- 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: Louisiana Sheriff's Association endorses Governor John Bel Edwards
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:08 pm to KiwiHead
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:08 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
They don't want to go there. The particulars of these suits would really piss people off
They absolutely would, John Carmouche is a big Edwards backer who stands to profit handsomely in these lawsuits.
These guys are screwing over the top paying industry in the state for their own ill gotten gains. If they want to sue someone for coastal erosion, sue the corps of engineers.
1
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:11 pm to CarRamrod
quote:
what is Honor Code promising them?
He doesn’t have to promise them anything.
Ever watch “Boardwalk Empire”? Bel and his brother Daniel are basically Nucky and Eli Thompson.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:13 pm to Godfather1
Wasn’t his brothers sheriffs office raided by the feds?
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:16 pm to TJG210
quote:
Wasn’t his brothers sheriffs office raided by the feds?
Yep.
Never heard what came of it though.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:38 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
His brother is a sheriff
The only story here is if they didn't endorse him.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:40 pm to TJG210
quote:
These guys are screwing over the top paying industry in the state for their own ill gotten gains.
So the oil companies that dug those canals and agreed to maintain them and then when The price of oil drops and they abandon their responsibilities,they have no responsibility?
Posted on 9/19/19 at 1:55 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
So the oil companies that dug those canals and agreed to maintain them and then when The price of oil drops and they abandon their responsibilities,they have no responsibility?
Where is your proof of damage?
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:18 pm to TJG210
quote:
Where is your proof of damage?
Apparently a judge found significant merit. Some of you are downright SCARED of going against big oil companies so you think anything they do is ok. Don't wanna piss off the money...don't want them to live up to their responsibilities. They might get upset.
I used to do oil and gas law.I assure you,their attitude is that they can frick whomever they want. Sometimes they do it because they can.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:26 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
Apparently a judge found significant merit.
One that was bought and paid for?
quote:
Sometimes they do it because they can.
Uh huh, the actions that are in these lawsuits happened 60/70yrs ago, why is this all of sudden a problem? Why didn’t the state ask the companies to mitigate the alleged problems years ago?
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:40 pm to TJG210
quote:
So the oil companies that dug those canals and agreed to maintain them and then when the price of oil drops and they abandon their responsibilities, they have no responsibility?
The real problem with this was that a lot of the big players in the onshore fields sold off to smaller companies that didn't have the resources nor the ability to keep up with the contracts and promises the other companies made. Also, the USACE probably stepped in and acted more like a roadblock when it came to some projects.
I can recall watching a 16 mm documentary on what Tennaco was doing in Terrebonne Parish to maintain the ecosystem back in the 1970s or early 80s. So some companies actually did give a damn about coastal issues. The point of the documentary was that the Government was the one that was getting in the way of restoring the land.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 2:43 pm to Tarps99
quote:
The point of the documentary was that the Government was the one that was getting in the way of restoring the land.
Not convenient to sue those entities though......
Posted on 9/19/19 at 3:01 pm to TJG210
quote:
Why didn’t the state ask the companies to mitigate the alleged problems years ago?
They did About 25 years ago. These defendants are contractually obligated to maintain these canals/channels as per the original agreements. Edwards, then Foster,nailed down,or thought they nailed down what they would do. Then thanks to mergers, etc the new companies did not feel bound to perform they gave a pittance . They make commercials about how they are planting stuff but not much else.
In the end these cases will be settled because part of the blame goes to the USACE because of the extension of the levee system in response to the 1927 floods. The big thing are the access canals that were dug and obligations entailed in those agreements. The oil companies are not acting in good faith regarding this.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 4:23 pm to Tarps99
quote:
The real problem with this was that a lot of the big players in the onshore fields sold off to smaller companies that didn't have the resources nor the ability to keep up with the contracts and promises the other companies made
Yes and no and that is where the dispute comes in, but these lawsuits are not why the oil and gas jobs are not as plentiful. The bulk of our oil lays on the shelf and that activity is doing just fine (now) as is the deepwater stuff. The problem is that we got really good at getting it out without spending nearly as much on labor or as many platforms. The technology is like it's on steroids.
quote:
Tennaco
Yeah that's part of it,Texaco was a HUGE Culprit and when they merged with Chevron and Chevron sold the leases off, Part of what is going on is that Carmouche goes at Chevron as the successor to Texaco,Chevron says they sold to Century, Century has shallower pockets.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 4:24 pm to CarRamrod
JBE got an astronomical vote out of Sheriffs assoc in 2015.
I'm told that enthusiasm for JBE was noticeably low amongst the sheriffs this year. I'm also told he couldn't get a majority on the first ballot but did eventually manage to get the necessary 33 votes. I wasn't completely off base starting a thread asking asking about possible refusal of endorsement.
"I've got my own race to run" was said a lot when sheriffs were asked about the Governor's race.
I'm told that enthusiasm for JBE was noticeably low amongst the sheriffs this year. I'm also told he couldn't get a majority on the first ballot but did eventually manage to get the necessary 33 votes. I wasn't completely off base starting a thread asking asking about possible refusal of endorsement.
"I've got my own race to run" was said a lot when sheriffs were asked about the Governor's race.
Posted on 9/19/19 at 4:35 pm to Sentrius
quote:
I'm told that enthusiasm for JBE was noticeably low amongst the sheriffs this year. I'm also told he couldn't get a majority on the first ballot but did eventually manage to get the necessary 33 votes. I wasn't completely off base starting a thread asking asking about possible refusal of endorsement.
They do second ballots? LSA didn't endorse anyone in the primary in 2015 because nobody got the 33 votes, but they did endorse JBE in the runoff. I assumed they just didn't give an endorsement if nobody got the 33 votes.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News