tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post8633555602476983193..comments2023-10-28T08:02:44.565-05:00Comments on illusory tenant: Walker judicial team brings the Gableman defenseillusory tenanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-55472257530820592472011-07-08T14:07:01.421-05:002011-07-08T14:07:01.421-05:00Maybe they meant "Time Lord Tennant Law."...Maybe they meant "Time Lord Tennant Law." That would be an exciting area of practice.Blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13331032307138903409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-38332945704072667422011-07-08T12:50:47.809-05:002011-07-08T12:50:47.809-05:00I'll try to scrounge it up in my travels.I'll try to scrounge it up in my travels.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-19054078721763392362011-07-08T12:48:59.396-05:002011-07-08T12:48:59.396-05:00Ah, no big deal. Just curious.Ah, no big deal. Just curious.gnarlytrombonenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-26352101363409500312011-07-08T12:31:43.147-05:002011-07-08T12:31:43.147-05:00I can't find it at the moment but I know I had...I can't find it at the moment but I know <a href="http://illusorytenant.blogspot.com/2010/03/quote-of-day-ii.html" rel="nofollow">I had it at one point</a> (might have a hard copy here somewhere).illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-77421892981617417092011-07-08T11:59:26.756-05:002011-07-08T11:59:26.756-05:00IT, is Gableman's motion for Crook's recus...IT, is Gableman's motion for Crook's recusal available anywhere?gnarlytrombonenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-8802904188706892642011-07-08T10:58:13.211-05:002011-07-08T10:58:13.211-05:00The biggest problem in Supreme Court elections is ...The biggest problem in Supreme Court elections is the corrupting influence of money. Too bad the impartial justice bill barely got a chance to work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-48266614854419019242011-07-08T10:19:56.349-05:002011-07-08T10:19:56.349-05:00And in fact each thing he said was not literally t...And in fact each thing he said was <a href="http://illusorytenant.blogspot.com/2009/11/gableman-oozes-through-loophole.html" rel="nofollow">not literally true</a>.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2506514005426983269.post-20921734150069347482011-07-08T10:14:52.780-05:002011-07-08T10:14:52.780-05:00What's disheartening is not that they defended...What's disheartening is not that they defended their client -- that's expected. It's the method they chose to use ("Each thing he said is literally true, we can't be responsible if you draw inferences from it") that is out of bounds. Lawyers are expected to advocate for their clients, but their argument was the least common denominator of ethics.Brianehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01616494058636881575noreply@blogger.com