Or if we expand it out to Kennedys in general, plane rides as well!

Well, sure, but he’s a 78 year old human being who did things the way he did them for decades. Unless he was being corrected for something abjectly evil, he, and pretty much everyone else, are going to rationalize away things in ways that mean they can look back on their life and think they weren’t terrible people.

I think one thing it would be fair to say about Joe Biden is his understanding of “norms” is developed from the perspective of a male who’s always been in a position of privilege and power.

Were there any kind of rides that it was safe to take with Ted Kennedy?

I know that rich people don’t necessarily check their bank accounts and investment portfolios every day, but it certainly seems.... questionable to decide to dump hundreds of thousands of dollars of stock in one day,

Yeah. I would think most attorneys who aren’t complete morons, who have any experience dealing with clients, would have the good sense to adapt, regardless of their own sensibilities, but the world is full of morons, and some of them manage to back their way into jobs at Big Law.

Are you addressing what happens if they end up meeting with clients who won’t wear masks and will react negatively to their outside counsel wearing a mask?

This is the way.

I wonder how much of this relates to work culture of professions dominated by dudes. My own discussions with highly educated genuinely whip smart white collar co-workers confirm that this isn’t just a thing with disaffected uneducated white guys from rural Alabama named Cletus. It’s a problem with masculine culture,…

If we’re approaching this neutrally, a co-equal branch of government (as Congress is to the President) should have more authority to subpoena documents than a lesser one (the DA of New York county).

That court said it to the tune of 9-0, with Elena Kagan writing the opinion. What the opinion specifically said is that federal prosecutors can’t charge people with fraud using fairly abstract reasoning to assert their conduct met the test of being intended to obtain money or property. The court repeatedly said that…

I think it does if you’re appealing more specifically to their self-interest in continuing to exist.

It’s fair to say that this is a lot more clear cut section of federal law. There are few extraneous details and no real room for exceptions to be interpreted differently.

I imagine that it’s commonly a combination of it meeting some of the elements of crimes like “inciting a riot” or “disturbing the peace”,

Owning it earns you more respect, I will grant you that. 

While many of us tuned into the Senate hearing to watch Dr. Anthony Fauci go full Denzel at the end of Training Day and threaten to put cases on all you motherfuckers

So is the argument here “We have to be fascist because these dudes are trying to infect each other with a deadly virus to get out of jail?”

I went into quarantine and woke up in 1993!

The reason I love the untrendy anonymous sites is that they are masters of SEO.

I’ll agree with the bad marketing part, because anything related to “being horny” goes without saying in a game like that.