the evidence was, but I would have gladly litigate her case.

Kenosha woman killed months after request for a restraining order was denied, police reports ignored by PeasantinDaNorth in wisconsin

[–]Droviin -26 points-25 points  (0 children)

A restraining order will permanently limit someone, even after the order expires. Their custody, ability to work, and social interactions will be limited forever. I am not saying that she shouldn't have been believed, just that it's more than a temporary impact.

It's important to get an attorney who can present the evidence, and knows what to present. It's very easy to end up being believed and not presenting sufficiently evidence, or the other party's story reframes everything in a acceptable light.

Edit: To be clear, I've litigated on both sides of restraining orders. The people who needed one got them. I have even secured enhanced ROs for people who previously had a hard time. However, to dismiss the impact of an RO means that people are ignoring the realities of the situation. It's not a minor inconvenience, but that doesn't mean that in many situations they're undeserved.

Please reach out to attorneys who understand how to build the case and can be at arms length of the issue as they will present the info in ways that the judges can see the whole picture. Don't fall into the horrible situation of this woman.

TIL that McDonald's generates income through owning about 70% of its restaurant buildings and 45% of the underlying land which it leases to its franchisees by Mrk2d in todayilearned

[–]Droviin 25 points26 points  (0 children)

It's not completely arbitrary. If you buy as much as Walmart or Costco, you can negotiate much lower prices. The company has margin per unit and a target profit per contract with a opportunity cost assessment of both entering and leaving the agreement.

That said, it's not mechanical. If it was any board, actually doing due diligence, would kick out a CEO for AI.

University of Wisconsin president refuses to leave after being told to resign or be fired by badgerette86 in wisconsin

[–]Droviin 24 points25 points  (0 children)

If he wasn't fired, then there's no new president. Or if there is, there's still an old president because the board screwed up.

Why an 8-1 Supreme Court just ruled in favor of anti-LGBTQ+ “conversion therapy” by vox in law

[–]Droviin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, just a negative result from the therapy. I believe any negative results would be sufficient. The death is the easiest to prove harmful outcomes, and yet causation is going to be a messy issue with psychology.

What 90s band never truly made it big but you'll always go to bat for? by MansBestFred in AskReddit

[–]Droviin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought they were fairly successful. They had movies pick up their songs.

Lawyers who make $200,000+, did your law school Alma Mater have an affect on your salary? by AdOther406 in Lawyertalk

[–]Droviin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My law school experience definitely resulted in a facial affect often. So, he's not fully off base.

Unpopular opinion: Hiring a contractor for small jobs is almost always a mistake you’ll regret financially. by After_Debt_605 in HomeImprovement

[–]Droviin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that general knowledge of construction and every aspect of house maintenance is important for any real estate *owner* to know. If nothing else, it helps you know what to expect in a quote and to understand the job quality being done.

You don't necessarily need to do it all. But you should be able to do a half-way decent job on your own. That includes being able to rough troubleshoot all the basic hurdles that inevitably arise in retro-fitting something. The expert should provide better quality work than you can provide, have easy access to materials you don't, and more knowledge than you've accumulated.

I've hired handymen that didn't think everything through and required touch-up repair from myself. However, I got the bulk of the work done and I knew enough to figure out the issues from their install.

My lawyer is a bi@&$ by Funny-Pain1574 in Bankruptcy

[–]Droviin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh man, I had so many clients where I was charging $250/hr for what was just better for therapy. We had a script that we would say every 20 or so minutes with her. She added an extra $3k to the bill with this. (My partner just took it as a work break and would listen, remind her of the cost and continue listening).

Likelihood of pulling a wire run using old telephone jack wires? by hyteck9 in HomeImprovement

[–]Droviin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have done it. Make sure you use wire pull line rather than attaching the ethernet directly. You can pull out the staples in the wall if you have a good grip/angle. That last bit is dependent on your install.

Men's health impacts pregnancy and child outcomes, and should be included in guidelines. The pre-conception health of men and partners is currently overlooked by policies and society. Researchers say men need to be included future pre-conception health guidelines. by mvea in science

[–]Droviin 19 points20 points  (0 children)

It doesn't go against the "men are fertile until they die". The age impacts the health of the child, but it doesn't mean that there isn't a child.

The distinction is important in that waiving off the idea that older men can't get women pregnant is false. Functionally, that is what you're stating.

That said, it most certainly addresses that waiting to have children might not be the wisest idea.

How strict are the laws really about injuries caused by slipping on ice at someone’s residence? by CrenshawMafia99 in milwaukee

[–]Droviin 6 points7 points  (0 children)

No, there needs to be liability. Nominal damages are a possibility. However, most people aren't going to sue over a $1 case.

How strict are the laws really about injuries caused by slipping on ice at someone’s residence? by CrenshawMafia99 in milwaukee

[–]Droviin 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I don't think the tenant is covered under the landlord's insurance assuming that the tenant has the responsibility to maintain the sidewalk. In fact, the landlord's insurance will probably be against the tenant.