You may want to reconsider your position on the Supreme Court. You might ask those who are providing you with these talking points to be more thorough in their research, or to be more willing to consider all information, not just what benefits Dish.
As for an emplyee, your statement in regard to that observation/question is quite telling:
"......and no to being an employee...."
To be clear, I am not necessarily stating that you are employed directly by Dish. Most all on-line "plants" are employed by independent companies, or are themselves independent contractors, thereby avoiding any conflicts that may arise if one is found to be working on behalf of the company in question, in this case, Dish TV.
You are far, far too heavily invested in this to convince me that you are not benefiting in some way from being their lead blocker, making sure that Dish has someone running interference in situations like this. No one is going to spend this much of their own free time in defense of a satellite TV provider just for something to do.
As for the "..it doesn't matter, facts are facts..." portion of your statement, what do you care? Who are you to decide what "matters" and what "facts" are correct? You are claiming, again with the condescending attitude, that you are right, I am wrong, and that is that. Anyone else who posts anything that is not fully supportive of Dish or dares to interfere is going to get the same treatment. One actually has in this thread.
I'm leaving you go with this final comment. You can post a response if you like, but I won't respond and you can be the "winner". Hopefully you are roundly rewarded for your efforts.
Kimmie_CO I agree with your assessment. The further that Chad was willing to go, the more telling his allegience to whomever is financing his defense of Dish became. These are real jobs and many companies use people like "Chad" to run interference for them. You were spot-on in your observation.