32 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

You seem to need a reminder:

Does this refresh your memory?

Sure, have you read the decison?

Here is the pdf by the way

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.693830/gov.uscourts.flsd.693830.59.0_2.pdf

17 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Sure, have you read the decison?

Here is the pdf by the way

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.693830/gov.uscourts.flsd.693830.59.0_2.pdf

So what? All this means is now you've located it. When you were asked before, you just evaporated. It is to laugh.

1 hour ago, Alan Zweibel said:

So what? All this means is now you've located it. When you were asked before, you just evaporated. It is to laugh.

Got it. You still havent read it. Maybe you should renew some subscriptions LOL

Finally some justice was done. And on the opposite end of the justice spectrum there is this.

Signs of massive GOP sponsored judicial corruption. A very broken system in America,

where votes often do not count.

A Virginia judge on Wednesday paused the certification of referendum results that would lead to redrawing the state's congressional map.

Virginians approved a measure on Tuesday to change district lines, possibly helping Democrats win control of the US House of Representatives in the midterm elections.

The court deemed the new map and the bill that triggered it unconstitutional, following a lawsuit from the Republican National Committee. The state has said it will appeal.

The state is the latest in a national redistricting race that began after President Donald Trump urged conservative states to re-examine voting maps to help Republicans keep their congressional majority.

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat, said in a statement on X that voters "pushed back against a President who claims he is 'entitled' to more Republican seats in Congress.

"As we watched other states go along with those demands without voter input, Virginians refused to let that stand. We responded the right way: at the ballot box."

Court pauses redistricting in Virginia, day after voters...

The court deemed the new map and the bill that triggered it unconstitutional, following a lawsuit from the Republican National Committee.

15 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Signs of massive GOP sponsored judicial corruption. A very broken system in America,

where votes often do not count.

A Virginia judge on Wednesday paused the certification of referendum results that would lead to redrawing the state's congressional map.

Do votes overide the US Constitution?

I thought we need to save Democracy?

7 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Got it. You still havent read it. Maybe you should renew some subscriptions LOL

Actually I did read it. Which only goes to prove that you previously hadn't. You claimed I was quoting spin. Clearly not the case. Unless of course you can point out what that spin was. Good luck with that.

6 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Do votes overide the US Constitution?

I thought we need to save Democracy?

I guess a court will soon be tossing out the Texas gerrymandering, along with the other GOP States who tried to do Trump's bidding.

It's a win for Democrats, who are a sure thing to retake the House in November, and likely the Senate, too.

7 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Signs of massive GOP sponsored judicial corruption. A very broken system in America,

where votes often do not count.

Could you please provide a detailed explanation of what you mean by massive GOP sponsored judicial corruption? Your insights would be greatly appreciated.

A personal attack has been removed

4 hours ago, Effective altruism said:

Could you please provide a detailed explanation of what you mean by massive GOP sponsored judicial corruption? Your insights would be greatly appreciated.

Both political parties regularly engage in corruption and unethical practices, that's a fact. In this particular case it does appear that the GOP was able to influence this judge's decision, was it through a cash payment? Was it through political influence? Was it through a promise of a promotion to a higher position?

It's likely we will never know, but something happened that changed his course of this outcome. And it smells very fishy. The people voted for change and the judge rejected the people's vote, sounds a bit like Thailand. Corruption!

10 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Actually I did read it. Which only goes to prove that you previously hadn't. You claimed I was quoting spin. Clearly not the case. Unless of course you can point out what that spin was. Good luck with that.

Try Pacer next time lol.

48 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Try Pacer next time lol.

Clearly a recent discovery of yours.

12 minutes ago, Wingate said:

I guess a court will soon be tossing out the Texas gerrymandering, along with the other GOP States who tried to do Trump's bidding.

Is there a case, Im not following it deeply....

11 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Clearly a recent discovery of yours.

Sure. 1989. LOL.

Clearly you had no idea it existed since I humiliated you over your lies and failure to read a document you could have gotten immediately. If you had been registered and open minded enough to read documents critically perhaps we wouldn't have been subjected to your constant bs spewing someone elses opinion.

31 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Is there a case, Im not following it deeply....

Sure. 1989. LOL.

Clearly you had no idea it existed since I humiliated you over your lies and failure to read a document you could have gotten immediately. If you had been registered and open minded enough to read documents critically perhaps we wouldn't have been subjected to your constant bs spewing someone elses opinion.

I had asked you to provide a link. Then I stated that you hadn't read it. And neither time did you reply. And as you're demonstrating now, your modus operandi is not to politely reply when someone says they don't know something. You and your 5555s. But instead of replying, you bugged out. Vanished. Evaporated.

And it's not at all clear that even now you've read the thing. You refuse to say what is wrong with my citations and take from journalists covering the story which you characterized as "spin.".

Anyway, out of the abundant goodness of my heart, I am going to take advantage of this teachable moment to share with you a link to a terrific explication of the judge's decision written by Andrew C. McCarthy, a former Federal prosecutor and a very right-wing guy.

https://archive.ph/E344N

Enjoy your education!

20 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

I had asked you to provide a link. Then I stated that you hadn't read it. And neither time did you reply. And as you're demonstrating now, your modus operandi is not to politely reply when someone says they don't know something. You and your 5555s. But instead of applying, you bugged out. Vanished. Evaporated.

And it's not at all clear that even now you've read the thing. You refuse to say what is wrong with my citations and take from journalists covering the story which you characterized as "spin.".

Anyway, out of the abundant goodness of my heart, I am going to take advantage of this teachable moment to share with you a link to a terrific explication of the judge's decision written by Andrew C. McCarthy, a former Federal prosecutor and a very right-wing guy.

https://archive.ph/E344N

Enjoy your education!

Andy always makes good arguments. Whats your point? Trying to spin your way out of your humiliation?

Did you sign up for PACER yet? For those of you who care, PACER is the system that allows you to view virtually everything filed in any US Federal Court, subject to individual Court rules. There is a minor fee. You can even file stuff if you are a lawyer. Its a fab system, it hit the net in the 1990s, you used to have to go to the terminals in the Clerks Office (remember those old giant monitors that look like old timey TVs).

If you sign up, you can read that a decision has been entered and then go READ IT YOURSELF instead of relying on someone else to interpret it for you LOL

10 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Andy always makes good arguments. Whats your point? Trying to spin your way out of your humiliation?

Did you sign up for PACER yet? For those of you who care, PACER is the system that allows you to view virtually everything filed in any US Federal Court, subject to individual Court rules. There is a minor fee. You can even file stuff if you are a lawyer. Its a fab system, it hit the net in the 1990s, you used to have to go to the terminals in the Clerks Office (remember those old giant monitors that look like old timey TVs).

If you sign up, you can read that a decision has been entered and then go READ IT YOURSELF instead of relying on someone else to interpret it for you LOL

11 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Andy always makes good arguments. Whats your point? Trying to spin your way out of your humiliation?

Did you sign up for PACER yet? For those of you who care, PACER is the system that allows you to view virtually everything filed in any US Federal Court, subject to individual Court rules. There is a minor fee. You can even file stuff if you are a lawyer. Its a fab system, it hit the net in the 1990s, you used to have to go to the terminals in the Clerks Office (remember those old giant monitors that look like old timey TVs).

If you sign up, you can read that a decision has been entered and then go READ IT YOURSELF instead of relying on someone else to interpret it for you LOL

11 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Andy always makes good arguments. Whats your point? Trying to spin your way out of your humiliation?

Did you sign up for PACER yet? For those of you who care, PACER is the system that allows you to view virtually everything filed in any US Federal Court, subject to individual Court rules. There is a minor fee. You can even file stuff if you are a lawyer. Its a fab system, it hit the net in the 1990s, you used to have to go to the terminals in the Clerks Office (remember those old giant monitors that look like old timey TVs).

If you sign up, you can read that a decision has been entered and then go READ IT YOURSELF ins

All your demonstrated is that you have a link to the decision. Nothing you've said gives any indication and you have read it, or, if you have read it, that you understood it.

Just because someone has a library card that doesn't mean they've read all the books in the library or any of them.

I did read it as I told you before, and so nothing that differed from the reports of journalists. It was a very straightforward decision and provides evidence that Trump is a massive ignoramus.

Case was dismissed without prejudice for lack of malice. First amended complaint filed May 27. In a nutshell:

You want malice? We got malice.

Retired judges weigh in on Trump's attempts to pay Jan 6 insurrectionists out of taxpayers money.

Trump Settlement Row Explodes as Retired Judges Step In

A growing legal battle over President Donald Trump’s controversial “anti-weaponization” fund has escalated dramatically, with dozens of retired judges publicly challenging what they describe as a deeply troubling settlement that threatens confidence in the US justice system.

The intervention has transformed a little-noticed court dispute into a broader confrontation over judicial integrity, placing fresh scrutiny on Trump’s legal strategy and the boundaries of executive power.

Judges Break Cover

The dispute intensified after 35 retired federal judges urged a court to reopen a case involving a settlement linked to Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service.

Their argument was blunt. The former judges warned that the arrangement raised serious questions about transparency, candour and potential manipulation of the courts. They argued the settlement risked undermining public trust in the administration of justice.

Claims of ‘Collusion and Fraud’ Gain Momentum

Legal analyst and former federal prosecutor James D. Zirin said the weight of the judges’ intervention gives unusual force to allegations that the settlement was the product of “collusion and fraud”.

Writing for The Hill, Zirin argued that the criticism carries particular significance because it comes not from partisan opponents but from former members of the judiciary. He described the underlying concerns as self-evident, pointing to claims that Trump effectively sued and settled with himself.

Conservative Voice Leads the Charge

At the centre of the challenge is former federal appeals court judge Michael Luttig, a prominent conservative jurist appointed by former President George H.W. Bush.

Luttig argued that judges remain among the few figures capable of rising above the increasingly toxic political climate. He warned that partisan conflict is placing extraordinary strain on American institutions and democratic norms.

Pressure Builds Beyond One Case

The intervention reflects a broader trend of retired judges stepping into major constitutional and legal disputes.

Zirin noted that even larger groups of former judges have recently weighed in on high-profile cases before the Supreme Court, signalling growing concern within the legal establishment about the direction of the judiciary and the rule of law.

What began as a court settlement dispute is now evolving into a wider debate over accountability, judicial independence and the limits of political power — with some of America’s most experienced legal voices demanding answers.

Trump's 'collusion and fraud' torn apart as retired judges break silence