Nick may be as much of a moron as he's trying to sound like but I think he'll talk a big game until it's hopeless, then take any decent non-jail deal. This has some serious humor value too because you know he'll be seething up a storm and people will constantly taunt him about pussying out and licking the jackboots.
I've made this short edit:I love how Nick was kvetching on stream about how “this was NOT a motion to suppress” and yet this was one of the first things out of his lawyer’s mouth.
View attachment 6350398
Consider this: weebs were the least degenerate group of fans Nick ever had.
I agree with you, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibilities that Nick will go down kicking and screaming on this. With how far out his way he has gone to put the spotlight down on the situation and kick the hornet's nest with basically every public official related to this matter, I think he might be delusional enough to belief his own hype. Plus, the State may not want to give Nick a good deal if he's publicly claiming they are corrupt liars at every opportunity, so it's questionable if the State would give him a deal he would accept.
Wickard v. Filburn did not "create" the dormant commerce clause, and it's not even a dormant commerce clause case. The dormant commerce clause dates all the way back to Gibbons v. Odgen in 1824 if you're taking about in concept, and at the latest 1873 in Reading Railroad v. Penn. for when it was first explicitly applied. How about you stop trying to teach people when you know jack shit about constitutional law? So insufferable.
I know the thread concensus is that Nick is taking it to trial, but I still think he's just trying to get it all thrown out. If he can't, he'll get whatever he can thrown out and use that as the starting point for a deal. The worst case scenario in Nick's mind will be to have all his shit dragged out into public, including redacted bodycam. He'll cope about pleading being what's best for his family etc.
They were there to get information for gossiping, any legal info was secondary. A legal transcript isn't going to go into detail about how Ralph smelled and the shape of his baldspot, how Nick looked distraught, and how the rest of the Qover looked like they were using their yoga-class best instead of anything resembling something you'd wear to court.
If I am being perfectly honest, I think the least degenerate would probably be whatever relatively normal-ass people he had that just wanted colorful trial commentary for Depp and Rittenhouse. I don't think all, or even most, of that audience was degenerate. At least I hope not.
I can't follow this thread all day - when did Nick appeal to vore fetishists?
Yep. Any story involving an ounce of cocaine isn't going to have the President of Kiwanas and the local Women's League in it.
It's a plain old vanilla Commerce Clause case. I think it expands that authority well beyond what was ever originally intended, for reasons most simply articulated by Clarence Thomas in his dissent in Gonzales v. Raich.
I'm from the UK, our terminology is different but means effectively the same thing - so you'll have to forgive me for getting the meanings mixed up.
Even when his daughter was found to have consumed cocaine under his care, I knew it was wheat that was the real problem! THE GUBMENT TOOK OUR WHEAT
That wasn’t referring to your comment, but a different comment that’s not even worth going over anymore, if it ever was. That wasn’t about what you said, but about part of how the topic started & was happening concurrently with all the definitions. I got what you are saying & was commiserating but that clearly didn’t come through.
Yeah, I probably should. I’m really a bit MATI. My bullshit meter is running low. I’m getting sick of a lot of repetitive & self important shit ITT not to mention how fresh news isn’t even posted here anymore. Mos def time for a change of scenery for a while.
There's no real logical connection between Nick's griping about federal Commerce Clause authority and his prosecution under state law. States have been able to outlaw drugs within their authority since time immemorial.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Blaming Ty is retarded. Chupp is an absolutely blisteringly incompetent judge to the upteenth degree and is a man who should've never been placed in a robe. He's a terrible judge who deserves to be fired if it were at all possible. He did not do his job and just looked for every excuse to throw away any case that touched his desk so he can go golfing. He did not give a shit.
This isn't correct, the act of taking drugs is a crime in 12 states. This is a great example of Nick being busy enjoying Blue State laxity while posturing as a Red Team supporter.
His biggest selling point is his expertise. Facing 20+ years in prison destroys that. Also consider that with no real interesting cases, that makes him have to use his Dick Masterson impression, and hes not very good at that.
wouldn't that mean no one can be called as a witness if they claim self-incrimination?
