Carly Fiorina To Media: How About We Stop Dancing To Trump’s Tune And Focus On Real Issues
[guest post by Dana]
Carly Fiorina is at her best when she is passionate and angry about an issue that she cares deeply about. And today that issue was Ted Cruz’s character. When a putz from the Daily Mail brought up the National Enquirer allegations about Ted Cruz and brazenly suggested that the candidate needed to go on the record, right then and there, to say that he had never been unfaithful to his wife, Fiorina wasn’t playing:
Amazingly, the reporter claims that the National Enquirer allegations pose a “very serious question” about Ted Cruz’s character. Really?? How so?? Has anything been proven that speaks to anything other than a solid character? Or is this just another case where the media is playing judge and jury, and assuming that if a Republican is accused of something, they’re obviously guilty? Because seriously, what exactly is it that makes his character questionable? That one anonymous source has accused him of having extra-marital affairs? That a notorious tabloid that trades in scurrilous rumors printed it? Exactly what is it? SPELL IT OUT. Because if you can’t spell it out because you don’t have anything concrete to substantiate your claim, then maybe you should just shut the hell up.
Innocent until proven guilty? Not in the court of media opinion… or politics.Dana (0ee61a) — 3/28/2016 @ 10:51 pm
Great posts today.Patterico (10a746) — 3/28/2016 @ 10:53 pm
Yes, what Patterico said, but is there another source for the clip from another YouTube poster that you could embed? This one looks like it’s from a Trump supporter.nk (dbc370) — 3/28/2016 @ 10:58 pm
Carly “Boxer Shorts Lite” Fiorina is just another RINO shill out to prop up the usual suspects., so that the GOPe can trot out their electable sacrifice, and ensure another 4 or more years of the same. Kabuki Theater at its finest.
i’m pulling for Smoking Meteor Of Death.
enough is enough… 😎redc1c4 (61696e) — 3/28/2016 @ 11:02 pm
Pull what you like, red, it’s a free establishment.nk (dbc370) — 3/28/2016 @ 11:05 pm
nk, I noticed that too, but the only other one I could find was shorter, and didn’t have the reporter’s opening remarks as well as Fiorina’s full fury. I’ll put a little note above this one with an explanation for using it.Dana (0ee61a) — 3/28/2016 @ 11:13 pm
I’m pulling for the selective meteors of Death, but what the heck, it’s a free country.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/28/2016 @ 11:54 pm
This one looks like it’s from a Trump supporter.
Then it’s a stupid Trump supporter.
Try this alternative.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 12:02 am
Oops. Try this alternative: https://youtu.be/_K0oG4H96QsKevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 12:03 am
I thought the meme was Sweet Meteor of Death. At least, it is over at Ace’s. Eh- yours works just as well.Bill H (dcdd7b) — 3/29/2016 @ 12:15 am
video exists of cruz and girl friend. randy ted named in d.c. madams black book.d.c. madam speaks from grave (2805d0) — 3/29/2016 @ 12:19 am
Thanks, Kevin M. I put it up.Dana (0ee61a) — 3/29/2016 @ 12:20 am
Cruz picking Phil Gramm as his economic adviser is stupid. Gramm has been at the root of the economic disaster. Phil Gramm is now an official at UBS, the Swiss bank which has been under fire for its protection of tax-cheating U.S. corporations and the upper echelon of financial speculators. Gramm would be the architect of the Cruz economic model.mg (31009b) — 3/29/2016 @ 12:22 am
WTF, Ted. He has sold out to the establishment.
This party is over.
Ted does not pick one person, or one camp. He has dozens of advisors from different perspectives. That’s how grownups do it. People like Obama pick yes men. Truly stupid people get their advise from TV talking heads.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 1:13 am
Always liked Carly. She will make a great VP.paul deignan (785ef7) — 3/29/2016 @ 1:27 am
Gramm was senator Enron.mg (31009b) — 3/29/2016 @ 2:19 am
Other than Greenspan this toe counter flucked the economy.
With Romney, Ryan, and the booshes now on Ted’s team, I am about out of this romper room debacle.mg (31009b) — 3/29/2016 @ 2:21 am
Establishment republicans must die quickly.
Hey Patterico, I used to read you many years ago in the early blogosphere days, I always thought you had a good head on your shoulders.
I support Trump but I have always liked Ted Cruz, though he hasn’t exactly ran his campaign well (Carson dirty trick, late to party on trade and immigration, his lunatic buddy Beck being attached at the hip, to name just a few problems). That said, I would definitely vote for him over Hilary (unlike, apparently these so-called conservatives parroting the “never trump” line). Think what that means for a minute. We lose Supreme Court and with it every 5-4 decision. For example, that means say good bye to Heller, say good bye to the death penalty, say good bye to ever curtailing affirmative action. And who knows what’s in store with a liberty majority. And for what? Because Trump hurts some feelings? Yes, his tweet and other behavior is ridiculous. But he loves this country and he’s right about immigration and trade.
As to this post, you’re fooling yourself if you think this clip comes off well. It doesn’t. Cruz is too smart to squirm and dance around this straight forward question unless he has a reason to do so. I think he fears he’ll get caught in a lie (that is, he has cheated on his wife) and be forever branded as Lying Ted. It’s obvious, is it not? Why not state he has always been faithful unless it’s widely known that he has not? Maybe this should not matter but the allegations are inextricably tied to his overall credibility and persona given how much he has relied on religion. That’s just reality.
Both sides have gotten too emotional about this race and aren’t seeing the big picture–keeping Clinton out of the WH and keeping the Supreme Court at least moderately conservative. I hope that whoever wins, the losing side will be smart enough to realize the stakes.Old Reader (08f24c) — 3/29/2016 @ 2:55 am
First, this post is by Dana, not Patterico.
Second, Ted Cruz has already responded clearly and forcefully to the National Enquire allegations: He called them “garbage” and “completely false.” Why is that not direct enough for you?DRJ (15874d) — 3/29/2016 @ 3:02 am
I’m not sure what’s hard to understand. They could be “false” by getting details wrong. They could be “false” by getting some things right and some things wrong. It’s vague, squirming language. Saying they’re “garbage” basically means whatever you want it to mean.
He was asked if he had ever cheated on his wife and he refused to answer, repeatedly. Normal people aren’t going to look at that positively. Maybe that isn’t fair and maybe this should not matter. I’m just calling it how I see it. If you won’t say, “yes, of course I have been faithful to my wife,” then something is up. That’s my two cents.Old Reader (08f24c) — 3/29/2016 @ 3:17 am
The Super Pac behind the original Melania meme and Carly Fiorina’s campaign have the same mailing address.
The Cruz campaign was attacking Melania Trump, specifically about the nude cover pic, well before the Utah caucus. (Cruz spokeswoman on Fox News March 8th).
Cruz bought the right to publish the Melania photos.
Your boy is riding dirty.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:39 am
walk walk fashion babyhappyfeet (831175) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:39 am
Oh and Cruz sent me a solicitation for money to pay for the Melania ad buy. I’m looking at it right now.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:46 am
Should I dig deep? We could cut back on cat food (I don’t own a cat, but I feed a herd of them on the back porch).
Nah. Ted, you’re on your own pal. I’ll stick with the cats.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:50 am
Trump. Still the only candidate I can afford.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:52 am
I like Carly’s stand by her man attitude. They should do a 60 Minutes interview.pinandpuller (0845e7) — 3/29/2016 @ 5:40 am
I just rewatched that Steve Croft interview of the Clintons in 1992 and its interesting. This Cruz thing is unfolding in a similar manner although Cruz isn’t the frontrunner and, as yet, there’s no Gennifer Flowers. And we have no hindsight to know if Cruz is Lyin’ Ted or SainTed.
Now if the conspiracy theorists who think that Trump is teeing up Hillary are right then perhaps Hillary ripped her own page from yesterday’s headlines.
“Your answer is not a denial.”-Steve Croftpinandpuller (0845e7) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:03 am
As a follow up I would ask is Cruz being Clintonesque in his response or were both men being lawyeresque? Would Nixon or Obama have responded in similar fashion?pinandpuller (0845e7) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:06 am
I’m hoping SMOD puts the entire state of Massachusetts out of its misery. I have a dream.Colonel Haiku (58355d) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:14 am
Cruz is responding better than I would have to someone thrusting a handful of shit under my nose, but Cruz is a better person. He has a history of putting up with fools if not gladly at least reasonably. Of course, Trumpturds operate to a different standard. Their idea of a reasonable answer is “Go f*** yourself you c**k-sucking f**got”. Anyway, Cruz could issue a five page denial, signed witnessed and notarized and Trumpaninnie would still find way to question its veracity. Anything for Der Combover.nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:20 am
Actually, the right way for Cruz to respond to this is with a rawhide horse whip. But that’s what Melania uses on Trump’s bare behind.nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:42 am
When they get behind closed doors.
And he lets his hair down.
And Melania puts on her spike-heeled thigh boots.
And lets him know who is the man.
Oh, nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors
Fast-talkin’, slow-walkin’, weak-lookin’ Mohair TrumpColonel Haiku (58355d) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:46 am
Cruz isn’t going to show that picture. I’d bet money.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:49 am
That’s a clowder of cats, papertiger. I learned that from Sheldon on The Big Bang Theory.Imam Hoagie ™ (e4fcd6) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:55 am
Anyone read the original GQ article? Read it!: Donnie Fraud was pimping Melania a long time ago.jb (8a9f1d) — 3/29/2016 @ 6:59 am
OK. So Cruz needs to admit or deny the sex files and Hillary promises to release the X files will Trump finally explain how his stubby little fingers manage to create his inexplicable hairstyle?
Enquiring minds want to know.crazy (cde091) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:06 am
A murder of crows.
An unkindness of ravens.
A skein of geese.
A nye of pheasants.
A siege of herons.
A cover of coots.
A kettle of hawks.
What do you call a bunch of lawyers?nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:07 am
Bernie protesters cost $60. Horsewhips not included. Ytpinandpuller (c16705) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:10 am
Thank you Imam Hoagie. PBUY.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:11 am
Clowder chow. Like the sound of that.
Although I like a glaring of cats too.
A drone strike of lawyers?pinandpuller (0845e7) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:13 am
papertiger, I think DRJ already explained to you last week that the mailing address in Alexandria is common for a number of PACs because the incoming mail is handled by the same firm.
I think the analogy is similar to that of “back in the old days” when a mailing address would be the destination for sending in the little subscription postcard that starts your subscription to any number of different magazines.
This really is not the “gotcha!” moment that you and Breitbart.com fantasize that it is.Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:14 am
Wasn’t Trump hiring Hollywood extras to cheer for him at his speeches when he started out?
But if you think I have any love for Moochers for Bernie or Black Olives Kalamata (which latter are also paid agitators courtesy of Soros) ….nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:15 am
40. A conspiracy.nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:16 am
carly says ted didn’t make sexy on numerous not-heidis
carly speaks in shrewish strident tones
ted looks sheepish
he’s definitely off balancehappyfeet (a037ad) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:18 am
What do you call a bunch of lawyers?
A sh*tload of lawyers.Colonel Haiku (58355d) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:20 am
Nah. I think it’s just a few.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:22 am
Or a “hot target” of lawyersColonel Haiku (58355d) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:23 am
A clusterfu*k of lawyers…Colonel Haiku (58355d) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:24 am
a caucus of lawyers.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:34 am
Cruz is not late to the party on immigration. Trump is late to the party on immigration. Patterico devoted an entire post to Cruz’s record on immigration long before Trump came along.
I don’t know what you’re referring to on trade. If you mean Cruz backing huge tariffs on imports he is definitely late on that and I hope he remains late.Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:36 am
@ mg: If you’re abandoning Cruz because he’s rallying the party so that he can win (first the nomination, then the general), then you never had any intention of sticking with him to begin with. You don’t strike me as a quitter, or someone to change his mind based on other people (whom you dislike anyway) changing theirs.
They’re coming to Cruz, mg — he’s not moving toward them. They’re doing it grudgingly, slowly, and in some cases grumpily.
Why would you abandon your candidate when he’s assimilating — and thereby transforming — the establishment Republicans whom you so despise?Beldar (fa637a) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:39 am
How much longer do we have to put up with this mendacious stuff?Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:39 am
What is it you want Cruz to do exactly? Denounce them?Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:43 am
Some Trumpkin named pushpin-something is lying again. The video clip posted here contains an absolute categorical denial of the National Enquirer story. “Garbage” and “entirely false” are unequivocal; there’s no “meaning of ‘is’ is” parsing going on.
But Trumpkins — by definition — have zero capacity to distinguish truth from lies, or else they wouldn’t be following the Big Liar Trump like little Trumpkin puppy-dogs, licking what he’s peed upon, rubbing their face in the poop the Big Liar Trump has spewed behind him in his wake of vulgar insults.
Remember, friends & neighbors: These Trumpkins who comment here are the shills. Their con-man needs them, and they’re desperate to feel important and to feel like they’re “striking back.” They can never be trusted, no more than their con-man principal. They’re not typical of Trump voters — many more people vote for Trump, alas, than actively spread his lies like these Trumpkins are doing here; most Trump voters are suckers, not shills themselves.
But shills are the worst kind of prostitute. And boy, howdy, there are some magnificently brazen — and entertainingly stupid — Trumpkins who shill for him in comments here.Beldar (fa637a) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:45 am
He doubts my word. I’ll pass it over to you Gerald.
There are a couple redirects to his campaign fund in there but I couldn’t get a CLEAN lock to beam it over.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:45 am
Beldar at 7:45 Heh! I had a similar comment moderated up the thread for not asterisking one of the 7 words.
Yes. Trumpadoodoos who will believe Trump’s lies will refuse to believe any truth that hurts Der Combover, preferring to wallow in the ordure that spews out of the badgerhead’s mouth.nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:50 am
I don’t see anything about Melania in there papertiger.Gerald A (7c7ffb) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:51 am
Oh and Cruz sent me a solicitation for money to pay for the Melania ad buy. I’m looking at it right now.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:46 am
Nothing in what you posted that even remotely alludes to that.Colonel Haiku (58355d) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:52 am
Thanks, though, papertiger. I didn’t know about the deadline. I’ll see what I have left in the card after I pay my Obamacare.nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:54 am
Where in that email does it say anything about some PAC’s “Melania ad buy?”carlitos (c24ed5) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:55 am
@ Col. H: The internet always has lists. This list, which I’ve seen republished many places, suggests these collective terms signifying a group of lawyers: a disputation of lawyers; a greed of lawyers; a huddle of lawyers; a quarrel of lawyers; an eloquence of lawyers; and an escheat of lawyers.
None of those tickle me, although “disputation” (which resonates with deputation, a more conventional collective noun) isn’t too bad.
This longer list includes a scrotum of lawyers (which is sexist, but sort of fits with the old joke about why lawyers have to wear neckties in court); a haggle of lawyers; a kevlar of lawyers; and a logjam of lawyers.
I think there’s still something genuinely brilliant out there, though. The floor remains open to nominations, and you don’t need to have won eight states first.Beldar (fa637a) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:58 am
Our campaign — Heidi and I — need you to keep us in this race.
yeah that’s not a weird sentencehappyfeet (a037ad) — 3/29/2016 @ 7:58 am
I disagree with the categorization of Trump shills as prostitutes. Trump doesn’t pay them, so sluts is more accurate. The vacuous stupidity is only entertaining for a short time before it becomes simply boring to the point where one might wonder if the actual intent is to diminish opinion of Trump on the basis of close association with halfwits.Rick Ballard (aa11e0) — 3/29/2016 @ 8:01 am
Strumpets?nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 8:08 am
Beldar – The old guard makes me nervous. And to name Phil Gramm as his economic advisor is troubling for me. I am beat up by the last 16 years of Hacks ruining our country. I need a break. Time to concentrate on my target and lower my handicap.mg (31009b) — 3/29/2016 @ 8:11 am
The Jupiter, FL police have issued a Notice to Appear to Trump’s thug Lewandoski re the battery of Fields.Rick Ballard (aa11e0) — 3/29/2016 @ 8:18 am
Trump’s former Communications Director of the Make America Great Again Super PAC has written an open letter explaining why she no longer supports the candidate:
“Self-preservationist.” I’ve been grasping for right term to describe what I see as the element that underlies his character, and this is it. Self-preservationist. No one person, no one thing, no one country will ever come before him because underneath it all, he is, first and foremost, about Donald Trump. Self-preservationist.Dana (0ee61a) — 3/29/2016 @ 8:24 am
Good stuff, Beldar!
A puddle of lawyers… A gaggle of lawyers… A maraud of lawyers…Colonel Haiku (58355d) — 3/29/2016 @ 8:26 am
Anything to prevent Donald going head to head with CruzSteve Nickerson (a10ea1) — 3/29/2016 @ 8:39 am
The Donald and his followers running scared
I am just a bald mannk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 9:07 am
But my story’s seldom told
I have spent a ton of money
On a stable full of publicists
All lies and gas
Still my Trumpniks hear what they want to hear
And disregard the rest.
Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah
They don’t hear you
Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah
It’s in the amount. Cruz is suddenly short the half mil he transferred over to Fiorina/Mair/Carly/Liz.papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 9:24 am
paper tiger, a fundraising mail? Good lord, grow up.SPQR (8bad86) — 3/29/2016 @ 9:32 am
yes, lets talk about real issues,
the promise made in 2007, was one that was kept,narciso (732bc0) — 3/29/2016 @ 9:48 am
Erica Grieder is a senior editor at reliably liberal Texas Monthly, and as such she’s been a long-time critic of Ted Cruz. I’m listing here (slightly reformatted) some of her tweet-thangies on the subject of Cruz and the National Enquirer smear:
This amuses me for two reasons:
First, her argument, though circumstantial, is nevertheless extremely powerful. Even before he was sworn in as Texas’ junior senator, Ted Cruz was already cultivating the best of enemies — not only among progressives and mainstream media figures like Grieder, but among establishment Republicans. As a result (and with advance apologies for freely mixed metaphors), Cruz been in a media fishbowl, and under ten thousand personal microscopes, continuously. He’s surrounded, in other words, by people with the means, motive, and opportunity to blow the whistle, point the finger, scream bloody murder, and live in political history forever by blowing a major GOP presidential candidate out of the water.
I’ve seen this same point made, albeit more subtly, by several other TV talking heads in their interviews with the candidates and others about this garbage — frequent reminders to the effect that “None of our [CNN’s, Fox’s, etc.] reporting confirms any of these allegations by the Enquirer.” The clear subtext is: “And if it were possible to confirm any of these allegations, we’d damn sure have already done so!”
Second, note how Twitter — pernicious, shallow, ridiculous medium that it is — reduces a senior editor of a respected magazine to the tone of — well, of a twittering sixteen-year-old. I mean. lolBeldar (fa637a) — 3/29/2016 @ 10:18 am
we started dancing and Trump put us into a groove
as soon as we started to movehappyfeet (a037ad) — 3/29/2016 @ 10:19 am
who is the journolist spreading lies, why don’t they name them, robert mccain did diligently uncover one nazgul, that the enquirer and the daily mail kept using,narciso (732bc0) — 3/29/2016 @ 10:22 am
Ms. Grieder is apparently able to write quite presentable prose if she’s not using Twitter, as she did in an essay entitled Seriously, Republicans. It’s Time to Drink the Cruz Kool-Aid. Her concluding lines: “In the end, frankly, Cruz is a better candidate than his critics in the Republican establishment deserve.”
Twitter makes everyone stupider.
Now it’s time again for me to go yell at the kids on the lawn.Beldar (fa637a) — 3/29/2016 @ 10:25 am
how many are supporting cruz,
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-fight-quarter-republican-senators-now-back-meetings-merrick-n546931narciso (732bc0) — 3/29/2016 @ 10:55 am
They’re coming to Cruz, mg
mg won’t support any candidate that appeals to more than 5% of the population. You should know that by now.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:04 am
by all means consider her,
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/274574-second-judge-opens-door-to-depositions-in-clinton-email-casenarciso (732bc0) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:05 am
A suit of lawyers.
A cell of lawyers.
A glut of lawyers.
A crush of lawyers.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:11 am
So, what happens were Trump to drop out today, saying that his intention was to inject certain issues (trade, immigration, jobs) into the GOP debate but had no intention of becoming the front-runner?Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:14 am
Any GOP Senator who talks to Merrill should get a 3rd party challenger immediately, using party funds for the signature gathering.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:16 am
and the superpacs will crush them as the did with mcdaniels, wolfe, et al, don’t you get it,narciso (732bc0) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:22 am
tell us again, marco, of sander’s bangup job,
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/03/27/veteran-burned-himself-alive-outside-va-clinic.html?via=mobile&source=twitternarciso (732bc0) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:24 am
that was then, this is now, narcisco.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:33 am
Consider the NRA’s attitude towards Merrill.Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:34 am
oops. Merrick Garland. Whatever,Kevin M (25bbee) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:36 am
What do you call a bunch of lawyers?
Bananas come in bunches
Lawyers come in punches.felipe (b5e0f4) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:37 am
An intercession of lawyers.felipe (b5e0f4) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:46 am
Barmen?nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:48 am
Strike that, it was stupid. I’m sticking with conspiracy.nk (dbc370) — 3/29/2016 @ 11:49 am
Gramm was senator Enron.
Yea, he was the epitome of laissez-faire capitalism back before the banking industry had been fully deregulated and allowed to play footsies with Wall Street. A big mistake and very naive of hands-off conservatives, who are myopic about that particular issue the way liberals are myopic about any number of socio-cultural (and economic) issues.
It’s disappointing that Cruz doesn’t realize that aspect of folks like Gramm and the way an obliviousness to the issue of business-as-usual (and picking the usual suspects) is a real turn-off to many people.
However, I continue to believe the only real hurdle for Cruz (and it most certainly doesn’t have anything to do with the tempest in a teapot of his ladies versus Trump’s ladies) pertains to his not triggering the warm fuzzies in a good portion of the onlooking public, including some standoffish Republican insiders too. Or a reference to a lack of the Peggy-Noonan phenomenon that the Democrat nominee was regrettably able to latch onto back in November 2008.Mark (026e69) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:27 pm
My final two answers:
A bellum of lawyers
A gavel of lawyers
O.K. one for Poe:
A reywal of lawyersfelipe (56556d) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:36 pm
Mark, the banking industry was “fully deregulated”? In what fantasyland?SPQR (a3a747) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:39 pm
A lobby of lawyers….papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:48 pm
a beldar of lawyers! hah what do i winhappyfeet (831175) — 3/29/2016 @ 4:49 pm