I was a big supporter of free market healthcare and letting insurance companies sell over state lines. Then I heard Trump try to defend it and now I’m a communist

They should really split the list into people who are unendorsing vs. people who never endorsed. For example, I know Jeff Flake has been VERY critical of Trump from the beginning

I mean, Cosby is right that this case has been tried in the media, and that it might be hard for him to get a fair trial. However, the solution to that is usually to go somewhere where you can find an impartial jury. Cosby is nationally known, so no luck there. They’ll presumably end up with a jury of people who…

No, Cosby’s rights shouldn’t be violated. That’s because we have this thing called a justice system, and defendants’ rights still matter even if their crimes violated the rights of victims (which, shockingly, is many crimes)

Countries around the world have the pill available over the counter, and things are just fine. If you want to know why doctors REALLY oppose these measures, just remember that when you go to the doctor to get your prescription, the doctor charges a ton of money for the meeting

Duty is an essential element of negligence claims. When you sue somebody for negligence, you claim that the defendant 1) owed you a duty of care (to do or not do something), 2) breached that duty, and the breach 3) proximately caused your 4) legally recognizable injury.

Because they’re better than him? Because demonstrating in the starkest terms that they’re better than the racists is a time-honored civil rights tradition?

Wow, this might be one of the weakest Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress claims I’ve ever seen, so the lawyer might have just thrown it in there to get more leverage to try to settle. That being said, any semi-competent defense lawyer knows that claim is going to be dismissed, and the case will actually be…

I think you’re right that we should be aware of social truths, which also leads to the realization that our society will never come close to achieving a 100% conviction rate for people who commit rape (nor should it try to), and that it’s incredibly important to not neglect other avenues of combating sexual assault.

Except this defense isn’t unique to rape cases. The defense attorney’s duty in EVERY case is to discredit the prosecution’s witnesses (which almost always includes the victim in non-murder cases). In every case wth witnesses, the defense attorney must attempt to show that the witnesses are either lying or mistaken. …

1) While that’s who he was referring to, the majority of rape cases are defended by public defenders (who defend the majority of all cases). So any change to how rape law works will affect public defenders the most.

As someone who’s spent some time in a public defender’s office, I can guarantee you that judges hate our clients even if they’re charged with rape.

I think the actual effect of this is going to be much less noticeable than people think. It’s difficult to get a conviction (or to avoid getting the case dismissed) when you’ve got 10-year-old non-DNA evidence. Memories get worse and witnesses become unavailable to testify. That’s one of the big reasons why…

It’s a....weird place. It loves Donald Trump.... but also loves Janet Napolitano. Our politics make little sense

It’s a county election, so I don’t think there’s any gerrymandering. It’s a combination of voter satisfaction (Arpaio supporters are RABID supporters) and the fact that he raises $10 million thanks to out of state contributions while his competitors usually raise somewhere around $30k

He’s been condemned by both the Arizona Republic and the Goldwater Institute, you’d think that would mean something in Maricopa County.

I worked for Maricopa County this summer, which meant I couldn’t disparage him online.

Maricopa County voter here. Some of us are trying to vote him out, I promise!

Yeah me too. An informed electorate would make things very different...

Johnson is more interventionist than you give him credit for, explicitly saying he IS willing to intervene for humanitarian reasons, although he is broadly skeptical that it is usually a good idea. http://www.weeklystandard.com/yes-gary-johns…