butterdezillion wrote: “Debunking crank nonsense is absolutely their job, “
Not really, though some courts have done so as an aside.
“This case, if it were allowed to proceed, would deserve mention in one of those books that seek to prove that the law is foolish or that America has too many lawyers with not enough to do. Even in its relatively short life the case has excited the blogosphere and the conspiracy theorists. The right thing to do is to bring it to an early end.” Hollister v. Soetoro, 601 F. Supp.2d 179 (D.D.C. Cir. 2009)
Yeah, the “right” thing that judge decided to do in Hollister was to claim that $20,000 or so in wages and benefits didn’t meet the minimum requirement of $500.
Real piece of work there. If it was such an easy thing to debunk then why didn’t he take the case and allow the truth to be seen clearly by everyone? Instead he “botched” math that even a first-grader could have figured out. And because he wears a black robe, the whole world has to abide by his math that would have flunked first-grade.
And you’re going around broadcasting this guy’s drivel as proof that *I’m* stupid?
We all know that judge knew the $500 minimum requirement was met. The reason he pretended otherwise was because he is a lying, corrupt piece of slime covering for what he knows to be an enemy combatant occupying our White House.