It's a follow up from last week, answering some of the questions and comments I got.
In response to people telling me that I am overestimating the ability of people to decode legal news, I attempt to prove this hypothesis:
If people stop listening to legal pundits speculating, they wouldn’t feel confused and they wouldn’t think they need help from lawyers decoding the news.
Thanks Teri. Good tonic for the week ahead. It's been fascinating to contrast the testimony in the Trump election fraud trial with the TV pundit analysis. Your timely advice that we make every effort to distinguish hard facts from opinion and speculation is going to be put to the acid test over the next few days.
One thing I didn't see mentioned as a contributing cause of the slow going is the two clerks resigning in mid-term. Do you think that was a significant part of the delay since October?
@Teri_Kanefield "...with the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) and the Presidential Records Act (PRA) so she’s on a steep learning curve. These are complex pieces of litigation. "
I believe you meant to use the word "legislation" rather than the word "litigation"
Add comment