- 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: Can we just give the required 2% to NATO?
Posted on 7/11/18 at 9:17 pm to texridder
Posted on 7/11/18 at 9:17 pm to texridder
quote:
No, I don't want you to dance me around. Let's try this again. So just explain to me what keeps the D.C. plaintiffs from filing he same basic lawsuit in N.Y. and seeking the same redress in the NY-filed lawsuit?
The fact that they come from the same alleged actions and occurrences combined with FRCP rule 20 and FRCP rule 22.
You clearly will not understand what any of that means, which is why I was trying to walk you through it.
When you come back and post something that proves you are still ignorant and confused I am going to have to try to walk you through it again, aren't I?
This post was edited on 7/11/18 at 9:19 pm
1
Posted on 7/11/18 at 9:28 pm to BaylorTiger
quote:Are you serious?
If Germany, and for conversation sake, and all of our other allies spent as much as the US on defense, would the US feel the need to spend as much?
It's a really good question. I have an opinion but not a well vetted, informed answer. My opinion is no, the US would not spend as much if everyone else spent more.
I'm willing to hear why not
Some countries, sure. But if Germany starts developing some real military muscle again, you better believe we won't cut back. I'm of the belief that Germany supports us, as long as they need us. Once that goes away, all bets are off.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 9:34 pm to Scoob
quote:
Some countries, sure. But if Germany starts developing some real military muscle again, you better believe we won't cut back. I'm of the belief that Germany supports us, as long as they need us. Once that goes away, all bets are off.
We can cut our military spending in half and still be 100 billion ahead of China, our next closest competitor.
I think we’d be ok if our “allies” picked up some of the slack.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 9:38 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
The fact that they come from the same alleged actions and occurrences combined with FRCP rule 20 and FRCP rule 22.
Explain how Rule 20 and 22 are going to prohibit the D.C. plaintiffs from filing their lawsuit in New York? i.e., they cannot file that lawsuit in New York.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 10:09 pm to texridder
quote:
Explain how Rule 20 and 22 are going to prohibit the D.C. plaintiffs from filing their lawsuit in New York? i.e., they cannot file that lawsuit in New York
On my God. Anyone can file whatever they want wherever they want. they can file, but it won't get past the first responsive pleading. I could file a suit against you in Alaska. I am not prohibited from filing. It will get thrown out after one responsive pleading is filed....but I could file it if I desired.
You really really don't understand how any of this works, at all. I don't know how you still surprise me. But you do. The remedy for he D.C. People will not be met by refilling in New York as you said they would. They will join the existing case. That was my point a week ago and it is still the point you are struggling to understand now. I know you don't comprehend what I am saying. Which is why I was trying to walk you through it. You just can't wrap your mind around it. Sorry man. I can't understand it for you.
I really do wonder if you are "special". You simply cannot grasp simple concepts. You argue irrelevant issues and can't comprehend important factors. It's not just this time. This is probably the fourth or fifth time I've gone down this road with you. Others here have too. You just aren't able to quite keep up, Tex. It isnt your fault. But perhaps you should stop trying to pretend like you can.
This post was edited on 7/11/18 at 10:16 pm
Posted on 7/11/18 at 10:33 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
The remedy for he D.C. People will not be met by refilling in New York as you said they would. They will join the existing case.
That's not what you said.You said that they couldn't refile in New York. Exactly what you said. Which is patently wrong.
It was wrong then and its wrong now. You bring up all this extemporaneous crap to try to slither out of the fact that you were just wrong.
What PROHIBITS the from refiling in New York?
Posted on 7/11/18 at 10:39 pm to GIbson05
quote:
Out of the 29 NATO countries the US has the 8th largest military....
...in Europe.
The BILLIONS we spend to keep troops and equipment in Europe because they can’t defend themselves could be better spent.
Remember just last month a story came out and said Germany only had 8 fighter jets that were ready for action. fricking 8.
As an aside,
It could be argued that Germany not having a military is actually a good thing.
Since History shows us they can do terrible things when they have one.
Maybe a better idea would be for Germany to pay 2% of their GDP building up their neighbors military.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 10:39 pm to texridder
ok. I knew you wouldn't be able to understand why that doesn't matter. You CAN file a lawsuit in Nebraska naming Elvis Presley as a defendant. There is nothing PROHIBITING you from doing that. The ability to file a piece of paper at the clerk of court is of no consequence. Yet it is what you have now made the cornerstone of your entire "argument". Here I was thinking we were talking about whether trump won a lawsuit in D.C....which would end up causing the plaintiffs to be joined into the existing New York case. Nope. That wasn't it apparently...you were arguing that someone could file something at the clerks office. Regardless of its merits. Do you see how your "victory" is hollow?. You won an argument nobody cares about. Tell me. What is the point of filing something if there is zero chance for victory or remedy based on that filing? That is what you are celebrating. The fact someone can file something with the clerk of court. You can't grasp why that is irrelevant. It amazes me. You are most certainly "special". You have a limited capacity.
You just can't wrap your mind around simple concepts.
quote:
You bring up all this extemporaneous crap
Oh....and I'm not sure what word you were going for...but it certainly was extemporaneous.
Perhaps you mean extraneous? If so, you should brush up on that one too. It is you who is arguing irrelevant issues. You said in response to trump declaring victory "they will just refile in New York and seek redress there". Well, that strategy won't give them any redress. So why did you say that? You just don't get it
This post was edited on 7/11/18 at 10:52 pm
Posted on 7/11/18 at 10:51 pm to CajunTiger78
Wrong. We spend 4.2%.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 11:04 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
What is the point of filing something if there is zero chance for victory or remedy based on that filing?
There we have it.
Your original statement was that they would be procedurally prohibited from filing in New York.
Now you are slithering and saying that they can't win on the merits, and that I won argument that nobody cares about.
You started the argument by popping off and saying that they would be procedurally prohibited from refiling in New York when you hadn't even read both of the pleadings.
And, BTW I did mean extemporaneous, since you were throwing out all this procedural crap without having read the cases.
Posted on 7/11/18 at 11:05 pm to texridder
ok man. Be happy they can file and have it immediately tossed. Will just give trump another chance to say he won a suit. That was the point you were going for in the original thread, I'm sure. I'm not mad at you. I feel bad for you. quote:
And, BTW I did mean extemporaneous, since you were throwing out all this procedural crap without having read the cases.
crap. Just when I thought I was out. Why would you say this? If your entire point was that a suit CAN be FILED, what would having read the cases changed? The content of the case has no bearing on the ability to file something. This comment leads me to believe you think the D.C. Case would not be joined with the NY case. Is that what you are saying?????
That, however, requires analysis beyond simply being able to walk to the courthouse and file some docs. you have made it clear you aren't Intersted in any further analysis. Do you see how this could be frustrating to those who aren't limited like you?
Do you actually think I was making an argument there would be some physical barrier preventing papers being filed at a courthouse. Or is it more likely when I brought up a procedural defect that I meant the defect would be brought at the same time as every other case ever. After the initial filing. I guess I need to remind self it's you. Things hat 99 percent of the world understands without explanation, you can't grasp.
If I tell you...you can't claim a deduction for country club dues on your tax return....i am not saying someone will stop you from marking them down as a deduction and submitting the return. I am saying the IRS will disallow. Same concept here. Does that make sense? If I say you can't file an identical suit in New York, it doesn't mean someone will physically stop you at the clerks office. It means the court will dismiss the suit. I'm really trying to explain it so you can understand. Does this make sense?
This post was edited on 7/11/18 at 11:25 pm
Posted on 7/11/18 at 11:54 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
crap. Just when I thought I was out. Why would you say this? If your entire point was that a suit CAN be FILED, what would having read the cases changed? The content of the case has no bearing on the ability to file something.
Do you read this stuff before you post it. You go around and around and end up contradicting yourself coming and going.
My point was the case cold procedurally filed. Your B'S' cover for saying it couldn't be filed was based on joinder, which involves an analysis of the allegations in the two cases. Now you say "What would having read the cases changed?
Which was my point exactly when you bought up joinder and I asked you what were the allegations made in each of the cases, and you couldn't even answer, because you had not read them, yet you were sure joinder would apply.
It's a good thing you got out of the lawyer game. You're not mentally equipped for it.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 10:38 am to texridder
OH MY GOD. This is beautiful. I don't know how to respond. You are failing to grasp what is being argued. It is fascinating to watch. You are literally the only person on here that can't seem to understand what is happening in this argument. If someone states "you can't file a lawsuit for that" what the vast majority of people would take from that is not that someone would physically stop you from placing a piece of paper with the clerk of court. Rather that once something was filed it would be thrown out. My entire point is that joinder would be the procedural move that would cause the case to be immediately thrown out (and joined with the original).
The procedurally steps for this to occur are set forth In. Rule 20 and rule 22. All of this has been posted. are you following this?
you know what...don't bother....I know the answer to that.
quote:
Which was my point exactly when you bought up joinder and I asked you what were the allegations made in each of the cases, and you couldn't even answer,
What?!?! I quoted the allegations from both cases in this thread. The specific allegations about hacking the dnc. I posted to exact words from the petitions. What the hell are you talking about?
Do you read the first sentence of my posts and just reply without looking at the rest of the post. I have literally shot down every single one of your "arguments" and you just act like those words aren't there.
Btw. Someone with less than a high school education, like you, should probably stay away from calling others slow. This entire board sees you as dim witted poster with limited capacity. 50,000,000 poli boarders can't be wrong.
This post was edited on 7/12/18 at 10:51 am
Posted on 7/12/18 at 12:18 pm to TBoy
quote:
The problem is that you and all the other reckless republicans have no farking idea what you are talking about.
Oh wow, Tboy's getting a little frustrated. Side effects of your testosterone injections? Keep with it man, before you know it you'll earn a coat.
Posted on 7/12/18 at 12:26 pm to Loserman
Posted on 7/12/18 at 4:32 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
What?!?! I quoted the allegations from both cases in this thread. The specific allegations about hacking the dnc. I posted to exact words from the petitions. What the hell are you talking about?
Nope. Yo never quoted the specific allegations when I asked you for them in the original thread ("Our President tweets about his YUGE Russia lawsuit victory") where we were discussing joinder.
In fact you answered "Are you serious. This is hilarious." And you NEVER answered that question in that thread.
This is my question and your response:
MY QUESTION quote: What were the actions and occurrences in the DNC suit in New York and what were the actions and occurrences in D.C. suit.
YOUR RESPONSE quote: Are you serious? This is hilarious. ]
Now, I have one more question for you.
What is the difference in joinder and consolidation, and would joinder or consolidation be relevant if, in fact, the D.C. plaintiffs refiled their lawsuit in NY district where the DNC had previously filed its lawsuit?
This post was edited on 7/12/18 at 5:30 pm
Posted on 7/12/18 at 4:59 pm to funnystuff
quote:
The military industrial complex
A Republican voter's worst enemy yet best friend.
Posted on 7/14/18 at 1:11 am to texridder
quote:
What is the difference in joinder and consolidation,
So you are admitting there won't be separate suit? Good.
And for your edification joinder (by interpleader) would be brought by Trumps legal team. Consolidation would be brought by the court. The result is the same. Glad you can finally admit I was right. :bangshead:
This post was edited on 7/14/18 at 1:56 am
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News