- 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: Here's the SCUM that Perry is being indicted over (SIAP) .......
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:39 pm to BobRoss
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:39 pm to BobRoss
quote:
I can't believe anyone is taking up for Perry. That guy is a fricking scumbag.
Because it sets a dangerous precedent where a governor can be criminally charged for exercising his lawful veto power
1
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:41 pm to BobRoss
quote:
I can't believe anyone is taking up for Perry. That guy is a fricking scumbag.
I'm not.
The DA is a POS however. Watch the vid.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:42 pm to MMauler
quote:
It's time for you to put on your hat and go sit in the back of the classroom while the adults discuss the issues of the day --
Can you please show me where in Texas law there is an exception to 36.03 if the public servant was convicted of a DWI?
Or you can behave like what you think is an adult and insult my intelligence instead.
quote:
Sec. 36.03. COERCION OF PUBLIC SERVANT OR VOTER. (a) A person commits an offense if by means of coercion he:
(1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty; or
(2) influences or attempts to influence a voter not to vote or to vote in a particular manner.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor unless the coercion is a threat to commit a felony, in which event it is a felony of the third degree.
(c) It is an exception to the application of Subsection (a)(1) of this section that the person who influences or attempts to influence the public servant is a member of the governing body of a governmental entity, and that the action that influences or attempts to influence the public servant is an official action taken by the member of the governing body. For the purposes of this subsection, the term "official action" includes deliberations by the governing body of a governmental entity.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:45 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
The DA is a POS however. Watch the vid.
The DA has already been convicted and served her time. I fail to see the relevance.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:45 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Sec. 36.03. COERCION OF PUBLIC SERVANT
Describes the DA's actions.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:46 pm to REG861
quote:
Because it sets a dangerous precedent where a governor can be criminally charged for exercising his lawful veto power
It is not lawful in Texas to exercise veto power (or any other power) for the purpose of coercing an elected official in the execution of her duties. See 36.03.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:46 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty; or
I fail to see how threatening a veto (which every governor invariably does) equates to this. Unless you are a partisan hack, that is. Let's go ahead and round up every governor since clearly all their vetoes, real and contemplated, were attempts to influence a public servant.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:47 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Describes the DA's actions.
Really? So has the DA said the charges will be dropped if Perry steps down? Or are you just lying?
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:47 pm to SpidermanTUba
You really cannot be so f*cking stupid as to believe that Perry's actions have anyf*ckingthing to do with that statute.
Seriously, you are one f*cked-in-the-head moron.
Seriously, you are one f*cked-in-the-head moron.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:48 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
It is not lawful in Texas to exercise veto power (or any other power) for the purpose of coercing an elected official in the execution of her duties
That's funny, it said absolutely nothing about the veto power 36.03, so I fail to see where your claim that it's illegal has its basis.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:50 pm to Asgard Device
quote:
Does Perry think that GWB was unfit to be in office since he had a DUI?
Considering that bush was nowhere even close to being a politician in the 1970's and this DA committed a crime while being in office, I don't understand you equating this to bush.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:51 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Really? So has the DA said the charges will be dropped if Perry steps down? Or are you just lying?
You're really a socially awkward person. I find it difficult you could take that out of context, but you did. I think your head is so far up "big gov" arse that you can't see things the overwhelming majority of people can see
The only thing I stated is the DA tried to coerce a public servant, I didn't insinuate anything else.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:51 pm to Asgard Device
quote:
Does Perry think that GWB was unfit to be in office since he had a DUI?
It's not that she got the DUI it's that she pulled the "do you know who I am card" more than once.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:51 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Really? So has the DA said the charges will be dropped if Perry steps down? Or are you just lying?
No, since you're too dense to understand, I'll explain it. The unfathomably drunk DA threatened all the public servants in the various videos posted (and therefore, ignored by you) that they would suffer consequences for arresting her and attempted to coerce them into dereliction of their duties based on her position of power. Did you understand that? Was that too complex? Should I draw a diagram?
This post was edited on 8/17/14 at 11:52 pm
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:53 pm to BobRoss
quote:
I can't believe anyone is taking up for Perry. That guy is a fricking scumbag.
Read about how he knowingly sent an innocent man to the death penalty: LINK
What does that have to do with this case? Nobody believes perry is a good man of morals in this thread. We're just calling it like we see it and that's a hack going way out of her bounds and abusing her power in retribution to an exercise of a constitutional and legal right.
This post was edited on 8/17/14 at 11:54 pm
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:53 pm to REG861
quote:
1) influences or attempts to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power or a specific performance of his official duty or influences or attempts to influence a public servant to violate the public servant's known legal duty; or
I fail to see how threatening a veto (which every governor invariably does) equates to this.
He threatened to veto unless she resigned her elected position. That's attempting to influence a public servant in a specific exercise of his official power ( all of her power in this case).
This post was edited on 8/17/14 at 11:54 pm
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:54 pm to REG861
quote:
No, since you're too dense to understand, I'll explain it
He really is.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:54 pm to REG861
quote:
That's funny, it said absolutely nothing about the veto power 36.03,
It says absolutely nothing about any specific act of coercion at all - it covers any form of coercion.
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:56 pm to Golfer
quote:
It's not that she got the DUI it's that she pulled the "do you know who I am card" more than once.
And if it had been Rick Perry in the drunk tank instead he would have said "Do you know who I am? I'll yank every cent of state funding from your department unless you release me".
Do you think Lehmberg would have fared better if she had that card to pull?
This post was edited on 8/17/14 at 11:57 pm
Posted on 8/17/14 at 11:57 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
It says absolutely nothing about any specific act of coercion at all - it covers any form of coercion.
I guess we're stuck in a Catch-22 when the 'act of coercion' is a veto, which is statutorily within the Governor's jurisdiction. Are we going to start rounding up and arresting governors based off of what we subjectively determine to be the motivation of their vetoes?
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News