3332
Comments (146)
sorted by:
114
sir-coffee 114 points ago +114 / -0

Jenna Ellis must be seething right now.

50
deleted 50 points ago +50 / -0
8
Test_user21 8 points ago +8 / -0

Wait, are you tryna say we're currently witnessing her clam demeanour at play? <shudder>

7
TaxDollarsHardAtWork 7 points ago +7 / -0

I have sometimes wondered about her clams demeanor as well.

6
Long_time_lurker 6 points ago +6 / -0

This appears to be some randos with no connection to Disney trying to sue over this law that got dismissed because the law doesn't even apply to them so they have no standing. Has Disney raised their own lawsuit on this?

I sorta see where people are coming from--the government shouldn't retaliate against lawful speech. However, I have a hard time linking tax changes to "retaliation" because if they open that can of worms then every tax change that somehow disfavors anyone can be challenged on such grounds. Also, this is Disney who got special rights for a city of the future they never actually built and I don't think they should have gotten such special rights to begin with.

4
semsem 4 points ago +4 / -0

(1) The morons from this suit genuinely had no standing, and even had they been the proper parties, the issue would not yet be ripe (they're speculating over potential future damages, but none have yet occurred) for adjudication. Idiotic lawsuit, all around.

(2) Disney can't actually sue, or else they legally expose the pretense that the Reedy Creek Improvement District is for public benefit as untrue. The parties that would have proper standing to sue would be the residents/property owners within RCID. Trouble is, those properties are all held by subsidiaries of Disney, and the residents are all employees of Disney, none of them holding the property upon which they preside. If those subsidiaries bring suit, it becomes very easy to (legally) argue that the RCID takes actions not for public benefit, but rather for an exclusive private interest, and so you can begin targeting their bonds and permits instead. This leads to audits and disclosures, which Disney also does not want, and ultimately can still lead to the dissolution of RCID.

The RCID is a municipal agency, and is legally distinct from Disney. Targeting RCID is not targeting Disney, not by any legal consideration. If Disney argues it is the same, then RCID (or the behavior of RCID and entities within) is likely not legally valid, albeit on distinct grounds from the present legislative dissolution passed and scheduled for June 2023.

Heads, Florida wins. Tails, Disney loses.

(3) Disney itself has not filed anything of import. They know they pretty much can't do anything official under the law without making it worse, so it's been PR moves and not much else. I expect some proxy shrieking for a time, and lobbying and PR for a while after, then probably some 'novel' legal theories for a little bit.

They'll ultimately end up kissing the ring, and a more conventional special district under current law will probably be established on the same or similar geographical boundaries, provided Disney does swallow its pride and kiss the ring. The legislation passed allows for a new special district to be implemented immediately. Realistically, that's probably two weeks to a month gap, given processing time and paperwork. Biggest change would likely be that the county would provide policing, along with the required public disclosures. Disney just needs to come to terms with finding its own ass caught in a sling by way of reckless arrogance, and move to fix it expeditiously, instead of seething and throwing tantrums.

1
Long_time_lurker 1 point ago +1 / -0

Good to talk to someone with clear legal knowledge, thanks for the info.

Something tells me the Disneys aren't going to like the policing change, though.

1
semsem 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, they won't be pleased. Can't hide as much- even when what they want to hide is just the mundane.

To be clear, though, I have no 'proper' legal knowledge, I've just been basking in the schadenfreude on this one so much that I've been checking on it regularly, in great part via other sources and commentaries that do come from a place of sound legal knowledge. So, second-hand analysis, but it seems solid to me.

Even without that, the case that just got dismissed was thoroughly idiotic, even just working from the basic civics and civil law knowledge I got in high school.

And I just realized I typed "RDIC" instead of "RCID" all through that post above. I must edit that.

20
jpower 20 points ago +20 / -0

I missed this - why Jenna Ellis?

73
Deadpool 73 points ago +73 / -0

She offered her services to them across social media. She offered to help Disney fight DeSantis and was removing any question about who’s side she was on. Damn RINO grifter.

26
Spicemustfiow 26 points ago +26 / -0

I’m not trying to be autistic but this situation in particular offers up a great example to everyone as to the root of the establishment and what causes these people to betray principles.

Money and greed. Here the situation was direct and simple enough to where she had to make her allegiances transparent.

In DC they often hide that fact behind layers of bullshit.

18
deleted 18 points ago +18 / -0
9
DrJosephWarren 9 points ago +9 / -0

Underrated comment

9
rebelde_sin_causa 9 points ago +9 / -0

She didn't have to make her allegiance transparent. She didn't have to do anything. She could have been silent about it.

8
Spicemustfiow 8 points ago +8 / -0

Yep. But she decided to exploit her image to try and prop up a corporation in the eyes of the public. So now her image pays the price.

1
notCIA 1 point ago +1 / -0

But then she wouldn't be able to cash in on this, and every other oppurtunity down the line.

2
Mangomangomango89 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think in her case it was more her wanting to be seen by others as an idealist that follows principals and not political parties. Part of it is probably because women by nature are more collaborative and wanting to get along.

As a Christian, I would hope she would put what is right over what her legal opinion is. That being said, she is really stretching to believe that Disney is somehow the victim of anything here besides its own stupidity.

1
Spicemustfiow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nah I have seen that game too many times.

“Oh look my selfish goals no longer align with my political ones. Quick, let me try and look principled.”

0
hansgruber7 0 points ago +1 / -1

She's just an attention-seeking grifter.

-1
SuspendBeforeYouBan -1 points ago +4 / -5

She's also a woman. We used to call this being a woman.

Women do not belong in industry or politics.

2
TrannyClausSliceDice 2 points ago +3 / -1

Hmm

Well what about…

Beto

Schumer

Schiff

Eric Adam’s

Cuomo brothers

DeBlasio

Cuck “Republican” Governor from Utah

Romney

Biden

Obama

Clinton

Podesta

Wheeler

Cory Booker

ButtGag

Bernie

Andy “call me hitler” Beshear

Don Lemon

To name a few…

-2
memepoon -2 points ago +1 / -3

Women outperform in major industries (social work, healthcare), be glad we contribute

0
SuspendBeforeYouBan 0 points ago +2 / -2

Both those areas should be abolished and refunded in our taxes. Women's only contribution should be at home, raising children and supporting their husband.

-1
memepoon -1 points ago +1 / -2

Guess where babies are born, goofy. I suppose you think husbands can just handle that one at home too.

-25
deleted -25 points ago +1 / -26
16
Spicemustfiow 16 points ago +17 / -1

I’m so beta that you needed to log onto your handshake account to tell me that.

Stop projecting.

It’s entirely possible she has done good in the past. But that changes literally nothing about he point I made.

People betray their principles for the reasons I mentioned. If she was MAGA there’s no way she helps Disney. So what’s her motivation here.

If she had good motivations you would have already told me that.

Instead you go beta and log onto your handshake then go omega and play whataboutism. Go be a loser somewhere else.

-17
deleted -17 points ago +1 / -18
5
Spicemustfiow 5 points ago +5 / -0

You can’t label people beta and support someone who doesn’t understand how to win vs socialism.

You’re clearly trolling now. Blocked.

5
TrannyClausSliceDice 5 points ago +5 / -0

How can ANY conservative possibly offer to HELP Disney? Seriously?

Okay i can see maybe not agreeing wiwith n DeSantis (I do) but I’ll give ‘em that.

But helping woke ass groomer degenerate Disney?? WTF?

2
Goozmania 2 points ago +3 / -1

She's not a RINO; She's just not MAGA.

1
Throwingway22 1 point ago +9 / -8

Not a RINO grifter, to be fair. She was the only competent lawyer Trump had during the steal and she lost a lot professionally for it.

She's a conservatarian loser. Taking back ground is antithema their personality.

-12
deleted -12 points ago +8 / -20
9
Truman_Show 9 points ago +9 / -0

Oh please if you can’t see it was to hurt Desantis you better ask the steward to put on your seatbelt and club you in the head with small hammer because you sir are a retard

1
notCIA 1 point ago +1 / -0

What the hell is this, Monty Python?

1
Getthetorches 1 point ago +1 / -0

👍

-13
deleted -13 points ago +1 / -14
9
randomusename 9 points ago +9 / -0

Her stance on disney sucks ass. Its one thing for Rand Paul to be a douche at times over some libertarian principal and not support de-certifying the election, and its another thing when Ellis offers up her services to defend disney in court potentually causing more MAGA resources to be used against her and potentually serving MAGA a defeat. The left does not operate like that, and it sure as shit needs to be rejected when anyone who portrays themselves as MAGA does it.

3
Deadpool 3 points ago +3 / -0

Bingo. Well said fren

2
notCIA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Big difference there. Rand Paul has a pretty clear and defensible position that he sticks to, Ellis is just money grubbing.

-8
deleted -8 points ago +1 / -9
3
Truman_Show 3 points ago +4 / -1

Shut up you faggot. You know full well what she was trying to do. Yes, it is a free speech issue in theory, also in theory it’s a criminal declaration of intent to subvert democratic laws. If I say I’m going to disobey a law maybe it’s free speech and maybe it’s criminal intent

2
getkek 2 points ago +2 / -0

Free speech that is a one-way street dependent on the flow of money aka lobbying. I can’t believe she vouched for them.

2
notCIA 2 points ago +2 / -0

All they did was cut ties with a business. Disney has no right to special privileges afforded only to them. Calling business deals between the state and companies a free speech issue would mean that the government can't function in that relationship. I could lose a government contract for laying a foundation and just say it's because they didn't like me telling them it would be 3 weeks behind. Violated muh freedumb of speech, damnit.

6
Goozmania 6 points ago +6 / -0

Jenna Ellis said far worse about Trump...

-11
deleted -11 points ago +1 / -12
4
1
TrannyClausSliceDice 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fuck her for defending groomer Disney BUT how many fellow MAGA pedes do we have now that have seen the light and used to be cuck leftists or anti trump?

2
ChilledCovfefe 2 points ago +2 / -0

take my upvote you ultra MAGA bitch!

2
MAGAholic2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Upvoted

1
rapsheet1mile 1 point ago +1 / -0

From an observers perspective, this seems like a blatant strawman.

-7
deleted -7 points ago +1 / -8
9
MissingTrump 9 points ago +9 / -0

Because she is a grifter bitch.

3
sully 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm so glad my constant warnings and bitching about Ellis is vindicated now.

A Dem/never-Trumper can only grift for so long.

3
Liberals_R_Idiots 3 points ago +3 / -0

She needs to be bitch slapped into oblivion.

2
idrago01 2 points ago +2 / -0

jenna clearly has a little mermaid vibrator

47
Bearing51 47 points ago +47 / -0

My buddy in Florida seethes and screams about how this law will increase his taxes by 30%, but I have yet to see any evidence that backs-up this theory.

44
deleted 44 points ago +44 / -0
32
tired-of-crap 32 points ago +32 / -0

The ONLY tax that might go up is DISNEY's tax. Reedy creek is a special district, so all the landowners in the special district have to pay the tax. Disney is the only landowner other than Reedy Creek itself, thus responsible for ALL the tax.

8
ShotgunJoe 8 points ago +8 / -0

Reedy creek is no longer a special district, it is gone, poof, with a stroke of a pen.

8
K-Harbour 8 points ago +8 / -0

Poof, also, Disney financing through muni bonds!

“servicing about $977 million in long-term bond debt that Reedy Creek has issued over the years.”

1
OneTwoBuckleMyShoe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Walt Disney woulda taken a blow torch to that den of insidious perverts long ago.

1
PKC_MAN 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just like Keizer Soze

1
tired-of-crap 1 point ago +1 / -0

Actually no. It does not end until 7/1/2023.

3
Bearing51 3 points ago +5 / -2

I just wish Florida didn't have so many damned tolls on the road.

22
2ScoopsofCovfefe 22 points ago +23 / -1

I will take a use tax over an income tax any day of the week. Most of the toll roads have free road alternates.

3
GainesvilleFlorida 3 points ago +4 / -1

Why did someone downvote?
I did notice sometimes I’m scrolling through hitting upvotes and sometimes on mobile but downvote instead.

16
UsernameChexOut 16 points ago +16 / -0

I'm confused why he thinks that Disney finally starting to pay taxes will make his taxes go up? If anything, should have the opposite effect...

3
Bearing51 3 points ago +3 / -0

His reasoning is that the costs that Disney originally paid would somehow transfer to the taxpayer.

6
Goozmania 6 points ago +6 / -0

This. They think they're going to have to pay for Disney's police and fire, now. The reality, however, is Disney will renegotiate their privileges and nothing will change. This will never go into effect.

What worries me is the left cheats a Pedocrat into office specifically for Disney's renegotiated privileges.

2
littleman 2 points ago +2 / -0

The costs would, but Disney also becomes a taxpayer worth lots of valuable land that can be taxed.

12
deleted 12 points ago +12 / -0
5
GainesvilleFlorida 5 points ago +5 / -0

I am Floridian. I can confirm that 9 out of 10 people I know in a group do not visit Disney or it’s properties.

2
TrannyClausSliceDice 2 points ago +3 / -1

Well unfortunately a fuck ton of other people you don’t know still go there and purchase Disney shit in some way.

They make aBsurd amounts of money. Haven’t slowed down at all.

8
CnnWillBlackmailYou 8 points ago +8 / -0

So Disney suddenly having to pay taxes is going to cause his taxes to increase?

How fucking stupid do you have to be to be on the left?

4
Throwingway22 4 points ago +5 / -1

Your buddy is Disney?

32
tooanalytical 32 points ago +32 / -0

If you don’t like Florida’s laws go make your own state.

Hope they have more pedo busts soon to further justify stripping more special treatment away.

14
123breadman 14 points ago +14 / -0

You mean go to California.

22
Rooster-J-Cogburn 22 points ago +22 / -0

DeSantis got that big dick energy going. Some might say Ultra MAGA?

-14
deleted -14 points ago +1 / -15
8
IllKissYourBoobies 8 points ago +8 / -0

Cry harder. Lol

-8
deleted -8 points ago +1 / -9
16
BlitheringIdiot 16 points ago +16 / -0

So typical. The law is passed in the correct manner and the Leftists try to get the courts to reverse the law using no true legal grounds (like actual constitutionality).

3
Maga2020Maga2020 3 points ago +4 / -1

DeSantis's redistricting law just got struck down by a lefty judge.

Lets see if they can fast track it to a higher court.

3
Liberty4All 3 points ago +3 / -0

They are definitely trying to fast track it to the appellate court. From a Forbes article today:

DeSantis’ Communications Director Taryn Fenske told Forbes on Wednesday the state will appeal Smith’s ruling to a higher court, and is “confident the constitutional map enacted by the Florida legislature and signed into law passes legal muster.” The case will head to a state appellate court next, and could eventually reach the conservative-leaning Florida Supreme Court.

9
Ienjoywearingcrocs 9 points ago +9 / -0

Dis is da wae

7
Spawnlingman 7 points ago +7 / -0

At least one state in the damn country is doing something right.

6
jormungandr 6 points ago +6 / -0

Muh protected speech lol btfo

5
51cab 5 points ago +5 / -0

When you get used to special privileges... being treated equally feels like oppression.

4
eupraxia128 4 points ago +4 / -0

How the fuck could you sue someone for removing a piece of bullshit legislation which artificially propped your company up???

4
AlphaOverBetaReturns 4 points ago +4 / -0

But muh multinational corporations

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
jpower 4 points ago +4 / -0

Because Democrats have standing

2
AlphaOverBetaReturns 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well, they are supposed to do that when the law is unconstitutional. This ruling should put all woke corps on notice that states have the power to regulate their existence.

4
BlitheringIdiot 4 points ago +4 / -0

And remember: to them feels >> constitutionality.

3
ADEPhase3AnimalTrial 3 points ago +3 / -0

We never targeted them. They targeted us. We stopped giving them gasoline they were using to burn us down with

3
Truman_Show 3 points ago +3 / -0

Winning

3
Kekistan_United 3 points ago +3 / -0

[groomers seethe]

3
oyabaskly 3 points ago +3 / -0

HE CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH THIS!!!

2
wantstogomoon 2 points ago +2 / -0

After President Trump does his 2nd term, expect Ron to run for president!

2
PeteyWheatStraw 2 points ago +2 / -0

Heavy D!

2
Choppermagic 2 points ago +2 / -0

wow, you mean you can't force governments to give special privileges to mega corporations?

2
TheWinningNeverStops 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fuck dailywire and the owner

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Account45CAD 1 point ago +1 / -0

“Reedy Creek is probably the most efficient local government in Florida, because it’s not a typical bureaucracy. It’s run like a business.”

Basically, government sucks

1
Kamalasflappymoosear 1 point ago +1 / -0

This guy would make a good Prez.

1
ComebackKing 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is an issue of bonds anyway so Disney won't lose their right to self governance, at least not with the outstanding bonds.

This is more of a troll move by DeSantis. It's fine but it's just propaganda, there is no substance. I'd prefer to see some 2A protection similar to what MO did.

1
Texan1stAmerican2nd 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why June 1st 2023? Why not sooner?

1
BigDaddyBigTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

No wonder libs cheat and steal. They suck at this whole law thing.

1
notCIA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Disneys on suicide watch rn

1
FloridaMan4Ever 1 point ago +1 / -0

Please keep giving Muh Fortune 500 company tax breaks so you can tax me harder daddy!

1
MythArcana 1 point ago +1 / -0

Now, turn off Disney's power and water.

1
FAQ-REDDIT 1 point ago +1 / -0

Mickey is fucking Goofy over this ruling.

-3
foxr21 -3 points ago +1 / -4

I don't necessarily agree with the reasoning behind the thing with Disney World. (I support the rights of all LGBT+ people) But I do support what they are doing. Disney is no different than any of us and should be paying their fair share.