Redshirt Year

  • Law
  • Lawsuit: Wynn Resorts failed to prevent man from gambling millions in loaned funds. [RJ]
  • Video released of possible suspects in death of Reba the bulldog. [RJ]
  • Exotic dancers file class-action lawsuit against Floyd Mayweather. [RJ]
  • Judge: teen accused of killing ex-chief unfit for trial. [8NewsNow]
  • Lawsuit: Bedbugs leave tourist with “permanent scarring.” [8NewsNow]
  • Nevada’s ballot questions explained. [KTNV]
  • Acadia Healthcare pays settlement after whistleblower investigation. [KTNV]
  • Running back joins quarterback in leaving UNLV over NIL flap. [KTNV]
administrator
76 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 9:38 am

The article on the [4th string] UNLV running back is over 2 weeks old and he has since made it clear his decision to leave had to do with lack of playing time and not NIL money.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:15 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Yeah this is a misnomer

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 10:36 am

Question 7
“But opponents say the measure is unnecessary because instances of in-person voter fraud — in which one person pretends to be someone else in order to cast a ballot — are so rare as to be almost nonexistent.”

BUT it seems that no one could possibly know the amount or frequency of voter fraud, simply because it is not detected, and in my experience voting in Nevada, not really looked for by poll workers.

BUT let us assume that the opposition is correct, that we simply should trust that voter fraud seldom happens. That is an admission that it does happen. What is the harm then or asking for ID at the polling station? You have to have photo ID for welfare, Medicaid, fill an Rx or just to buy cigarettes.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 10:39 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Welfare, medicaid, and prescriptions are not constitutional rights.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:49 am
Reply to  Anonymous

@10:39
Say Hippy Dippy. Neither the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution mention a right to vote. The 14th Amendment extends citizenship to all born or naturalized citizens, and guaranties the rights of citizenship, like voting. Notice the citizenship requirement for Federal elections.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 12:44 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

>The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Seems pretty clear that the Constitution includes a right to vote.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:22 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

“On account of age.” Missed that part did ya?
Requiring ID neither denies nor abridges the “right”.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:51 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

No, I was only responding to the comment above that asserted “Neither the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution mention a right to vote.”

Clearly, the Constitution does “mention” a right to vote.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:15 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Do you share that same opinion regarding regulating guns and the 2nd Amendment?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 5:18 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

He couldn’t even spell guarantee, you expect him to read the constitution?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 12:50 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Article IV, Section 4: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…”

The “distinguishing feature of [a Republican Form] is the right of the people to choose their own officers for governmental administration, and pass their own laws in virtue of the legislative power reposed in representative bodies, whose legitimate acts may be said to be those of the people themselves.” In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 461 (1891)

Maybe next time don’t get your ConLaw from PragerU.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:23 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Pretty sure none of those things exclude the need to require an ID to vote.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:59 am
Reply to  Anonymous

So, 10:39 a.m. is the following you with regard to the 2nd Amendment:
“What part of “well regulated” don’t you understand? Why do you fail to understand that NO right under the Constitution is absolute, except apparently gun rights?” Yes, I am pro-gun, pro voter ID, and will not apologize for my DNA.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 12:51 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Kamala echoing healthcare is a right. Total socialized medical is in our future if Kamala wins and takes the House and Senate.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:58 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

That would be awesome.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 10:55 am
Reply to  Anonymous

You couldn’t afford the new taxation that would be required.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 11:24 am
Reply to  Anonymous

As compared to the PBMs that currently tax my ass, and the Insurance companies that currently tax my ass, and the co-pays that currently tax my ass? That is, when some b-school asshole isn’t deciding to play doctor and requiring a “prior authorization?”

Bring on the governmental taxation and treat public healthcare as an investment for public benefit, like highways. The for-profit system of healthcare is broken.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 11:34 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Of course healthcare is broken, because it it the Medical Industrial Complex that makes billions off of illness and obesity.

You think this will improve with government funding? It will only become more onerous and less effective.

Taxation is theft and everything the government has is stolen.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:16 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

So, what’s the downside?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 10:44 am
Reply to  Anonymous

I have never heard an actual cogent argument against voter ID laws. It will never cease to amaze me that this is a controversial issue.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 10:51 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Those in favor of this most simple of requirements are written off as racist if we question the need for an ID.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 12:13 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Name one voter ID law that stopped voter fraud.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 12:58 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Hahaha we get the reference re guns … buttttt a voter id law does not stop one with an id from voting. Skipped logic in college did we?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:12 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

You haven’t heard any because there are none. It’s really the most minimal step one can take to participate in our democracy.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:19 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Here is a cogent argument.

The problem:

The Brennan Center’s seminal report on this issue, The Truth About Voter Fraud, found that most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices. The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and found incident rates between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent.

Effect of solution:
“Several experts were tasked with determining the number of registered voters who might lack SB 14 ID, along with their demographic characteristics. Based on the testimony and numerous statistical analyses provided at trial, this Court finds that approximately 608,470 registered voters in Texas, representing approximately 4.5% of all registered voters, lack qualified SB 14 ID and of these, 534,512 voters do not qualify for a disability exemption.”

“The draconian voting requirements imposed by SB 14 will disproportionately impact low-income Texans because they are less likely to own or need one of the seven qualified IDs to navigate their lives. A legacy of disadvantage translates to a substantial burden when these people are confronted with the time, expense, and logistics of obtaining a photo ID that they did not otherwise need. Drs. Barreto and Sanchez’s field survey found that 21.4% of eligible voters who earn less than $20,000 per year lack a qualified SB 14 ID. That number compares to just 2.6% of eligible voters who earn between $100,000 and $150,000 per year. In other words, lower income Texans are over eight times more likely to lack proper SB 14 ID.”

“[U]nreliable and irregular wage work and other income . . . affect the cost of taking the time to locate and bring the requisite papers and identity cards, travel to a processing site, wait through the assessment, and get photo identifications. This is because most job opportunities do not include paid sick or other paid leave; taking off from work means lost income. Employed low-income Texans not already in possession of such documents will struggle to afford income loss from the unpaid time needed to get photo identification.”

“The poor also feel the burden most acutely. The concept is simple—a $20.00 bill is worth much more to a person struggling to make ends meet than to a person living in wealth. Economists call this concept the diminishing marginal utility of wealth. Mrs. Bates, an African-American retiree living on a $321.00 monthly income, described it well. She testified that it took a while to save the $42.00 she needed to pay for her Mississippi birth certificate because “when you’re getting a certain amount of money, you’re going to put the money where you feel the need is most urgent at the time . . . I had to put the $42.00 where it was doing the most good. It was feeding my family, because we couldn’t eat the birth certificate . . . [a]nd we couldn’t pay rent with the birth certificate, so, [I] just wrote it off.” Mrs. Bates’s dire circumstances illustrate how SB 14 effectively makes some poor Texans choose between purchasing their franchise or supporting their family.”

Selected quotes from Veasey v. Perry, 71 F. Supp. 3d 627 (S.D. Tex. 2014).

So, potentially disenfranchising a grossly disproportionate amount of voters for a miniscule problem is a poor policy choice. Or put another way, the cost (4.5% of current voters ineligible) is too high for the gain (stopping .0003% that are ineligibal).

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:36 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Don’t worry I can find a “think tank” to back all of my positions too. Luckily, I cant convince you logically or morally, so I will not bother.

That said, cross referencing “registered voters” and “lack ID” are the only parameters for the report. How many of those are illegal, incompetent, or otherwise actually ineligible to vote? Oh yeah, none of those things were considered.

Stop with the nonsense.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:45 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

“Don’t worry I can [pay] a ‘think tank’ to back all of my positions too.”

“Jeremy Aguero, for the record, did someone just summon me?” -Jeremy Aguero, for the record.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:19 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Please, find me a think tank that shows substantive counter evidence. Criticizing the methodology is a good thing and legitimate to show the shortcomings of any study.

However, the counter expert in the case could produce no such substantive criticism. Even if the number are off by half, is 2% worth .0003%?Presumably all the think tanks were hired to defend this law, but failed to produce legitimate counter evidence.

And the illustrative evidence of the difficulty for some to obtain the required ID is not rebutted or addressed either.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:27 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Thanks. But I do not need the exercise, nor am I in a position to care enough, because you are so illogical and so deeply committed to your delusion, that its not worth the effort.

Just know that I, like 70% of Nevadans will be voting YES on Question 7

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:53 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

How many of those 2-4% even voted to begin with? And of course this all devolves into “muh racism” and “muh discrimination.”

The arguments in the study come up with every excuse in the book why some people can’t obtain an ID. If it’s really that onerous, we should just stop requiring ID for driving vehicles, because hey, it’s real tough going to the DMV like a grown adult with 2 or 3 pieces of paper for 2 hours of the day.

And what exactly will your argument be if taxpayers just subsidize the ID cards? The whole “but think of the poor” argument will go out the window. How will you pivot then?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 8:06 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Not who you were replying to, but what about a federal ID card that’s provided free of charge to all citizens?
(Assuming the program is sufficiently funded that it actually works)

Makes it easy for any citizen to get ID to vote. No cost. ID is tied to your SS# and is integrated with ID.me, IRS, et al. It’ll make it easy to use any government service because you have this ID.

And then no one has to worry about state to state idiosyncrasies, it’s a uniform system for everyone.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 5:50 am
Reply to  Anonymous

. . . . free of charge to all citizens [and optional].

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 8:23 am
Reply to  Anonymous

And ban use of ss#’s for anything other than the SSA tracking your retirement funds.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 8:59 am
Reply to  Anonymous

. . . . which will be completely moot just a few years from now.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:20 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

He cited a court opinion, not a think tank.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:22 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

He is you. But thanks, dicta.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:25 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

You’re quite adept at being wrong.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:43 am
Reply to  Anonymous

There are actually some real problems with voter ID laws, but from the phrasing of your comment/question, you’ve already made up your mind. Since you’re clearly online, you could go on google and read some of the reports and studies that have been done in recent years on voter fraud, but you could have done that before you posted and chose not to so this is clearly just trolling. Go away.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:51 am
Reply to  Anonymous

So, by your logic, if speeding is rarely ticketed in school zones, its is ok to speed in school zones?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:57 am
Reply to  Anonymous

11:43 here. Can you point to where in my comment I said that?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:18 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

He was referring to the [lack of] logic in your statements.
Go away troll.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:17 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Yeah, why do we need more election security?

It’s fiiiiiiiine!

“Reports and studies”
Yuk yuk.

🤓🤓

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:23 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

We need more election security!!

It’s a yuuuuuge problem!

“Lying Republicans”

Yuk yuk.

😒😒

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:31 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Matters not, we are gaining more states monthly. We will get it whether you want it or not.

#70percentOfNevadans

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:21 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

If an individual is incapable of acquiring an ID, despite the numerous avenues to do so, then I believe they’re better off not voting. If they lack the capacity to do something as simple as possessing identification, their perspective on things likely matters very, very little.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:24 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Nobody, reasonably lacks the capacity to get an ID. That’s a joke, right?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 1:26 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

1:21 here, no there’s absolutely no excuse for not having an ID

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:00 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Ah yes, the old Jim Crow “you gotta pass a test to prove we should let your vote” way.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:10 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Analogizing a literacy test as a requirement to vote and a voter ID law is wild… lmao

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:33 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

That’s just dumb. Please just stop.

Last edited 7 months ago by Anonymous
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 2:51 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Hey lets just make a deal – same requirements to vote and but a gun, cool? Make BOTH stringent.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:43 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

1:21: “If they lack the capacity to do something as simple as possessing identification, their perspective on things likely matters very, very little.”
Very similar to, “If they lack the capacity to read, their perspective on things likely matters, very, very little.”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:45 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

“Objection, mischaracterizes his testimony.”

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:45 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Now you’re getting it!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:44 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

holy false equivalency, Batman!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:46 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

What we need is a law that says unless you are practicing member of bar, you don’t get to vote on judicial races. Gimme that.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:53 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Nah. Just get them appointed. That better. Not perfect, but better.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:59 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Not when the appointments are made by a former police chief who only appoints prosecutors who know nothing about civil. #bringbackthecivilbench

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:02 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

It’s not just judges. OBC is run by a guy who has never practiced civilly or had his own client trust account, which is wild. It is not good having so many people with no civil experience in such widespread power.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:07 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

If he appoints ALL the judges, not just the vacancies, he will get it closer to right than not.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 5:08 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

He’s getting it wrong now with limited power, but let’s give him all the power, and then he’ll get it closer to right.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 5:48 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Its not about him. Its about the office and the process.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:11 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Are you the woman from veterans in politics?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 4:25 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Sleuthing on social media is a wonderful thing

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:56 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Now you’re on to something. I’m about 5 minutes away from saying only land-owning, degree-holding taxpayers should have the right to vote, period.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 14, 2024 8:18 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Ah yes, all men are created equal. Just some more equal than others. It’s all find and dandy til you’re the one being shipped off to the glue factory.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:16 am

Jesus Ayala better thank his lucky stars that he got Christy Craig because any other judge (other than Ballou) would never let him jerk the system around like this.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 3:12 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

Craig handles all of competency court, so obviously he got Craig for his competency challenge. After competency, he will go back to his assigned judge, Bluth.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 14, 2024 12:58 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

So is Ayala just going to be released into the public again?

I will be sure to vote Craig out when she’s up for reelection.

Anon Please
Guest
Anon Please
October 14, 2024 1:17 pm
Reply to  Anonymous

No- he will go to a secure facility (Stein or Lakes Crossing) until they deem him competent to stand trial. Vote out Craig why? Because she is assuring that the case does not come back on appeal because there was a claim he was not competent and no one did anything?

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 14, 2024 2:21 pm
Reply to  Anon Please

How dare you interrupt their knee-jerk, completely uneducated reaction with facts and logic!!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 10, 2024 11:38 am

A

Last edited 7 months ago by Anonymous
Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 9:22 am

The AG’s office is ending their remote work and making everyone return to office full time in the near future. Let’s see–low paying gubbermint job, no flexibility, ever diminishing pension, yeah, I totally wanna work there.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 11:13 am
Reply to  Anonymous

You wrote this at 9:22 a.m. on a Friday morning. Deputy AGs are still getting their coffee before rolling in for a cushy 5 at that hour.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 11:17 am
Reply to  Anonymous

Maybe not a deal-breaker in Vegas, but could be a huge barrier to recruiting in the Carson office. On the other hand, could see Reno City Attorney/Washoe County Counsel getting a big influx of applications. Will only make the state’s defense worse.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous
October 11, 2024 10:44 am

At least Las Vegas doesn’t have a monopoly on outlandish impropriety. https://www.courthousenews.com/attorneys-must-apologize/