Maurile Tremblay

Admin
  • Content count

    36,714
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,379 Excellent

About Maurile Tremblay

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    San Diego Chargers

Recent Profile Visitors

37,854 profile views
  1. Is Donald Trump a Racist? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/opinion/sunday/is-donald-trump-a-racist.html?_r=0 Article by a good journalist who has done some research. I had been hoping there was a chance that Trump isn't genuinely racist himself so much as he is simply pandering to racists. The article takes away that hope.
  2. Some are literally right next to each other.
  3. They were from white supremacists. How many white supremacists can there be who aren't Trump supporters? I mean, surely there are a great deal of Trump supporters who aren't white supremacists, but it seems pretty unlikely that there are many white supremacists who aren't Trump supporters. Also, while I didn't see any of the comments, if they were solidly pro-Trump in content, I think it's a fair inference that they were from Trump supporters. Or are you suggesting that they may have been from Hillary supporters who were trying to make Trump look bad? That seems implausible. In my experience, people don't have the stomach to use the n-word or other vile epithets like that when they are just kidding. I think anyone who uses the n-word in that way, in that context, is pretty much by definition a true, no-fooling-around racist.
  4. Kind of predictable? https://mobile.twitter.com/JoeMyGod/status/755124469778251777
  5. Has anyone linked to this New Yorker piece about the ghostwriter of The Art of the Deal? He's not a fan of Trump at all.
  6. I don't see how the second one would ever matter at all. Isn't finger-printing just a part of the booking process? It's not a form of self-incrimination that one has a right to avoid, is it? In this case, I also don't really see how Mirandizing Naz would matter at all. He's never confessed. All the statements we've seen him give are amply supported by physical evidence. In any event, Box is no dummy, so he'd have made sure that Naz was Mirandized before they talked. (Probably right after the knife was found on him.) Naz told Stone in their first meeting that he'd been read his rights.
  7. I don't think I agree with any of this. Blowing by his client's story is fairly standard, I think, for criminal defense attorneys. I think I've read Dershowitz saying, for example, that he never wanted his client to tell him whether he was innocent or guilty or what actually happened -- all he wanted to know was what evidence the state had against him. That's what matters. Beyond that -- if the state's evidence admits of Possibility X (that would exonerate the client), but the client has already told the lawyer Not X, the lawyer can't ethically press Possibility X as part of his defense. (Can we get Woz in here? Most of what I know about criminal law I learned from watching TV, so I could be off on this.) What "possible procedural avenues" did he skip over? All they've done so far is the arraignment and the bail hearing, which I think is all that's possible. I can't think of anything possible that was skipped. What do you mean by "covered the Miranda rights up front?" Naz was read his rights before he had an attorney, so I'm not sure what Stone was supposed to do about that. (And if by "covered" you mean "make sure that they were read properly," that's the last thing a criminal defense attorney would want.) What makes you think that Stone is a plaintiff's lawyer? I don't think the show has given any indication that he does anything but criminal law. He obviously does an awful lot of criminal law because he knows everyone at the police station, the detectives, etc. How in the world should Naz not be in jail right now? You don't think all the physical evidence is probable cause to make an arrest? Box says it's the most open-and-shut case he's seen, which seems about right. Stone did great at the bail hearing, IMO, but you can't win them all. When is the last time a murder suspect was granted bail? I have no idea where you're getting the idea that Stone isn't an experienced criminal attorney. He seems exceptionally experienced. From what we've seen, he pretty much represents very small-time criminals -- petty thieves and the like -- so a murder case is not his standard fare. But we've gotten no indication that he lacks competence as a criminal defense attorney.
  8. If a pollster asks you whom you're voting for and you answer Gary Johnson, it will probably be the biggest statistical impact you ever have on politics in your life. Johnson is polling around 13% right now, and he needs to hit 15% to get into the debates. Sample sizes are often 400-1000, so he needs only 8-20 more people per poll to name him.
  9. And Kimberlin Brown! That's the wife of my highschool football coach!
  10. The GOP is millions of dollars short of putting on the convention as would-be sponsors are staying away. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/07/15/3798688/rnc-corporate-sponsors/
  11. You are a legitimate pizza mastermind.
  12. In fairness to the Trump campaign, that logo was not benign.
  13. Ben Watson is a stud. https://www.facebook.com/BenjaminWatsonOfficial/videos/917809041679561/
  14. Commentary on the logo: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/07/15/trump_pence_campaign_s_penetrating_new_logo.html
  15. There are going to be some really enjoyable made-for-TV movies that come out of all of this.