re: Obamacare Appeal --- Jonathan Gruber doing more work

quote:

---

So, what is the fact you think they should take judicial notice of?

---

You can't be this f*cking stupid.

So the fact is that Gruber thinks that was what congress intended?

ETA:

Let me make ask you this differently because you still won't answer the question. If you were on the SC and got to write the sentence or paragraph taking judicial notice of these videos and explaining the fact proven and the importance, what would it say?

Got it. So the only thing Congress could have intended was what what this guy thinks they intended.

Yea, theres no hope of judicial notice ever being taken on that fact.

And, I think there's a lot of people who would dispute the import of his statements.

When you've lost the battle, the name calling begins. I'd be willing to bet my posting privileges that you will see no such statement regarding Grubers videos in the majority opinion. You MIGHT find it buried a dissent if the conservatives lose the case, but that's about it.

But keep telling yourself that these videos are important enough to warrant judicial fact finding as to a possibility of intent. In fact, you want the SC to infer congressional intent as stated by a person who is not a member of congress.

Interesting, NC. Correct me if I err, but did not the Chief Justice approve of an utterly unlawful ruling in that last challenge, and all for the sake of the credibility of the Supreme Court and giving the electorate one more chance to decide their *real* desires in the election?

Now if the SC makes ANOTHER contrarian ruling in favor of ACA, yet obviously against both Law and the electorally-expressed current will of the substantial majority...do they then risk losing total respect and legal viability?

And this don't even consider that the whole ACA was sold in a FRAUDULENT misrepresentation of it's innate character and effect on the citizenry.

My take...they had best shut this baby down, and tell the Congress and the President to get their asses to work, IN FULL VIEW, with honest numbers and true information as to whether the young/healthy will pay for slackers, old folk, illegals, etc., and whether they will FIRE bureaucrats and low-life idiots who hold power over our health care (VA style)...but screw it up.

The SC has one more chance to underpin their relevance...even morality. Or they deserve to be compared to tits on a boar hog; there...but outmoded and worthless.

No, raising a question at oral argument is not taking judicial notice. Not at all. Judges can ask whatever the hell they want, but it doesn't make it fact.

Where did you learn all of this judicial procedure so wrongly?

As did I. But congressional intent is not satisfied by a YouTube video by a guy stating what he believes or thinks Congress intended.

And, while it doesn't have to be written, you are not going to hear one person say they are taking
judicial notice of a fact at the SC. Not one.

ETA: do you realize how absurd your notice argument is? For this to matter at all, they would have to take judicial notice that he is the architect of the bill, then they would have to take notice that his intent is Congress' intent, and then they videos MIGHT matter. That's a lot of judicial fact finding.

Quote a portion, make a slam, offer no substance. That's been most of your strategy in this thread.

And, all the government has to do is say he is not the architect of the bill and any notion of establishing a fact is out of the window.

I hope your judge didn't leap several steps in order to take judicial notice of facts.