RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 8:49:23 AM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

For him, allegations are fact.

oic

(in reply to cloudboy)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 11:59:17 AM

Phydeaux

Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
When in fact, there was a great deal of harm, as has already been proven in depositions in the class action lawsuit on this matter.

Proven in depositions?
Has the case been settled?
If not then how can anything have been proved?

When there is a motion to dismiss, and a judge finds to the contrary that there is evidence (of damage) to proceed.
A litigant must have standing (ie., must have been injured) to proceed. There additionally must be evidence of wide spread bias in order to obtain class action suit - as well as a coherent class.

The fact that there was class action status allowed, and it is to libertarian / republican groups *is* evidence.

If you think there is any chance that this suit is going to lose - or that millions will be paid to the affected groups - you are delusional. My guess is that damages will reach into the several hundreds of millions of dollars.

So, you are correct - that the case isn't *proven* - it hasn't gone to court, and no verdict has been reached. But enough evidence has been proven to support the suit and class status.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 12:06:33 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Standing does not mean the plaintiff has been damaged.
For a motion to dismiss to succeed the judge must consider the plaintiffs claims as completely true and still not find a tort has occurred. Which BTW I can find no evidence that a motion to dismiss has been filed much less adjudicated.
The class action lawsuits have been filed only. I can find nothing saying the court has certified the class which is required before the suits can go forward.

BTW the suits will not go forward unless the judge waives sovereign immunity, certifies the class and the appellate courts agree. IOW not a snowballs chance in hell.

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 12:27:26 PM

Phydeaux

Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Standing does not mean the plaintiff has been damaged.
For a motion to dismiss to succeed the judge must consider the plaintiffs claims as completely true and still not find a tort has occurred. Which BTW I can find no evidence that a motion to dismiss has been filed much less adjudicated.
The class action lawsuits have been filed only. I can find nothing saying the court has certified the class which is required before the suits can go forward.

BTW the suits will not go forward unless the judge waives sovereign immunity, certifies the class and the appellate courts agree. IOW not a snowballs chance in hell.

I'll try to find the quote. From prior reading I saw that 2-3 motions to dismiss had been filed, and dismissed. I'm less certain on the Class. See what I can find.

But the suits can certainly proceed without class status. But I think it makes more sense to certify in this instance.

Regarding sovereign immunity - the FTCA act already waives sovereign immunity for tortuous acts, and with Lerners admission seems to fit the standard under which it will be tried. Additionally, I see no legal impediments due to the state standards, although it would argue against class action status.

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/22/2013 12:32:23 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 1:39:42 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
When in fact, there was a great deal of harm, as has already been proven in depositions in the class action lawsuit on this matter.

Proven in depositions?
Has the case been settled?
If not then how can anything have been proved?

When there is a motion to dismiss, and a judge finds to the contrary that there is evidence (of damage) to proceed.
A litigant must have standing (ie., must have been injured) to proceed. There additionally must be evidence of wide spread bias in order to obtain class action suit - as well as a coherent class.

The fact that there was class action status allowed, and it is to libertarian / republican groups *is* evidence.

If you think there is any chance that this suit is going to lose - or that millions will be paid to the affected groups - you are delusional. My guess is that damages will reach into the several hundreds of millions of dollars.

So, you are correct - that the case isn't *proven* - it hasn't gone to court, and no verdict has been reached. But enough evidence has been proven to support the suit and class status.

The long and short of it is that you were wrong once again.

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 1:59:23 PM

Phydeaux

Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

Quite to the contrary.

I said that the fact that there were damage was established.
I stand by that.

Your side of the argument choses to construe that to mean that it must be proved in a legal sense. I reject that argument. Mathemeticians "prove" things. Scientific theories are "proved".

Obama's political calculations are "proved" when he wins reelection.

Your definition of 'proved' is not the operative, nor even the primary definition. Here is, once again, the definition of the word.

prove
[proov] Show IPA verb, proved, proved or prov·en, prov·ing.
verb (used with object)
1. to establish the truth or genuineness of, as by evidence or argument: to prove one's claim.

One's actions proves one's words. One can prove a mineral field will play out by obtaining a sample. A deposition (sworn evidence) proves that there were damages.

< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/22/2013 2:00:42 PM >

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 2:02:54 PM

Phydeaux

Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Additionally, according to info release August 19, the discrimiinatory policies that were put in place is still in effect, in contradiction of Obamas appointee Danny Werflen?

I thought it was Werful that came in, noticed it was still in place, and sent out an immediate cease memo about it.

Correct. Werfel testified that he ended the practise. New testimony is however, that he did not.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 2:04:07 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Regarding sovereign immunity - the FTCA act already waives sovereign immunity for tortuous acts, and with Lerners admission seems to fit the standard under which it will be tried. Additionally, I see no legal impediments due to the state standards, although it would argue against class action status.

The FTCA exempts "performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function" So no the FTCA does not apply and the plaintiffs will have to convince a judge to waive immunity which simply is not going to happen in this case. The damages are insignificant, actually imaginary.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/2680

(in reply to Phydeaux)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 2:53:26 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

So, you are correct - that the case isn't *proven* - it hasn't gone to court, and no verdict has been reached.

I am correct when I point out that you are wrong and you admit that I am correct that by definition means that you were wrong once again.duuuuhhh

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 9/22/2013 2:54:23 PM >

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: IBD calls for a special prosecutor - 9/22/2013 7:00:48 PM

VideoAdminChi