Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RobGMN" data-source="post: 8885425" data-attributes="member: 683408">Inciting insurrection is &quot;assisting&quot; or &quot;engaging&quot; in it. Do you think incitement is in no way assisting or engaging?You think bills from MaraLago the Secret Service, charging them for rooms where Trump&#039;s detail styed, it &quot;interpretation&quot;?Yeah, I&#039;m afraid that whether he was POTUS or not mattered:&quot;In his <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-330/164660/20201223145425828_20-330%20Trump%20v.%20CREW%20Cert%20Reply%20FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">reply brief</a>, then-Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall argued that the justices should wait to act on Trump’s petition until after the inauguration and then vacate the 2nd Circuit’s ruling with instructions to dismiss the case as moot so that it would not serve as precedent for future cases – a move known as <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/2008/06/practice-pointer-mootness-and-munsingwear-vacatur/" target="_blank">Munsingwear vacatur</a>.&quot;Dismissed as moot because he was no longer POTUS.So, **** the businesses that lost out on the income form having the Secret Service be housed and fed at their properties, since Trump could stay &quot;home&quot; and get paid for it. Cool.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RobGMN, post: 8885425, member: 683408"] Inciting insurrection is "assisting" or "engaging" in it. Do you think incitement is in no way assisting or engaging? You think bills from MaraLago the Secret Service, charging them for rooms where Trump's detail styed, it "interpretation"? Yeah, I'm afraid that whether he was POTUS or not mattered: [I]"In his [URL='https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-330/164660/20201223145425828_20-330%20Trump%20v.%20CREW%20Cert%20Reply%20FINAL.pdf']reply brief[/URL], then-Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall argued that the [U]justices should wait to act on Trump’s petition until after the inauguration[/U] and then vacate the 2nd Circuit’s ruling with instructions to dismiss the case as moot so that it would not serve as precedent for future cases – a move known as [URL='https://www.scotusblog.com/2008/06/practice-pointer-mootness-and-munsingwear-vacatur/'][I]Munsingwear[/I] vacatur[/URL]."[/I] Dismissed as moot because he was no longer POTUS. So, **** the businesses that lost out on the income form having the Secret Service be housed and fed at their properties, since Trump could stay "home" and get paid for it. Cool. [/QUOTE]

Verification