- 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
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
dukkbill
| Favorite team: | Auburn  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 1114 |
| Registered on: | 8/16/2012 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Leaked text message debacle at Michigan: TE shits all over OC in group chat
Posted by dukkbill on 10/7/26 at 7:47 am to The Third Leg
quote:
His backup, Hiter, is a 5* true freshman, #1RB in the class who could have gone anywhere.
Are they going to use him in a Blitzkreig package?
1
re: Truth, not victory, should be the purpose of argument
Posted by dukkbill on 10/4/26 at 10:41 am to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
Again, sorry for the self-indulgence, but they're are others in the same boat
Self indulgence should be fine. You have people engaging with you in your points. In fact that ratio is pretty high here in Sunday morning. We also will all have aspects of the environment that we don’t like. My bugaboo is those that jump in a good thread and try to make it all about themselves. Others will have different things they don’t like
If your seeking “the truth” you will find it, at least in what you perceive it to be. But if you want someone to curate it for you, then there are places and services for that which operate differently than a public board
quote:
you just skip to “you’re wrong you stupid bitch” it CAN be an indication of losing the debate, but isn’t necessarily so. It could just be an accurate descriptor.
And it can be very funny, as seen with the old Akroyd and Curtain sketches on Saturday Night Live
There is one poster here who will make substantive arguments and throw in the insult “dummy”. I always read that as Fred Sanford talking to LaMont
re: Truth, not victory, should be the purpose of argument
Posted by dukkbill on 10/4/26 at 10:16 am to LemmyLives
quote:
rather be shown to be wrong here so I am not wrong 350 times in real life
I don’t think inaccuracy here is negatively correlated with inaccuracy elsewhere. It’s not a classroom. Motivations will range from venting to socialization, and in some cases true organizing
re: Useful Observation for discussions on PoliBoard: use of slander = admission of defeat
Posted by dukkbill on 10/4/26 at 9:50 am to IvoryBillMatt
quote:quote:You're correct. Thanks
Socrates never said it
You can always go to the wisdom of Billy Jeff Clinton instead
quote:
Politics is a contact sport
And less admirably
quote:
You better put some ice on that
Participating in the public sphere is different than other forms of rhetorical exchange
quote:
WashU proud
Go Bears
quote:
don’t look at the rankings/lists much so you may be right but I always thought of UChicago as a borderline Ivy League type school while northwestern as close but not quite that level.
I agree. Bunch of Disney Wildcats at Northwestern :)
re: Reflecting Pool Case Dismissed with Prejudice: No evidence of a crime
Posted by dukkbill on 10/1/26 at 1:22 pm to JimEverett
quote:
Pirro request a dismissal with prejudice?
There was an express request to dismiss without prejudice. NACDL has a copy. It’s on the top of second page and in p.18
As I mentioned above if it was not so overtly written as “this is DOIs” fault, it would be easier to argue that contractor liability is an alternate theory and the burdensome restriction on the people to never be able to refile is contrary to the interests of justice and ultra vires to the judges discretion under Rinaldi
quote:
If not, i would want to appeal because having this as any sort of precedent is troubling. The judge clearly doesnt like trump's politicization of the matter. But so what? To put it simply and half-arse way - A lot of investigations and charges are politicized, that doesnt mean a Judge can bar a prosecution because of it
Agree, it’s the proposition that’s troubling even if the outcome is ok. There are a couple of '1 pros plus threat' cases at the DDC that were dismissed with prejudice, but none at a higher level. Moreover, it’s, imho,distinguishable between an overt threat and a dissatisfied President
re: Reflecting Pool Case Dismissed with Prejudice: No evidence of a crime
Posted by dukkbill on 10/1/26 at 12:51 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
President Trump’s statements about his displeasure with Pirro in dismissing the case, however, might be construed a direct threat.
Agreed and also on that side of the ledger Pirros express request of “with prejudice” after the “fold like an umbrella” tweet
On the other side of the ledger, a litigants mere displeasure with their counsel’s actions without express threat is usually just another day in the justice system
The problem with an appeal is justice’s (Pirro) express and unequivocal statement on the cause of damage. If it had just been statements that currently discovered actions of another impede a current ability to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, then Justice could take an appeal without arguing out of both sides of its neck
re: Reflecting Pool Case Dismissed with Prejudice: No evidence of a crime
Posted by dukkbill on 10/1/26 at 12:29 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
the very preliminary stage of a case, it's unusual for a judge to conclude that the there is no scenario where the prosecution might ultimately find incriminating evidence in the future.
I agree, but let’s look at that dismissal. The judge throws Rinaldi in as a basis of his decision. Rinaldi does allow a dismissal based on vexatious prosecution; however, in this instance there was only one prosecution. There are some sister cases that have dismissal prosecutions on “one prosecution and threat of another” but no binding authority that reaches the status of Rinaldi on 48(a) discretion. Indeed, the DOJ has made no such threat. Presidential dissatisfaction wouldn’t seem to rise to the same level. This has the affect of a judicial pardon with no violation of Concrim amendments, no misdeed, and no express threat
re: Lindsay Clancy attorney now going after juror.
Posted by dukkbill on 9/30/26 at 4:42 pm to TerryDawg03
quote:
Did this juror go on a media campaign or are they simply going after him because he didn’t let her off?
I'm not aware of the media campaign. The impropriety alleged by the motion is the lack of candor during voir dire and the use of cell phone during deliberations.
On the former, it relates to the juror having an active restraining order. We don't have the jury questionairres so we don't have what was asked or disclosed. That should be a simple matter to resolve.
The squirrley one is the relief being sought on the potential cell phone being used. Shooter Reddington's request for relief has a scope that would include all jury deliberation information. The defense is permitted to inquire about outside influences, but isn't permitted to ask what was going on in the juror's head. Commonwealth v. Fidler
re: The Senate Passes the Protect College Sports Act
Posted by dukkbill on 9/29/26 at 4:33 pm to Roll Tide Ravens
How do you get there. Modern interpretation seems to indicate that Aa cause of action is an inchoate right that doesn’t vest until a final judgment. See eg In re Consolidated U.S. Atmospheric Testing Litigation, 820 F.2d 982, 989 (9th Cir. 1987) stating (cause of action does not afford the holder the traditional bundle of rights associated with the ownership of property. Cf. United States v. Security Industrial Bank, 459 U.S. 70, 75-76, 103 S.Ct. 407, 410-11, 74 L.Ed.2d 235 (1982).)
quote:
The state universities are going get suits dismissed for immunity, they will have to sue individuals
The The Civil Rights Remedies Equalization Act ((CRREA) removes state sovereign immunity for Title IX claims
quote:
this is the truth, however this judge is trying to cut off avenues of these women to seek redress.
If they are in any of the other 49 states then they still have a private right of action. The private right of action was established in Cannon and extended to sexual harassment in Jackson
Of course it would potentially become moot everywhere if the federal version of the Riley Gaines Act is passed
re: Federal Judge rules NCAA is not subject to Title IX
Posted by dukkbill on 9/29/26 at 1:03 pm to TROJANFORCEONE
quote:
Again, I went to AU. Can you elaborate?
There are three ways OCR can determine if you are complying with Title IX
1) The number of male and female athletes is substantially proportionate to their respective enrollments; or
(2) The institution has a history and continuing practice of expanding participation opportunities responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex; or
(3) The institution is fully and effectively accommodating the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.
The first one is the most accounting based one but the House settlement changes to roster size, revenue sharing and back pay present Title IX issues. These are getting sorted out with cases like Schroeder
Indeed, House could end up with newer male sports cuts and more female sport opportunities to make the accounting under Test 1 to work. Of course, if the athletes become employees Title IX may not apply and Title VII would be the governing statute
This case has nothing to do with that though. It’s about men playing women’s sports which is now unlawful in GA
re: Federal Judge rules NCAA is not subject to Title IX
Posted by dukkbill on 9/29/26 at 12:47 pm to TROJANFORCEONE
quote:
think he’s asking if you can now have more men’s sports than women. I would enjoy men’s soccer and wrestling. Title IX was always an excuse to not have those teams
This case makes no changes to Grove City or the legislative clarification Civil Rights restoration Act. Thus indirect funding through student assistance still makes the entire university subject to Title IX.
The test for substantial proportionality established by Cohen is still the major way most schools comply with Title IX. ( Three Part Test) The House settlement reads on that situation but this case does not in any way read on it.
I think the misunderstanding may be because the Ga schools were dismissed, people are erroneously coming to the conclusion that title IX doesn’t apply to schools.
What happened was very specific relief was plead against those schools and you didn’t have to get your title IX interpretation. The statute gave them everything they asked for in relation to GA and GaTech.
To analogize, if a play is blown dead for a false start and the lineman purportedly holds a defender after the whistle, the holding is moot because the play is dead
quote:
the dismissals were based on a state law, the matter of Title 9 was not adressed
Yes. The state law makes the application of title IX moot. A GA school must designate the sport by biological sex and once designated can’t roster a person of the opposite sex. The plaintiffs have full relief; there is no title IX issue to decide against UGa or Ga Tech. The plaintiffs have a statutory home run
re: The Senate Passes the Protect College Sports Act
Posted by dukkbill on 9/29/26 at 12:29 pm to Roll Tide Ravens
quote:
The question becomes whether those anti-trust exemptions are unconstitutional
Antitrust is a statutory construct. There is no antitrust clause in the Constitution. Indeed Congress has done this with insurance with the McCarran–Ferguson Act
The issue would be the potential conflict with employee rights under the NLRA if the student athletes are employees
quote:
the theory is that individual schools would still have to abide by Title IX, however, the judge preempted that by dismissing the individual schools from the lawsuit
The schools were dismissed a year ago for Mootness. GA law now restricts rosters based on biological sex Legiscan
quote:
To the extent a court determines that an NCAA policy imposed by a college or university violates Title IX, a college or university enforcing that policy could be found in violation of Title IX
To the extent a university violates Title IX they violate Title IX. Their relationship to the NCAA is immaterial
quote:
schools will then be given exemptions to avoid major penalties that harm the school.
A contractual relationship does not exempt a party from a federal statute. Indeed, intervening illegality can provide an excuse for non performance of that contract
None of that is in this order
quote:
The problem is that this ruling is designed to give universities a way out also. Dig into the ruling
Where in the Order are you finding this.
The University of Georgia system was dropped a year ago but the basis was the claim was moot because Georgia passed the Riley Gaines Act. Order on Mootness
Popular
11
