https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his subpoena threat.

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news, certainly not
against Musk. Any majority party in the Senate has subpoena power and
oversight responsibility.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news, certainly not
against Musk. Any majority party in the Senate has subpoena power and oversight responsibility.

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the constitution?

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news, certainly not
against Musk. Any majority party in the Senate has subpoena power and
oversight responsibility.

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Before you leap on that word, the 'implication' is backed up by
precedent and practice.

"Although Supreme Court decisions in this area are limited, they
illuminate the basic constitutional foundation of Congress’s
investigatory power and establish key legal limitations on its exercise.
The Court’s early jurisprudence began with a focus on establishing the
source of the investigatory power before considering the power’s
scope.12 In that vein, the Court established that the authority to
conduct investigations was implied from the legislative power vested in Congress by Article I of the Constitution, but only to the extent that
an inquiry actually served a legislative purpose.13 By the mid-twentieth century, judicial recognition of the investigatory power had been well established, and the Court’s focus shifted to legal limitations on congressional inquiries, generally in the context of the tension between congressional investigations and the individual rights of private citizens."

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news, certainly not
against Musk. Any majority party in the Senate has subpoena power and
oversight responsibility.

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Before you leap on that word, the 'implication' is backed up by
precedent and practice.

"Although Supreme Court decisions in this area are limited, they
illuminate the basic constitutional foundation of Congress’s
investigatory power and establish key legal limitations on its exercise.
The Court’s early jurisprudence began with a focus on establishing the source of the investigatory power before considering the power’s
scope.12 In that vein, the Court established that the authority to
conduct investigations was implied from the legislative power vested in Congress by Article I of the Constitution, but only to the extent that
an inquiry actually served a legislative purpose.13 By the mid-twentieth century, judicial recognition of the investigatory power had been well established, and the Court’s focus shifted to legal limitations on congressional inquiries, generally in the context of the tension between congressional investigations and the individual rights of private citizens."

Where is the right to use the threat of "investigations" to influence corporations upheld by SCOTUS? It's not.

Your fascism is showing again.

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news, certainly not
against Musk. Any majority party in the Senate has subpoena power and
oversight responsibility.

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without trying to
paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

Before you leap on that word, the 'implication' is backed up by
precedent and practice.

"Although Supreme Court decisions in this area are limited, they
illuminate the basic constitutional foundation of Congress’s
investigatory power and establish key legal limitations on its exercise.
The Court’s early jurisprudence began with a focus on establishing the
source of the investigatory power before considering the power’s
scope.12 In that vein, the Court established that the authority to
conduct investigations was implied from the legislative power vested in
Congress by Article I of the Constitution, but only to the extent that
an inquiry actually served a legislative purpose.13 By the mid-twentieth
century, judicial recognition of the investigatory power had been well
established, and the Court’s focus shifted to legal limitations on
congressional inquiries, generally in the context of the tension between
congressional investigations and the individual rights of private citizens."

Where is the right to use the threat of "investigations" to influence corporations upheld by SCOTUS? It's not.

Under "judicial recognition of the investigatory power had been well established."

"Threat" and "influence" is from your mind.

Your fascism is showing again.

When subpoenas are served by brownshirts in hobnailed boots, you may
have a point. Until then, not so much.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news, certainly not >>>> against Musk. Any majority party in the Senate has subpoena power and >>>> oversight responsibility.

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without trying to
paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the time.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged as an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function derived implicitly from Article I’s vesting of legislative
Powers in the Congress.2

Until they go crazy and abuse that power.

Schumer's threat from his presser are just the first step in his warning that he is about to abuse his power.

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/8/22 6:56 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his
subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news,
certainly not against Musk. Any majority party in the
Senate has subpoena power and oversight responsibility.

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without trying
to paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the time.

Lazy and looking to evade seeing what is presented to you.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged as an essential
and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function derived
implicitly from Article I’s vesting of legislative Powers in the
Congress.2

Which affirms what I said. Implicit = implied.

Until they go crazy and abuse that power.

No, that's you, not the Constitution or the two centuries of judicial precedent.

Schumer's threat from his presser are just the first step in his
warning that he is about to abuse his power.

It's not a threat to say that Senate committees have subpoena power, and
you aren't condemning McCarthy for actual threats of investigation.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 7:37:02 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 6:56 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

I agree....let it rip and tell Schumer to go pound sand with his
subpoena threat.

I don't see any specific Schumer threats in the news,
certainly not against Musk. Any majority party in the
Senate has subpoena power and oversight responsibility.

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without trying
to paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the time.

Lazy and looking to evade seeing what is presented to you.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged

Lacking context....acknowledged by whom and under what circumstances
and limitations.

I seriously doubt any court has granted Congress the right to abuse and harass corporations into compliance with their woke wet dreams without any legal basis.

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/9/22 5:00 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 7:37:02 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 6:56 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8,
MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the
constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without
trying to paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the
time.

Lazy and looking to evade seeing what is presented to you.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in
the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged

Lacking context....acknowledged by whom and under what circumstances
and limitations.

Dude. Learn to work the links and footnotes:

2See McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174 (1927) (We are of opinion
that the power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.).

3 ...We have made it clear [ ] that Congress is not invested with a ''general’ power to inquire into private affairs.’ The subject of any inquiry always must be one ‘on which legislation could be had.’)
(citations omitted). For a discussion of other constitutional
limitations on congressional investigations see CRS Report RL30240, Congressional Oversight Manual, by Christopher M. Davis et al.

And so on. The context you say you want was just a short scroll down. Of course, that assumes you figured out how to get to the page.

I seriously doubt any court has granted Congress the right to abuse
and harass corporations into compliance with their woke wet dreams
without any legal basis.

https://people.howstuffworks.com/congressional-investigations.htm

"Many of the probes — including some of the famous ones, such as the Watergate hearings of the mid-1970s — involve actions of the executive branch, in keeping with Congress's role as a check-and-balance against presidential power. But legislators have investigated plenty of problems
and controversies in the private sector as well, ranging from the
sinking of the Titanic in 1912 and rigged television quiz shows in the
1950s to the use of steroids and other performance-enhancing substances
in Major League Baseball in the mid-2000s."

Relatively recent investigations: drug prices, the Washington
Commanders, Wells Fargo, etc.

Yes, there's a legal basis.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 8:23:47 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/9/22 5:00 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 7:37:02 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 6:56 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8,
MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the
constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without
trying to paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the
time.

Lazy and looking to evade seeing what is presented to you.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in
the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged

Lacking context....acknowledged by whom and under what circumstances
and limitations.

Dude. Learn to work the links and footnotes:

2See McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174 (1927) (We are of opinion
that the power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.).

1927 ruling is going to be relevant to Congress investigating a private company
because they're undoing egregious censorship on the internet?

Now that's funny.

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/10/22 6:33 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 8:23:47 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/9/22 5:00 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 7:37:02 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 6:56 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8,
MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the
constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without
trying to paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the
time.

Lazy and looking to evade seeing what is presented to you.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in
the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged

Lacking context....acknowledged by whom and under what circumstances
and limitations.

Dude. Learn to work the links and footnotes:

2See McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174 (1927) (We are of opinion
that the power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and >> appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.).

1927 ruling is going to be relevant to Congress investigating a private company
because they're undoing egregious censorship on the internet?

Now that's funny.

I guess you don't cotton to that Originalism but what's funny is you
changing the subject from Congress' right to investigate.

Yes, it's relevant if the investigation is on a topic ‘on which
legislation could be had.’

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 6:59:35 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/10/22 6:33 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 8:23:47 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/9/22 5:00 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 7:37:02 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 6:56 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8,
MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the
constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without
trying to paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the
time.

Lazy and looking to evade seeing what is presented to you.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in
the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged

Lacking context....acknowledged by whom and under what circumstances
and limitations.

Dude. Learn to work the links and footnotes:

2See McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174 (1927) (We are of opinion
that the power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and
appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.).

1927 ruling is going to be relevant to Congress investigating a private company
because they're undoing egregious censorship on the internet?

Now that's funny.

I guess you don't cotton to that Originalism

You're pointing to court cases and then blathering about Originalism.

How disconnected internally can you be?

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 12/11/22 12:37 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 6:59:35 PM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/10/22 6:33 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, December 10, 2022 at 8:23:47 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/9/22 5:00 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Friday, December 9, 2022 at 7:37:02 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:

On 12/8/22 6:56 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 1:23:04 PM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/8/22 11:59 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Thursday, December 8, 2022 at 8:06:05 AM UTC-8, MINe109
wrote:

On 12/7/22 8:06 PM, ScottW wrote:

On Wednesday, December 7, 2022 at 12:19:18 PM UTC-8,
MINe109 wrote:

On 12/7/22 12:48 PM, ScottW wrote:

https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2022/12/07/ex-twitter-ceo-jack-dorsey-suggests-elon-musk-just-release-everything-without-filter-and-let-people-judge-for-themselves/

Corporation oversight? Where is that in the
constitution?

It's implied:

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-7-1/ALDE_00013657/['third','amendment']

Page not found.

Works for me. Let me guess: you clicked and gave up without
trying to paste it. Fortunately for you, I quoted.

I clicked it...which is far more than you'll do most of the
time.

Lazy and looking to evade seeing what is presented to you.

But what do you know I find. It affirms what I said.

Although the power of inquiry was not expressly provided for in
the Constitution, it has nonetheless been acknowledged

Lacking context....acknowledged by whom and under what circumstances >>>>> and limitations.

Dude. Learn to work the links and footnotes:

2See McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174 (1927) (We are of opinion >>>> that the power of inquiry—with process to enforce it—is an essential and
appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.).

1927 ruling is going to be relevant to Congress investigating a private company
because they're undoing egregious censorship on the internet?

Now that's funny.

I guess you don't cotton to that Originalism

You're pointing to court cases and then blathering about Originalism.

I guess you don't understand either.

How disconnected internally can you be?

Originalism, precedent, stare decisis. There's no contradiction or disconnection there.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)