22,000,000

We only recently passed the 21,000,000 mark last April but we just hit 22,000,000 today, according to WordPress. Congratulations everyone. This has been a banner year for the site with a continuing increase in traffic, links on other sites, and new voices on the blog. These milestones are coming faster and they give us a chance to look at the spread of our regular readers and commentators. As always, I want to offer special thanks for our weekend contributors: Mark Esposito, Eliane Magliaro, Mike Appleton, Larry Rafferty, Charlton Stanley, Darren Smith, and Kimberly Deines. The increasing traffic on the site is gratifying and reaffirms that there are many people looking for mature and civil debate. Even among the top ten sites, I believe that we offer a unique forum of different views and backgrounds in the discussion of law and politics (and a few quirky items).


We continue to rank in among the most popular legal blogs in the world.

In the last 30 days, our ten biggest international sources for readers came from

1. United States
2. Canada
3. United Kingdom
4. Australia
5. Germany
6. India
7. France
8. The Netherlands
9. Sweden
10 Philippines

The list has remained unchanged except that Sweden replaced Denmark at number 9.

The top ten posted in terms of readership in the last 30 days were:

1. Texas Woman Pleads Guilty To Manslaughter and Later Discovers The Fatal Accident Was Caused By Defective Switch
2. FEDERAL COURT DISMISSES ALL CHARGES AGAINST DR. SAMI AL-ARIAN
3. Wikileaks: Obama Administration Secretly Worked To Prevent Prosecution of War Crimes By The Bush Administration
4. 10 Reasons The U.S. Is No Longer The Land Of The Free
5. Supreme Court Rules For Hobby Lobby In Major Blow To Obama Administration
6. Florida Man Fires Four Shots Into The Air And Is Given 20 Years Per Shot To Run Consecutively or 80 Years In Prison
7. Teacher Admits To Sexual Relationship With 14-Year-Old Student But Is Sentenced To Only 30 Days In Jail
8. Mother Of Seven Dies in Jail While Serving Sentence For The Truancy Of Her Children
9. Hell: Exothermic or Endothermic?
10. Supreme Court Unanimously Finds President Obama Violated Constitution In Use Of Recess Appointments

The most frequent commentators in the current cycle were:

Nick Spinelli
Paul C. Schulte
Annie
TheSaucyMugwump
Karen S
Max-1
Dredd

We continue to show robust growth at this blog, which is a testament to our commitment to hearing from a variety of different perspectives and to allow for passionate but civil discussion. While we often have strong disagreements, the vast majority of readers and commentators continue to come to this site for civil, adult exchanges on a wide array of issues. It is a continuing honor to be associated with this site and the readers and posters that compose our virtual community. Thanks again.

42 thoughts on “22,000,000

  1. Yes…. Civility is indeed important.

    One day I expect to see the glass ball dropping in time square.

  2. Professor Turley you do allow for contributors who disagree with you (a good move) but it seems to me you do not allow for contributors from the “right”. I think it would further the expansion if you did so.

  3. The country is desperate for legal analysis without the partisan
    spin. Propaganda dominates the MSM who now consider reading the WH talking points investigative research. The lawlessness,
    corruption and unaccountability that Obama has instilled in the federal agencies and his WH are dooming any hope that the
    rule of law or justice will survive. Obama, Holder and Reid are
    a troika of WMDs. Any chance you could volunteer to assist
    Boehner with his law suit against Obama? Having to depend on
    him alone is quite dispiriting.

  4. I’m more moderate and lean right, but I so appreciate the civility here. And it’s very refreshing to ‘read’ someone who is beyond the ‘talking points’ and speaks from the point of view based on the rule of law and constitution, with a great deal of common sense. Common sense is sorely lacking in too many conversations these days.

  5. The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

  6. Is there any greater beast of burden upon the issue of abrogating free speech, than that of a federal justice forbidding a victim the right to point out fraud upon the court – being perpetrated by those sworn to protect the Constitution? (Because she has to get back to “Tweeter”
    http://petters-fraud.com/Transcript_Hearing_2009_eToys_JudgeMFW_says_she_is_going_back_to_Twitter.pdf

    What good does it do to have a count of millions, when you sit idle by as the DOJ and federal courts are upon bend of knee before an organized crime syndicate engaging in a RICO so powerful that it was able to arrange for one of its own to become the DE USA – and shut down the Public Corruption Task Force (while threatening career federal agents to silence)?
    Here’s my (clocked/time stamped) filing to the public corruption task force unit.
    http://petters-fraud.com/Clocked_18_USC_3057_A.pdf

    Here’s the shut down story of the task force 12 weeks later

    articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/20/local/me-shakeup20

    ——————————————–
    Why is it that a victim has to beg those who know the law and write in search of protecting the sacrosanct, when they can readily see what is happening because

    Res ipsa loquitur?

    There’s no great manifest injustice than those are swear to protect and uphold the law – especially tax paid public servants – fail to do so for the sake of veiled agendas (such as the hopes to be a friend of a POTUS).

    Is that any worse than freedom of the press being to no avail;
    because those with great followings

    restrict the truth from shining its light?

  7. Laser Haas,

    I retrieved your comment from the spam filter (1:22). The reason this happened was because if a comment has more than two hyperlinks, it gets flagged as spam. To avoid this, if you have more than two links for the readers, just add an extra comment for the additional ones. I de-referenced one of the hyperlinks to make this work for this comment.

  8. I subscribed to your blog several months ago. I am impressed by your reasoned and logical approach to the events of today. You say you are a supporter of the President and his policies. Would you consider doing a post specifically of what you support and why? I am sure there are many of us who are curious. Thank you, Nancy Campbell

  9. Last time I was placed between my two favorite guys, Dredd and Raff, not so this time :( I need to comment less to land next to Dredd. Max is great too.

  10. I enjoy the blog. I would like to see a topic on the Roberts Court and whether there has been a shift from right to middle by Roberts, Scalia, Alito on the issue of privacy. In my opinion the Wurie and Riley cases (consolidated) which were unanimous, show a strong tilt in favor of privacy. That aspect of life is covered by several provisions of the Constitution including the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. The privacy rights involve our blogging rights. The Court and indeed the mainstream media sometimes put journalists on a free press pedestal and leave the bloggers and truth seekers like Snowden and indeed the folks who blog on this free speech blog on a lower rung. I recommend the recent book by Glenn Greenwald, titled No Place To Hide. I also recommend that everyone read the Wurie/Riley decision recently handed down.

  11. Congratulations everyone.

    What surprises me is how much traction the “Hell, exothermic or endothermic” article received over the last few months.

  12. Darren,
    I have been watching that article as well. It was published in May 2010, and as of this writing, has garnered 160,013 hits.

    I am thinking that some physics prof has been making it a class assignment. Either that or a theology professor. Maybe both.

  13. I’m encouraged that there are straws upon the autocratic beast’s back;
    which seems to be emboldening others to stand up against the fray.

    A federal justice (His Honor Richard G Kopf) is upon his personal blog openly quoting “stfu” to the SCOTUS inane decision of the Hobby Lobby case.

    Another Richard (Washington State Supreme Court Justice Richard B. Sanders) yelled out the word “tyrant” thrice to then USAG Mukasey at a federalist dinner in D.C.

    The reason these bold public stands are necessary;
    is because We the People are lax.

    KUDOs to those who risk much against usurping despotism!

  14. Laser Haas – your judge suggests the court dodge the issue by refusing to take it. However, refusing to take the case is a decision of its own. The ruling of the lower court stands. You only need 4 judges to decide to take a case and it could have been the 4 who voted against it who decided to take it. Personally, I am a little concerned about how much your judge knows about the Supreme Court. :)

  15. 1st of all – he ain’t “your judge” (my); as he sits not upon any of my cases..

    Your legal prowess and facts foundation has never been true to form.

    Finally, I commend any judge who would question the questionable. (Especially one who powerpoints the absurdity with a “stfu” quote). As the problem with decorum and requisite civility is most often touted by those parties nefarious!

  16. Laser Haas – is English your first language? I only ask because you write like someone from the late 19th century. BTW, he is your judge because you linked him. If you have problems with my facts, rebut them.

  17. One is unable to rebut the ad hominem oppressive by seeking reason/logic.

    When you can cite the statute that makes my linking some – a dependency; and/or your PHD in Supreme Court issues that would make you more of a scholar than a federal justice like His Honor Kopf.

    Then we can banter pf rebuttal.

  18. Laser Haas – no one on here is required to have a J.D. or Ph.D.. Personally, I have an M.A., but others on here have B. A. s and some less than that. Please rebut my facts. BTW, what are your credentials? I get the feeling you are writing in a different language and then translating it into English.

  19. Yes, we are speaking 2 different languages.

    I’ve shut down 3 law firms, helped get 26 people convicted, gave the msm the facts to prong the pathway for Mitt not to become POTUS and even made the Deputy Director of the DOJ EOUST resign.

    Your language is that of haughty autocrats oppressive;
    and mine is of a victim thereof severally pee’d off!

  20. Laser Haas – I asked for your academic credentials, since you were asking for mine, not your apparent ability to destroy things and people. BTW, you hardly sound like a victim.

  21. Laser,

    As you can note of late I have not been commenting. I see you are the latest victim of the taunts. It’s unfortunate, I scan through the comments and see whom I wish to read. Yours, Annie’s and others are a good reflection of my thinking.

    Keep the ship afloat, and watch the starboard green lights…..

  22. Thanks AY;

    We are getting to the end of my battle. A crossroads where the 9th Circuit dangles the fate of the many cases in their hand. All they have to do is simply permit the case to go forward and re-affirm the scheduling order.
    http://petters-fraud.com/9th_cir_notice_of_appeal_and_schedule_barrygold_mnat_gww.pdf

    Of course, if they do permit the case its proper just due; then my adversaries will wish me a swifter end. (As they can never permit the case to go to trial).

    I’m meeting with people in D.C. – in the coming weeks;

    who have great anxiety about the state of affairs in our fed system of justice.

    Thanks – again – Much!

  23. Paul;

    My academic credentials are what I’ve done with what I know.

    As for you, the making of my case for me (by your remark of my status as a victim); demonstrates how damnation bent you are concerning the facts! One would be hard pressed, in the extreme, to find a victim equal to what we’ve endured (who is still breathing).

    There’s only 200 plus articles out there are the cases;
    and my battling Romney, Bain and Goldman Sachs for 12 years.
    http://www.politicususa.com/2012/11/23/meet-man-battling-romney-bains-bankruptcy-fraud-12-years.html

    I’ve had reporters and even Asst. US Attorneys who have opened up their home and wallets to help ease my suffering. Whereas you, open up only your words of condescending/ad hominem. You would side with the assaulting parties upon what is good for all, for the sake of what you believe is the law of G-d.

    The one and same G-d who provided freedom of choice that you seek to arbitrarily and capriciously wash away!

  24. Laser – my apologies. You changed your handle so I did not recognize you. If you remember, I told you I would contribute to a kickstarter for your suit.

  25. Paul;

    Thank you for your candor.

    I appreciate your offer to do a kickstarter;
    but I’ve learned people simply don’t care

    when you tell your own (sad) tale.

Comments are closed.