The Schnauzer settles down

We schnauzers are known to be a bit hyper. And the Legal Schnauzer went a bit over the edge while posting yesterday about the ExxonMobil ruling, breaking into a fit of capital letters and exclamation points.

Reading that post reminds me of our beloved Murphy when she used to see crows walking in our front yard. Man, she hated crows, and she would almost try to dive through the window to get at them--until we closed the blinds. (The crows never seemed to notice a thing; they just kept doing that funky crow walk.)

Anyway, I've taken some doggie Xanax, so maybe I can discuss the ExxonMobil case with a bit more clarity tonight.

When I talk about criminal acts by Alabama's Republican Supreme Court justices, it might be best to refer (calmly . . . calmly) to the Bribery: A Primer post that was part of our Mississippi Churning series on the Paul Minor case.

And then we have the Mail Fraud: A Primer post from that same series. Remember those terms: Bribery and honest-services mail fraud. That's what we are talking about here.

Those posts will give you the legal foundation you need to understand what happened in the ExxonMobil case. And we will go into it in more detail soon.

The bottom line? You take money from a party and then act in a corrupt and unlawful manner, you've committed a crime.

Now, I feel better. But I feel the Xanax wearing off. Better go.

To all a good night . . .