Sir, "reading" what?

I figured out the *what* and *who*. Who: Jeff Sharlet What: [...] 👇 "legal gray area around killing of Ashli Babbitt" The mutability of Jeff Sharlet over the years, his tendency for feigned evenhandedness makes interacting with him *enervating*. bsky.app/profile/jeff... ⬅️ 🙄 'imagine that?'

www.lawfaremedia.org/article/eval...

Sir, this is a mostly rhetorical reply: *legal issues at play?* [...] There are NO *legal issues at play*. There are NO *legal gray areas*. Lawfare? Jack Goldsmith? www.lawfaremedia.org/about/our-st... There is only (1) choice to make here, and that is not to read that technocratic tripe.

Thanks!

The position of Stoughton and his colleagues, as I understand it, is inconclusive: their legal questions/objections are quite clear and need consideration, but they acknowledge they don’t know how many lawmakers were in the area or how many the policeman believed were in the area.

They acknowledge too that it’s a unique case with an untested application of the Fourth Amendment. Am I being generally accurate in that regard?