re: #177 lawhawk

Apparently not CMP, which broke a bunch of laws with those “stings” that don’t even show any illegality on the part of PP. But PP should be charged with something because they’re evil and must be destroyed.

That’s the logic here. Which is to say, not logic, but a belief that PP must be destroyed and therefore anything goes in furtherance of that goal.

I am guessing it’s too much trouble to try to explain the exclusionary rule and the fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine to wingnuts, right?