A Simple lie is often desired above a complex truth. Newton was much easier to understand than was Einstein.
Republicans and Democrats have cited Wong as binding precedent; like the Republican Attorney General of Indiana in Ankeny v. Daniels
Citing Ankeny is an automatic slap across the nose with a rolled up newspaper. I would be EMBARRASSED to go near that piece of crap. You lose competency points in my mind from stooping to that.
or Obama’s Democrat attorney in Georgia who cited Wong in his brief but then nearly blew his case by getting indignant like a two year old and refusing to show up for trial.
Yet magically, it didn't matter. What ought to have been a slam dunk automatic finding for plaintiff became the victim of an Advocate Judge.
And you wonder why we should respect a system that ignores any rule when it feels like it?
The Courts disgust me. They are vile, and need to be ripped out of the Ground and replanted. They worship sophistry, and are ugly to people who value truth and logic.
And you think citing them will play a role in convincing me of something?
You sure do like your non-sequiturs, Galileo, Roe and Wong Kim Ark, huh? Wow.
Analogies. A distinction of which you are apparently unfamiliar.
A "non Sequitur" is more along the lines of "I can't drive because Germans eat ice cream. " Just look at any one of Jeff's arguments for other examples.
I guess you were unaware or forgot that in the Georgia ballot challenge trial where Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski refused to participate, Judge Michael Mahili was ready to issue a default judgement as a penalty but the plaintiffs’ attorneys begged the judge to not issue a default judgement and to conduct a trial on the merits. Judge Mahili acceded to the plaintiffs’ wishes and the plaintiffs’ lost on the merits.