Tuesday, January 21, 2020

The president’s legal case would negate any need for witnesses. But constitutional scholars say that it’s wrong.

from NYT > Top Stories https://ift.tt/2RyRskp

Related Posts:

  • LATEST NEWSNatalie Meade recommends “Part of My Soul,” which offers letters, interviews, and testimonies that document Winnie Mandela‘s fight against apartheid South Africa. from Everything https://ift.tt/2ODqc24 … Read More
  • LATEST NEWSTroy Patterson writes about Terence Nance’s late-night show on HBO, which includes a collage of sketches, music videos, and features appearances by Black Thought and Jon Hamm. from Everything https://ift.tt/2n4VT7R … Read More
  • LATEST NEWSDavid Sipress’s Daily Cartoon anticipates the 2018 midterms. from Everything https://ift.tt/2n6Bwaw … Read More
  • LATEST NEWSRichard Brody reviews “The Miseducation of Cameron Post,” the Iranian-American director Desiree Akhavan’s new film, about gay teens in a Christian conversion-therapy center. from Everything https://ift.tt/2LX6MGM … Read More
  • LATEST NEWSTamara Shopsin humorously illustrates a typography of bugs. from Everything https://ift.tt/2AwM5Ni … Read More

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Followers

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Popular Posts

FOLLOW BY EMAIL

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner