Archive for the 'legal spin' Category

Spinning Real Gold from Alleged “Bad” Facts

Tuesday, August 23rd, 2005
In legalspeak, bad facts are hard facts introduced to befuddle a jury: “Bad” facts by definition are indeed facts but they are beside the point. They sound important but they are irrelevant to the guilt or innocence that the jury is sworn to determine.

How big a problem can “bad” facts cause?

Ask Merck, the giant drug company that produced Vioxx. According to a number of legal experts, the use of alleged “bad” facts by the lawyer for the plaintiff caused a Texas jury to award a quarter billion – that is billion — dollars in damages.

Tomorrow’s Spinspeak Today Direct from the Senate

Tuesday, May 24th, 2005

Forecasting is a slippery enterprise. But, in the case of the Great Senate Filibuster Compromise, the following forecast of new spinspeak in our future looks safe indeed:

advice (as in advise and consent) = angry ultimatums to the President on judges the liberal left finds politically objectionable.

extraordinary circumstances = hypertalk for any judge that the President has the effrontery to nominate (as he alone is empowered to do by the Constitution) even though the liberal left Senate minority told him they didn’t find that judge to their liking.

comity = the wonderful gooeytalk relationship that the Republican Majority destroys when it fends off attempts by the comity-loving Democratic Minority to push it into the nearest swamp.