Dean
Flairless
Variously accused of being a hilarious insufferable reactionary post-modernist fascist neo-conservative neo-liberal conservative classical liberal critical theorist Nazi Zionist imperialist hypernationalist warmongering isolationist Jewish-Polish-Slavic-Anglo race-traitor masculine-feminine bitch-man idiosyncratic party-line Fox News boomer. No one yet has guessed a scholar, or multiple people. Add to our list of pejoratives today!
User ID: 430
Dean
Flairless
7hr ago
I think most observers would put the deathknell of Republican respectability politics closer to 2012, and the Democratic Party's campaign against Mitt Romney.
Dean
Flairless
7hr ago
He'll get taxed at a Federal level, but not a state level. The protection he gets by moving isn't from the IRS, but the CDTFA.
Dean
Flairless
7hr ago
As to why stay in Buenos Aires vs someplace in Uruguay/Chile/Paraguay/Southern Brazil, it's probably a combination of politics and (zero bias here) Buenos Aires being the best city to be in South America.
Will not dispute, 100% objective evaluation.
Anyone who disagrees can feel free to donate to an anonymous vacation fund of my choosing.
Does his being found in contempt of court factually change whether he violated a court's ruling?
If not, what purpose does the question serve other than as a deflection to addressing the claims of fact presented and disputed by gattsuru? You are certainly appealing to vague possibilities ('very rare', 'weird technicalities' 'basically every single accusation... is a misunderstanding of something by idiots'), but you're not actually disputing the claims presented by gattsuru. You're not even claiming that your language of frequency even applies to this case- even if corruption of this sort is very rare, that has no bearing on a case that can be drawing attention for being rare. It would be akin to disputing accusations of medical malpractice because most doctors don't commit medical malpractice. The appeal to statistical rarity is irrelevant if the challenge is based on a dependent rather than independent factor.
Gattsuru is making a direct position on a matter of laws and facts here. You seem to disagree. On what grounds that apply to this case? What is gattsuru's misunderstanding in this matter? What is the weird technicality that applies to this case law?
Has anyone ever responded with 'No, that was centuries before my time, and by a totally different people?'
I like me a good sectarian shittalk as much as anyone, but I've hard enough blaming people for the sins of their own fathers, let alone the sins of someone else's fathers.
More options
Context Copy link