Notices by NatlSecCnslrs (natlseccnslrs@mstdn.social)

By far the most amusing yet depressing thing that happened on my trip to Denver with my 6yo was the following from the first night in our hotel:

Me: Go wash your hands.
Saoirse: <goes into bathroom> There's no soap.
M: <goes into bathroom> They use bars of soap here. <unwraps soap>
S: What's a bar of soap?
M: This.
S: <examines bar critically> How do you use it?
M: You get it wet and rub it between your hands, then wash normally.
S: <gingerly tries> Ooooh that's so weird.

@mmasnick @kathryntewson ODNI did the same thing (though not in litigation). Agencies started doing something obnoxious that wasn't authorized under the governing Intelligence Community Directive and a bunch of us complained, so ODNI issued a new ICD authorizing the obnoxious thing.

@mmasnick @kathryntewson You joke but this is basically how a lot of government agencies do it.

True story, I sued the State Department for not following their own reg and doing something obnoxious and discriminatory that the reg prohibited, and their response was to change the reg in the middle of litigation to allow the obnoxious and discriminatory thing they'd been doing.

tl;dr they had a good reg, they didn't follow it, they got sued, they made it a bad reg.

@mstein609 @Danielsand @kathryntewson Jenna Ellis's client won't get held in contempt for recording and transmitting proceedings without permission.

@mstein609 @Danielsand @kathryntewson Side note, this is a MONUMENTALLY TERRIBLE IDEA.

Have any of you ever BEEN in traffic court?

THE LAW HAS NO DOMINION THERE. If you come into a speeding hearing & start talking about burdens & case law & precedent, the judge will shut you down on the spot because he ain't got time for that noise. The cop will say, "yeah I knew he was speedin' 'cause he was goin' really fast" & the judge will nod along. It's the freaking Wild West in those courtrooms.

@mstein609 @Danielsand @kathryntewson I once lost a speeding ticket case solely because the person in front of me tried to make the same argument I was going to make but botched it up so royally that the judge didn't even let me finish because the last guy had no clue what he was talking about, & so it was clearly a bad argument. Judge even said, "were you here 10 minutes ago?" and I said yes, but that guy got the argument wrong, and I'm making the correct one, and he didn't want to hear it.

@mstein609 @Danielsand @kathryntewson Ironically an AI would have a better chance in a complex federal motion hearing than in traffic court because at least then a citation to an opinion will actually be listened to and won't just piss off the judge.

@mstein609 @Danielsand @kathryntewson I do have one legitimately interesting question though.

It's pretty well understood that a pro se litigant is entitled to more lenient treatment than one represented by a lawyer. They're not expected to be as sophisticated so judges cut them some slack.

Will someone with an AI still ask for that lenient treatment? Because that'll piss off judges right quick.

#Amazon is winding down #AmazonSmile. That's annoying. We didn't get a LOT from the program, but we got a decent amount.

I normally would never share a blatant #disinformation piece like this, but I think it's very illustrative of the way that right-wing disinformation works.

I'll focus primarily on the part that cites me. Note how it correctly quotes me as saying that the President can declassify anything he wants. Because, well, he can. I stand behind that statement. And like it or not, I'm a pretty reputable source. https://www.wnd.com/2023/01/can-declassify-documents-can-stored/

But that's where it stops. It then takes that statement and runs ...

Just got a sneak peek at the new #Spoutible platform and it's looking pretty sweet so far.

Hey, did you like the fact that we got to see what actually happened on the House floor last week? As opposed to a sterile shot from one spot in the balcony?

If you think this was a good idea, help us tell the House to keep it up. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfA-zFYyU5wYnd5kE0E-HHtvKv6gMnMkYu8pHR5FaATHbsR0w/viewform?pli=1&fbzx=2984694257612994754

and continues to fight against returning the material. THAT'S the crime. Trump was INFORMED that he had national defense information and he refused to return it. THAT'S why it's different. Anyone who tells you different is actively trying to mislead you.

Oh boy here come the false equivalencies. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-center-classified-documents/

Let's just get out in front of this, shall we?

1) Is it equally bad that #classified info was taken home by Trump & Biden? Yes, but sadly not unheard of. Transitions are messy. That's why nobody ever really argued that the initial removal from the WH was criminal.

2) Then why would Trump be prosecuted but probably not Biden? Because the second Biden's team discovered the material, they moved to return it. Trump OTOH fought ...

When I first came to Mastodon, I had my hands full with a half-dozen things, so I kinda phoned it in. (TBH I'm still doing that to a degree, but at least now the calls are longer & more involved.) One of the things I didn't do was a proper #introduction, & for that I apologize.

My name is Kel McClanahan, & I run the non-profit public interest law firm National Security Counselors. As the name suggests, we focus on #nationalsecuritylaw matters, mostly involving #employmentlaw & #transparency.