- 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: Judge orders $240,000 in sanctions against Louisiana AG’s office in Caddo Commission case
Posted on 7/23/26 at 9:20 pm to 4cubbies
Posted on 7/23/26 at 9:20 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
Move on from y’all ignoring actual wrongdoing by our officials in favor of speculating about someone in New Orleans doing something that upset Liz Merrill?
Scared…to…death
0
Posted on 7/23/26 at 9:29 pm to 4cubbies
quote:
On this day, she didn’t care about legalities, she cared about “the point” instead.
You really, really need to try and read your posts from a third party point of view and realize how embarrassing they are.
FFS
You are truly deranged.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 9:38 pm to moneyg
quote:
You really, really need to try and read your posts from a third party point of view and realize how embarrassing they are.
Likewise. You realize your posts to me are emojis and insults with no attempt at reasoning or making an actual substantive point, right?
Posted on 7/23/26 at 9:43 pm to LSURussian
quote:
You’re really pissed about what you did, aren’t you? Tsk, tsk…
Pissed that a stranger old enough to my father has saved a photo of me for two decades? Not pissed. Disturbed would be a more appropriate word.
And you bragged about this.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 9:47 pm to Nosevens
quote:
at open meetings are required to conduct official business, and if a public body issues an official action without a meeting, it has violated the open meetings law
The vote ratifying the resolution happened during a public meeting.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 9:59 pm to Bard
quote:
However... I don't know if there is an actual law which allows for that sort of "end-run" where a resolution can be adopted in a violative meeting
There was no violative meeting. Seven members signed a “resolution” welcoming a sitting US Senator to town, framed it and gave it to him.
When Liz Murrill threw a fit, they held a public meeting to ratify the resolution.
I could have sworn this was an episode of Parks and Rec.
This post was edited on 7/23/26 at 10:01 pm
Posted on 7/23/26 at 10:09 pm to 4cubbies
Was after the initial resolution, of which 7 members only attended, they held a meeting right? So if it was a resolution to increase their pay without an open public meeting that would have been okay? I highly doubt that you would agree with that scenario, do tell us all why one closed meeting drawing a resolution is different than another ?
Posted on 7/23/26 at 10:29 pm to 4cubbies
Sounds like a Boasberg ruling that will get swatted down by the appellate court.
Posted on 7/23/26 at 11:28 pm to 4cubbies
4 emotional posts in a row and not once can you simply say “I was wrong”
AWFL indeed
AWFL indeed
Posted on 7/24/26 at 5:01 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Likewise. You realize your posts to me are emojis and insults with no attempt at reasoning or making an actual substantive point, right?
Dude they're isn't ANY reasoning with people like you that's the reason this country is in the shape it's in
don't like it when one side plays dirty back do you.. and eye for an eye and ya'll loose your frickin shite, and it always right on cue
Posted on 7/24/26 at 5:50 am to 4cubbies
quote:
There was no violative meeting.
quote:
When Liz Murrill threw a fit, they held a public meeting to ratify the resolution.
Except that there was, and you just admitted it.
They wouldn't have felt the need to ratify the resolution in a follow-up meeting which was a public meeting.
Let me break it down for you:
Was there a non-public meeting?
-Yes, but non-public meetings aren't violative by themselves.
Was an official action done during this non-public meeting?
-Yes, thus the passing of the initial resolution was violative.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 7:36 am to Bard
quote:You’re saying the public meeting during which the resolution was ratified violated the public meetings law? Not even Murrill’s office claims that.
Except that there was, and you just admitted it.
quote:Wait, what other meeting was held? When was it held?
They wouldn't have felt the need to ratify the resolution in a follow-up meeting which was a public meeting.
quote:When?
Was there a non-public meeting?
Or are you claiming that anytime officials happen to be in be in the same room, it’s a meeting?
quote:
Was an official action done during this non-public meeting?
-Yes, thus the passing of the initial resolution was violative.
Is there any evidence this resolution was passed by vote? It seems to me that they framed a welcome letter and some of the commission signed it.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 7:40 am to ole man
quote:
don't like it when one side plays dirty back do you.
You’ll be hard pressed to find posts of mine directly insulting posters or just posting emojis with an insult. Don’t act like you or anyone who does is simply reciprocating when they post insults to me. Y’all are just acting like trash because you want to.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 7:43 am to 4cubbies
quote:
You’re saying the public meeting during which the resolution was ratified violated the public meetings law?
The Sunshine Law.
7 people…the max would be three people at one meeting.
You sure do like to defend criminals.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 7:44 am to 4cubbies
quote:
trash
If we were trash, then you would be knighting for us.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 7:46 am to 4cubbies
quote:
You’re saying the public meeting during which the resolution was ratified violated the public meetings law? Not even Murrill’s office claims that.
You need to reign in that indignation, it's clouding your ability to read what's plainly in front of you.
quote:
Is there any evidence this resolution was passed by vote? It seems to me that they framed a welcome letter and some of the commission signed it.
Just the proposal of a resolution is an official act and that proposal did not happen in a public meeting. At which meeting was the resolution proposed? At which meeting were those first signatures applied?
Any meeting by the commission which is not public and which an official act or event happens is a violation of the public meetings law.
quote:
Or are you claiming that anytime officials happen to be in be in the same room, it’s a meeting?
If they are making official actions or decisions, yes.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 7:55 am to 4cubbies
Please pray for this lady.
Just think how awful her life will be when Liz is elected governor.
Just think how awful her life will be when Liz is elected governor.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 8:07 am to 4cubbies
quote:
4cubbies
You know how i know your link is a pure hack job?
quote:
A Louisiana Supreme Court-appointed judge ruled today
Translation, district court. Your media outlet tried to paint it as the Louisiana Supreme Court issued a ruling when it clearly did not. This is 1 District court judges ruling. It is being appealed.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 8:13 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Likewise. You realize your posts to me are emojis and insults with no attempt at reasoning or making an actual substantive point, right?
In this particular case, it is apparent that you really do not understand the subject matter you are posting about. Several posters have pointed it out to you but you keep trying to argue your original point that has nothing to do with the subject matter. This is a pattern with you.
Posted on 7/24/26 at 8:19 am to jimmy the leg
What was the date of this meeting? Murill said no one disputes that there was no meeting. Someone should inform her that you dispute that.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News