- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump’s latest filing in the MAL case to dismiss might derail Jack and save SCOTUS.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 1:03 pm to loogaroo
Posted on 2/25/24 at 1:03 pm to loogaroo
The problem, in types of hyper-partisanship, is that hyper-partisanship requires extreme (emotional) reactions. If you don't react within the accepted range of outrage, then you're seen as supporting the perceived out group/enemy.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 2:57 pm to GumboPot
the Mueller case was filed and heard five and a half years ago in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals
the Jack Smith case was filed and may be heard in South Florida US District Court
the Jack Smith case was filed and may be heard in South Florida US District Court
This post was edited on 2/25/24 at 2:59 pm
Posted on 2/25/24 at 3:02 pm to GumboPot
My question on MAL..
Does anyone have a true value of MAL? If you get a real estate estimator with TDS, they will move heaven and earth to find ways to de-value the property.
Does anyone have a true value of MAL? If you get a real estate estimator with TDS, they will move heaven and earth to find ways to de-value the property.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 3:38 pm to SlowFlowPro
Does it matter that they appointed for multiple as opposed to just one?
Posted on 2/25/24 at 3:48 pm to supatigah
quote:
the Mueller case was filed and heard five and a half years ago in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals
the Jack Smith case was filed and may be heard in South Florida US District Court
Why would the 11th take a different route than settled precedent that was confirmed (by the leading court in federal jurisprudential interpretation) a few years ago?
Posted on 2/25/24 at 5:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
ignoring the textual analysis
If that attorney is lucky this motion will be ignored.
If he's smart he withdraws the motion.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 5:12 pm to Clemson_all_in1979
quote:
It's almost like someone is trying to stop him from running for president
Jailing your main political rival is a page right out of Putin's playbook.
Biden doesn't mind running that play at all.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 5:30 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
If that attorney is lucky this motion will be ignored.
If he's smart he withdraws the motion.
I can't even call this clever because this literally already was used during the Trump era.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 6:34 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Bump for the Sunday legal scholars.
Jedediah Clampett, Esq. sez, “ that dog ain’t a gonna’ hunt”
Posted on 2/25/24 at 6:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It's unlikely to survive on the first level of appeal and I don't know if this would be proper for teh Supreme Court to review.
Why wouldn’t this be a matter for SC review? I would have thought this was precisely the type of thing that would ultimately always end up at SC? (Assuming it is filed in good faith, etc).
A hypothetical since we know this argument has been litigated before. Suppose the FL circuit does in fact hear this and decides that there is merit to the argument and says “sorry, DOJ, Jack Smith isn’t a proper appointee so this whole thing is out.” This would then create a situation where the SC would definitely hear the case, right? Unless one side quit the appeal process before then?
Posted on 2/25/24 at 7:01 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Judge Cannon rules in Trump’s favor
This is possible I guess
quote:
and the 11 Circuit upholds
This won't happen
Posted on 2/25/24 at 7:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Can we post the actual motion and not a grifter's analysis of it?
Just for the record
A Grifter is anyone that is conservative and you hate?
Despite your protestations of you being an Independent?
Posted on 2/25/24 at 7:32 pm to Wiseguy
quote:
Why wouldn’t this be a matter for SC review? I
It's not a novel issue and there isn't any appellate conflict.
If all the appeals courts agree on an issue, then the USSC is highly unlikely to take an appeal on that issue. You have to have a reversal of longstanding precedent to have that happen.
Considering this JUST had a DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruling without the USSC agreeing to hear the case, I don't see why they'd agree to hear it now.
quote:
This would then create a situation where the SC would definitely hear the case, right? Unless one side quit the appeal process before then?
No. The Court of Appeals can reverse her decision and then the SC can decline to hear it.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 7:33 pm to bamadontcare
quote:
A Grifter is anyone that is conservative and you hate?
No.
quote:
Despite your protestations of you being an Independent?
I posted a Left-grifter lawyer example ITT.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 7:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It's not a novel issue and there isn't any appellate conflict.
Thanks for the explanation. Makes sense.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 7:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
If half the shite you say as a lawyer is right our country is so freaked
Posted on 2/25/24 at 9:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why would the 11th take a different route than settled precedent that was confirmed (by the leading court in federal jurisprudential interpretation) a few years ago?
well we may just see soon enough won’t we?
Posted on 2/25/24 at 9:43 pm to supatigah
The 11th has already embarrassed Cannon once, so I'm pretty sure they will feel free to do it again if they need to.
Posted on 2/25/24 at 9:46 pm to GumboPot
he does not want to be seen as saving Trump and politically tainting his court.
That ship has sailed. Roberts showed his colors during the last election.
That ship has sailed. Roberts showed his colors during the last election.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News