Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

OA605: GEICO to Pay $5.2m for Car Sex?! and MORE Jan 6 Bombshells! (Patreon)

Published:
2022-06-17 04:21:03
Imported:
2022-10

Downloads

Content

Today is two entire show's worth of things somehow crammed into one! First, Jan 6 hearing #3 is in the books. Some amazing bombshells! Also, I grill Andrew on intent and how it could possibly be that we have to prove what Trump had going on in his dumb brain. It's an extended cross examination but hopefully it will provide more understanding! THEN, you've likely seen the headlines: GEICO has to pay $5.2m for car sex? Really? Well, we might have another McDonald's coffee lawsuit on our hands! Get the break down!

Links: Geico ordered to pay $5.2 million for STD in a car, RMCo 537.065, GEICO opinion

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

-Subscribe to the YouTube Channel and share our videos!

-Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

-Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

-For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!

Files

Comments

Anonymous

I have a slightly different take on the judges delivery and style I suspect, after a lifetime on the bench, he has learnt that he needs to address the lowest common denominator. He wasn't talking to us. He was talking to recalcitrant Republicans

JustAGuy
>>86106769

I think his speech was too halting for them. Look at their commentators, all rapid and emphatic.

Anonymous

Hello- Currently listening to OA OA 605, specifically the first half where Andrew is attempting to assuage Thomas’s frustration regarding impediments to a criminal prosecution of Trump. Many times, Andrew addresses the issues from the context of criminal code vis a vis an established jury. This made me wonder (please keep in mind that I have no legal training, and thus this question may be elementary): In the event of any criminal indictment of Trump which would lead to a court case, I would predict that the process will be extremely mired at the jury selection phase. It seems likely that idiotic petty politics will come into play from both prosecution and defense. If you have any space on the white board, could you offer a little information on what authority a federal and/or state (most likely being Georgia) judge may have to limit and expedite potential juror interviews and jury selection process for a trial to continue? I worry that any proceedings would essentially be “filibustered” at this step. Thank you!