- 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: Obamacare Appeal --- Jonathan Gruber doing more work
Posted on 11/16/14 at 3:59 pm to MMauler
Posted on 11/16/14 at 3:59 pm to MMauler
And are you an altar? I seem to remember another poser from a few years ago who couldn't help but type unnecessary things with an asterisk like Odumbf*ckcare. He wasn't terribly bright, and you seem to be heading down that path.
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:01 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
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.
And, you're stupid enough to think that Scalia, or any other Justice, is going to say, "Well, I guess you have me there. I'll stop my questioning because you've got me!"
Or maybe, Scalia would add, "Didn't the Odumbf*ck Administration pay a Mr. Gruber almost $400,000 to advise it on Odumbf*ckCare? Isn't this the same Mr. Gruber who was instrumental in writing Massachusetts similar law which the Odumbf*ck Administration claimed it's law was based on? And, didn't Mr. Gruber state that this provision was purposefully put in the bill to 'encourage' states to form their own exchanges all before, of course, he ever thought this would be issue? And, yet, hasn't this same Mr. Gruber filed amicus briefs saying that it's now just a 'typo'?"
Once again -- you really are that f*cking stupid.
This post was edited on 11/16/14 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:04 pm to MMauler
AND NONE OF THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED ANYWHERE.
That's shite that needs to take place at the district court, not at the appellate level. You are completely wrong on this point, and it amazes me that you think facts like this will or can be established by lawyers and judges at the SC. You have an incredibly misguided view of how appellate proceedings work.
That's shite that needs to take place at the district court, not at the appellate level. You are completely wrong on this point, and it amazes me that you think facts like this will or can be established by lawyers and judges at the SC. You have an incredibly misguided view of how appellate proceedings work.
This post was edited on 11/16/14 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:08 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
That's shite that needs to take place at the district court, not at the appellate level.
First, not if the video wasn't available to the attorneys at that time.
Second, I've cited you an article which quotes the rule of evidence you brought up in the first place. When it comes to Judicial Notice, there is nothing in the rule of evidence that states any such thing. As the article points out, at the appellate level, they can take judicial notice of things not presented at the district court level --- THAT is the f*cking point. If it was presented at the D.C. level, they wouldn't need to take Judicial Notice.
This post was edited on 11/16/14 at 4:09 pm
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:12 pm to MMauler
Look you are just wrong. At best, they can take notice of the existence of the video, but no one can take notice that his words evidence congressional intent. You're absolutely wrong.
Posted on 11/16/14 at 4:17 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
but no one can take notice that his words evidence congressional intent.
For the comprehension impaired
There is NO F*CKING WAY you clerked for a federal judge.
This post was edited on 11/16/14 at 4:19 pm
Posted on 11/16/14 at 7:25 pm to MMauler
This has been awesome.
I agree with both your avatars, but have a strong preference for FP's.
Can you both tell me where you earned your JD's? It'll help me decide which of you knows what you're talking about.
TIA.
I agree with both your avatars, but have a strong preference for FP's.
Can you both tell me where you earned your JD's? It'll help me decide which of you knows what you're talking about.
TIA.
Posted on 11/16/14 at 8:51 pm to Lsut81
quote:
How can he be compelled to testify
Executive Privilege, right? If anyone in the WH sent him an email, Barry will claim exec privilege.
(yeah, I'm that cynical)
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News