Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

On 5/6/2023 at 8:25 PM, Gatorubet said:

I understand that civics was not your thing in school, but had you paid the slightest attention they would have taught you that lawyers are not responsible for things like how many court rooms are built and how many judges are hired.  Lawyers who practice in that court are not responsible for the Senate refusing to fill judicial positions because of bullshit politics, nor are we in charge of allocating falling state tax resources to the state court systems after MAGA tax cuts.  Nor are we responsible for societal issues that result in rises in criminal activity - that leads to increased criminal charges - that leads to increased criminal trials - that bump the civil trials because of speedy trial rules mandating that criminal trials go first.

Putting it differently, instead of your ‘try harder’ comment why don’t you offer up even the smallest example of what your extensive research has shown to fix the problem before you share your solution with the board. I note your equivalent “turn the desert to glass” response on middle east foreign policy solutions as applied here on the court delay issue. 

Try harder.  Fucking brilliant.  Nobody thought of that. 

Thank you for the civics lesson. Did you bill for that hour?

To think lawyers as a group, with as much money as they generate, and as smart as they all seem to project, couldn’t band together to improve the inefficiencies of the court system, and are at best some pawn in the great game of life is just the chefs kiss. 

But maybe I’m wrong, and you are all powerless, just one cog in the great law machine. I’ve definitely never experienced a lawyer using delay tactics to increase my expenses in a civil trial. That’s just part of that unchanging system. You know what, maybe you could find another old post of mine for a pithy reply? 

Edited by Neonmoon
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

First off, Greg Abbott didn't do that.  He was AG at the time and the AG has nothing to do with the passage of legislation. 

He was previously on the Texas Supreme Court during a period when they tightened standards for pain & suffering, was he not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Yawn.

Example 1 of umpteen million, lawyer Gerg Abbott puts a limit on the amount of damages that can be collected after he is set for life by collecting damages.  I didn’t realize I needed to provide examples to the obvious for your stupid ass.

Go away, leach of society.

Rocko??

So, in your politically fucked up state your fucked up governor passed a tort reform bill supported by your other fucked up GOP politicians, and that is the fault of lawyers in all states everywhere - including plaintiff lawyers? 

B595E289-C611-4252-9D18-46C63F8C58E1.gif.db179c2993525af9c98a42634b685145.gif

Given that the original subject was your infantile grasp of why legal matters move slower than you’d like, because you think lawyers can magically change that, your goalpost move is noted.  

Please share your occupation, so I can tell you what national problems you and your fellow whatevers let slide by refusing to act.  I mean, all those engineers letting the bridges and infrastructures get too old, and all of the teachers letting education go in the shitter - and no one lobbying to fix it!!!    

Man, now you’ve discovered that previously hidden lobbying-to-problem link, you and Neonmoon need to get on that stat and fix stuff.  It’s all so fucking easy. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, Greg Abbott didn't do that.  He was AG at the time and the AG has nothing to do with the passage of legislation.  That would be the august legislature of the State of Texas and a bill signed by Rick Perry, who is some kind of animal husbander or some shit.
You're not showing off your civics and government knowledge to great effect here.  Perhaps you should rethink slinging around terms like "stupd ass."

Didn’t the voters of this great state do it to themselves? They passed the constitutional amendment that allowed the Legislature to pass the law in the first place. I don’t have the numbers, but I’ll bet you it was lawyers who spent an awful lot of money lobbying against it.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

The right since Reagan has been beating a drum that lawyers, newpapers, unions, and even your congressperson are to be despised. Like most of their hate campaigns, it's worked pretty well.

All of those objects of their scorn are the only things the little guy has to use against the powerful. Some unions are bad, some lawyers are dicks, journalists can be lazy or stupid, and there are plenty of hacks in Congress. It's human that such persons and organizations can have bad elements, but they are not inherent.

The rich would love to destroy or control everything I listed to increase their grip on our genitalia. Don't be fooled.

You've been around here long enough to know this isn't true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Most of them are dicks 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 5
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

Rocko??

So, in your politically fucked up state your fucked up governor passed a tort reform bill supported by your other fucked up GOP politicians, and that is the fault of lawyers in all states everywhere - including plaintiff lawyers? 

Given that the original subject was your infantile grasp of why legal matters move slower than you’d like, because you think lawyers can magically change that, your goalpost move is noted.  

Please share your occupation, so I can tell you what national problems you and your fellow whatevers let slide by refusing to act.  I mean, all those engineers letting the bridges and infrastructures get too old, and all of the teachers letting education go in the shitter - and no one lobbying to fix it!!!    

Man, now you’ve discovered that previously hidden lobbying-to-problem link, you and Neonmoon need to get on that stat and fix stuff.  It’s all so fucking easy. 

 

It’s definitely not easy. Change is never easy, but most industries strive to better themselves through change. To your point, most industry wide change is a reaction to something negative. For example, environment laws after Exxon Valdez spill, the Dodd-Frank Act after the Great Financial Crises, and the Judicial Conference along with the Rules Enabling Act after large case backlogs in the 1920s. Maybe the current deficiencies of the court system will inspire some lawyer or judge to champion a more efficient process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Thank you for the civics lesson. Did you bill for that hour?

To think lawyers as a group, with as much money as they generate, and as smart as they all seem to project, couldn’t band together to improve the inefficiencies of the court system, and are at best some pawn in the great game of life is just the chefs kiss. 

But maybe I’m wrong, and you are all powerless, just one cog in the great law machine. I’ve definitely never experienced a lawyer using delay tactics to increase my expenses in a civil trial. That’s just part of that unchanging system. You know what, maybe you could find another old post of mine for a pithy reply? 

What are there, 20 million attorneys?  The percentage of retrograde assholes is no different in any group that size in the society.  They can’t band together any more so than the rest of us.

Edited by nbmishoid
Fn splchk
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, nbmishoid said:

What are there, 20 million attorneys?  The percentage of retrograde assholes is no different in any group that size in the society.  They can’t band together any more so than the rest of us.

And as pointed out earlier, on any given policy issue lawyers are something like equally divided. 

They may not be equally divided personally, but their client base may compel them not to take a position on an issue. 

And you are absolutely deluding yourself if you think even the biggest law firm wields the kind of money and influence as most of the fortune 500,especially when several of them are bound together in an imdustry/lobbying group. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

And you are absolutely deluding yourself if you think even the biggest law firm wields the kind of money and influence as most of the fortune 500,especially when several of them are bound together in an imdustry/lobbying group. 

Are you suggesting a single law firm couldn’t use money to curry favor with a Supreme Court justice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

It’s definitely not easy. Change is never easy, but most industries strive to better themselves through change. To your point, most industry wide change is a reaction to something negative. For example, environment laws after Exxon Valdez spill, the Dodd-Frank Act after the Great Financial Crises, and the Judicial Conference along with the Rules Enabling Act after large case backlogs in the 1920s. Maybe the current deficiencies of the court system will inspire some lawyer or judge to champion a more efficient process. 

ok dude we'll get right on it

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

He was previously on the Texas Supreme Court during a period when they tightened standards for pain & suffering, was he not?

Actually, although Abbot was a member of a Texas Supreme Court that was, generally, pretty right wing and what you'd call "business oriented," he was not at all a standout fascist.

The court as a whole back then was comparatively mellow and Priscilla Owen and Nathan Hecht were probably the fascists in chief.  Hecht is still there and my sense of it is that he blows like a political weathervane and thus is all-in on current fascist tendencies.  Owen is now at the Fifth Circuit and is about as hardcore a fascist as you would want (or not, as the case may be), and has been so for years and years.  She and Edith Jones are the real-deal Holyfield.

That's why it is somewhat surprising that Greg Abbott has done such a heel turn into a total shitbag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Are you suggesting a single law firm couldn’t use money to curry favor with a Supreme Court justice?

Currying favor with a couple of judges and lobbying Congress to spend a shitpile of money creating more courts and judgeships are two entirely different things.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, nbmishoid said:

What are there, 20 million attorneys?  The percentage of retrograde assholes is no different in any group that size in the society.  They can’t band together any more so than the rest of us.

It is valid to say that some attorneys occupy positions of power that fuck people, namely the Supreme Court, but it's their position as judges rather than lawyers that makes that so.

And, I'm mostly taking out of consideration the fact that in an adversarial dispute or process, there's usually a winner and a loser, and sometimes the loser actually gets fucked.  Sometimes they deserve it.  But that's to me a different ball of wax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it won't ultimately make a shit. Unless he's found guilty in a criminal trial, it won't fucking matter to the GQP. He'll spin this as a witch hunt, etc and the MAGATS will go on their merry, blissfully ignorant way and pull the lever for him in November 2024.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somebody has likely beat me to this, but from the NYT:

 

Quote

A Manhattan jury on Tuesday found former President Donald J. Trump liable for the sexual abuse of the magazine writer E. Jean Carroll in a widely watched civil trial that sought to apply the accountability of the #MeToo era to a dominant political figure.

The federal jury of six men and three women also held Mr. Trump, 76, liable for defaming Ms. Carroll when he posted a statement on his Truth Social website in October, calling her case “a complete con job” and “a Hoax and a lie.”

The jury determined that Carroll had proven Mr. Trump sexually abused her, but they rejected the accusation that she had been raped. Sexual abuse is defined in New York as subjecting someone to sexual contact without their consent.

The jury awarded Ms. Carroll, 79, a total of $5 million in damages. Although more than a dozen women have accused Mr. Trump of sexual misconduct over the years, allegations he has always denied, Ms. Carroll’s case is the first such claim to be successfully tested before a jury.

The jury’s unanimous verdicts came after three hours of deliberation in Federal District Court in Manhattan. Its findings are civil, not criminal, meaning Mr. Trump has not been convicted of any crime and faces no prison time.

Show less

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Red Five said:

You know, back in my day, being found guilty of sexual assault might have been a hindrance in one's quest to be President of the United States.


maga gqp celebrate this. Grab them by the pussy, all women are good for !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

And it won't ultimately make a shit. Unless he's found guilty in a criminal trial, it won't fucking matter to the GQP. He'll spin this as a witch hunt, etc and the MAGATS will go on their merry, blissfully ignorant way and pull the lever for him in November 2024.

He'll raise 10 million tonight.   

lawdogs: what about attorney fees?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

"I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters, OK?"

"I stood in a dressing room at Bergdorf-Goodman and raped somebody, and I won't lose any voters, OK?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Red Five said:

You know, back in my day, being found guilty of sexual assault might have been a hindrance in one's quest to be President of the United States.

something something... but her emails

something something... but Hunter Biden's laptop

something something... but protest not insurrection

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...