4 ms·
The Supreme Court also had a major role here. That was a 5-4 decision where the wife of one of the jurors was actively working for Bush's campaign/administratio
by nescioquid 4y ago
The Supreme Court also had a major role here. That was a 5-4 decision where the wife of one of the jurors was actively working for Bush's campaign/administration; said juror refused to recuse himself. Maybe that's the moment "even the appearance of impropriety" left the political phrasebook.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> The Supreme Court also had a major role here. That was a 5-4 decision where the wife of one of the jurors was actively working for Bush's campaign/administration “Justices” not “jurors”.
- MrWiffles 4y agoWhile you are technically correct ("the best kind of correct!"), that distinction does not absolve the individual of their obvious conflict of interest. ...nor does that conflict of interest in and of itself, entirely alone, prove that the decision reached was incorrect, wrong, or an act of corruption or malice.
- nescioquid 4y agoThat was mortifying. Thanks for the correction.