The Many Faces of US Politics...

[Oraisteach]

Google Harvardlawreview.org

[Eamonnca1]

Evening, everyone. Here is today's conservative bait:



Take it away, Fox. Standing by for your head to explode in 5-4-3-2-1...

[seafoid]

Evening, everyone. Here is today's conservative bait:



Take it away, Fox. Standing by for your head to explode in 5-4-3-2-1...

The GOP spent so much energy on the birth cert yet when Trump came along he stole the Base unopposed.

[Eamonnca1]

Donald Trump has been sued for sexual assault of a 13 year old girl. Here's the filing:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits#fullscreen?platform=hootsuite

Mainstream media doesn't seem to be picking it up, which is interesting.

[muppet]

J70.....Obama became the editor of the Harvard Law Review without ever having published a single article......not one singular solitary article....stone cold affirmative action hire. 

He's no more a constitutional law scholar than I am....his hiring in Chicago was a politically motivated affirmative action hire

Ah Whitey, you have it all backwards. 

Moat people write anonymously for the Harvard Law Review in their first year there. And for very good reason.

Most expect to go on and be successful and don't want such articles coming back to haunt them. And that would apply to less high profile jobs than President.

Despite the above, one article, on the right of the foetus (see what I mean?) has since been attributed to Obama.

Do you have any credible source to back that up...I've read extensively on the topic and that's the first I've ever heard of anyone submitting articles anonymously to the HLW.

http://harvardlawreview.org/about/

...All student writing is unsigned. This policy reflects the fact that many members of the Review besides the author make a contribution to each published piece....

http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2010/07/anonymity-of-notes-in-the-harvard-law-review.html

TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2010

Anonymity of Notes in the Harvard Law Review
6a00e54fd2d5af883400e55206f8788834-800wi As is the case with many student-edited law journals, members of the Harvard Law Review may write articles – called "notes" – for publication. But unlike most other student-edited law journals, the Harvard Law Review has a peculiar policy of publishing these articles anonymously.

http://law.fsu.libanswers.com/a.php?qid=29481 [Q & A explaining how to cite an unsigned article]

...This "note" in the Harvard Law Review is student-written and anonymous. In the journal's "about" page online, they state in the second to last paragraph that "All student writing is unsigned..."

https://theheartofbigbrother.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/part-2-harvard-law-review-anonymous-arguments-against-the-4th-amendment/

As for the unsigned Note in the HLR, these are pieces of student writing are a normal part of the educational process that is membership in the review. Anonymity has always been the norm for these pieces. The reason supposedly is that the students are insufficiently formed professionally to have a signed piece published under their name, at least not one that goes through the Note review processed, which assesses them as student papers, rather than the Article review process, which assesses them as faculty or mature independent pieces. Other law schools have moved away from publishing these as unsigned, but not the HLR. Neither the Articles nor the unsigned Notes, in particular not the Notes, represent anything like a consensus or generally accepted view even of the set of students then-working on the review, much less of the Harvard Law School more generally. The Note you have identified is a piece of student writing that does not represent the views of anyone other than its author, likely a second or third year student. If the Dean at the time would have tried to influence that piece in any way, it would have been utterly unacceptable as a matter of academic freedom or the pedagogy behind having student-editors in law journals. Imputing the views of a student Note to every graduate of the Harvard Law School would strike most alumni as bizarre. It provides not more insight into the mind of any of the HLS alums who are presently on the supreme court than it does into the minds of other alums like William Brennan or Ralph Nader, or, for that matter, me. I completely agree that there are real political issues we need to address arising from the national security establishment's expansion. But I don't think an unsigned student Note sheds much light on how we got here or what we need to do to get out.

[muppet]

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/05/politics/donald-trump-saddam-hussein-iraq-terrorism/

Raleigh, North Carolina (CNN)Donald Trump on Tuesday once again expressed his preference for keeping dictators in power in the Middle East.

While acknowledging that Saddam Hussein "was a bad guy," Trump praised the former Iraqi dictator's efficient killing of "terrorists" -- despite the fact that Iraq was listed as a state sponsor of terrorism during Hussein's time in power.

Trump, who supported the Iraq War before the invasion and in the early months of the war, said the U.S. "shouldn't have destabilized" Iraq before pivoting to praising Hussein.

"He was a bad guy -- really bad guy. But you know what? He did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn't read them the rights. They didn't talk. They were terrorists. Over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism," Trump said.

[screenexile]

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump  7h7 hours ago
I don't think the voters will forget the rigged system that allowed Crooked Hillary to get away with "murder." Come November 8, she's out!

"murder"

Classic Donald 

[fearbrags]

http://www.newstalk.com/Donald-Trump-accused-of-statutory-rape-assault-and-battery-against-13yearold-girl

[muppet]

http://www.newstalk.com/Donald-Trump-accused-of-statutory-rape-assault-and-battery-against-13yearold-girl

He [Saddam] killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn't read them the rights. They didn't talk. They were terrorists.

I wonder if Donald will want his rights now?

[foxcommander]

Evening, everyone. Here is today's conservative bait:



Take it away, Fox. Standing by for your head to explode in 5-4-3-2-1...

Some say he's still alive Eamon.

[whitey]

J70.....Obama became the editor of the Harvard Law Review without ever having published a single article......not one singular solitary article....stone cold affirmative action hire. 

He's no more a constitutional law scholar than I am....his hiring in Chicago was a politically motivated affirmative action hire

Ah Whitey, you have it all backwards. 

Moat people write anonymously for the Harvard Law Review in their first year there. And for very good reason.

Most expect to go on and be successful and don't want such articles coming back to haunt them. And that would apply to less high profile jobs than President.

Despite the above, one article, on the right of the foetus (see what I mean?) has since been attributed to Obama.

Do you have any credible source to back that up...I've read extensively on the topic and that's the first I've ever heard of anyone submitting articles anonymously to the HLW.

http://harvardlawreview.org/about/

...All student writing is unsigned. This policy reflects the fact that many members of the Review besides the author make a contribution to each published piece....

http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2010/07/anonymity-of-notes-in-the-harvard-law-review.html

TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2010

Anonymity of Notes in the Harvard Law Review
6a00e54fd2d5af883400e55206f8788834-800wi As is the case with many student-edited law journals, members of the Harvard Law Review may write articles – called "notes" – for publication. But unlike most other student-edited law journals, the Harvard Law Review has a peculiar policy of publishing these articles anonymously.

http://law.fsu.libanswers.com/a.php?qid=29481 [Q & A explaining how to cite an unsigned article]

...This "note" in the Harvard Law Review is student-written and anonymous. In the journal's "about" page online, they state in the second to last paragraph that "All student writing is unsigned..."

https://theheartofbigbrother.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/part-2-harvard-law-review-anonymous-arguments-against-the-4th-amendment/

As for the unsigned Note in the HLR, these are pieces of student writing are a normal part of the educational process that is membership in the review. Anonymity has always been the norm for these pieces. The reason supposedly is that the students are insufficiently formed professionally to have a signed piece published under their name, at least not one that goes through the Note review processed, which assesses them as student papers, rather than the Article review process, which assesses them as faculty or mature independent pieces. Other law schools have moved away from publishing these as unsigned, but not the HLR. Neither the Articles nor the unsigned Notes, in particular not the Notes, represent anything like a consensus or generally accepted view even of the set of students then-working on the review, much less of the Harvard Law School more generally. The Note you have identified is a piece of student writing that does not represent the views of anyone other than its author, likely a second or third year student. If the Dean at the time would have tried to influence that piece in any way, it would have been utterly unacceptable as a matter of academic freedom or the pedagogy behind having student-editors in law journals. Imputing the views of a student Note to every graduate of the Harvard Law School would strike most alumni as bizarre. It provides not more insight into the mind of any of the HLS alums who are presently on the supreme court than it does into the minds of other alums like William Brennan or Ralph Nader, or, for that matter, me. I completely agree that there are real political issues we need to address arising from the national security establishment's expansion. But I don't think an unsigned student Note sheds much light on how we got here or what we need to do to get out.

Ahh..I think I get it....the Republicans were trying to goad him into releasing something they could then use against him.


Would one not reasonably expect that such an esteemed scribe would have left some type of a "written" footprint post Harvard, especially seeing as  he was a constitutional law professor in Chicago???

[heganboy]

Such as your own esteemed footprint?

[dec]

Some say he's still alive Eamon.

Just the conspiracy loons

[whitey]

Such as your own esteemed footprint?

Blah

[heganboy]

my thoughts exactly!

anyhooooo

interesting news for the GOP today:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/anti-donald-trump-forces-see-convention-coup-as-within-reach-1467839099