Nanker Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 2:42 PM, Koko78 said: I doubt it's either. I'm sure they call her for the vote/discussion. Oral arguments are really the least important part of an appeal. Sometimes you can change a judge's mind or get one off the fence by clarifying a point for them, but decisions are mostly made based on the briefs. Expand And what happens if they're wearing boxers? For the record, does anyone from the SC actually check in on her to make sure she's still alive and cognizant? If she's not able to speak and no one has seen her, what is the assurance that she is indeed alive and capable of doing her job? Asking for a friend.
Koko78 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:18 PM, Nanker said: And what happens if they're wearing boxers? For the record, does anyone from the SC actually check in on her to make sure she's still alive and cognizant? If she's not able to speak and no one has seen her, what is the assurance that she is indeed alive and capable of doing her job? Asking for a friend. Expand The rules are quite clear: boxers are unacceptable. Rule 3.14(i)(5)(ix) requires tighty-whities or gtfo. 2
/dev/null Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:18 PM, Nanker said: For the record, does anyone from the SC actually check in on her to make sure she's still alive and cognizant? If she's not able to speak and no one has seen her, what is the assurance that she is indeed alive and capable of doing her job? Asking for a friend. Expand that is my concern. is she performing the duties of Supreme Court Justice or is she holding the seat for someone else? 2
Nanker Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:25 PM, /dev/null said: that is my concern. is she performing the duties of Supreme Court Justice or is she holding the seat for someone else? Expand Very true. If she's in late stage lung cancer she could be really incapacitated and heavily drugged with opiates. It would not put it past the Dems to do a Weekend at Bernie's with her until 2020.
row_33 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:25 PM, /dev/null said: that is my concern. is she performing the duties of Supreme Court Justice or is she holding the seat for someone else? Expand clerks do all the work if necessary
3rdnlng Posted January 21, 2019 Author Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:21 PM, Koko78 said: The rules are quite clear: boxers are unacceptable. Rule 3.14(i)(5)(ix) requires tighty-whities or gtfo. Expand I object! It's still debatable.
Koko78 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:42 PM, row_33 said: clerks do all the work if necessary Expand I can't see clerks doing something that unethical. Their legal careers would be over if they got caught trying to cover her death.
row_33 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 4:22 PM, Koko78 said: I can't see clerks doing something that unethical. Their legal careers would be over if they got caught trying to cover her death. Expand i understood they always do the work, they are either hired to reflect the justice's view or a devil's advocate role
/dev/null Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 4:22 PM, Koko78 said: I can't see clerks doing something that unethical. Their legal careers would be over if they got caught trying to cover her death. Expand the SPLC or ACLU would probably offer them a lifetime appointment
boyst Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:53 PM, 3rdnlng said: I object! It's still debatable. Expand With those two, I can't pick a side. Jesus. Line me up right in the middle. ???
3rdnlng Posted January 21, 2019 Author Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 5:15 PM, Boyst62 said: With those two, I can't pick a side. Jesus. Line me up right in the middle. ??? Expand We all know you won't pick a side but that still leaves you the front or the rear as a choice.
Nanker Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 3:53 PM, 3rdnlng said: I object! It's still debatable. Expand Depends
3rdnlng Posted January 21, 2019 Author Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 5:32 PM, Nanker said: Depends Expand Do what's right for you.
row_33 Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 5:39 PM, Deranged Rhino said: Proof of life time. Expand 1
3rdnlng Posted January 21, 2019 Author Posted January 21, 2019 Every notable person including some that are not have their obituary written prior to their death, and I would assume that graphics for tv or internet are created in advance so that they can immediately put it on the screen when that person dies. That's not the news here. Posting it is the news. 2
Hedge Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 5:39 PM, Deranged Rhino said: Proof of life time. Expand Simple mistake. Guess they will just need to put this on ice for a little while longer. That ice may be getting crowded. 1
DC Tom Posted January 21, 2019 Posted January 21, 2019 On 1/21/2019 at 5:39 PM, Deranged Rhino said: Proof of life time. Expand I kind-of wish, instead of "accidental," they'd said "premature." 2
Numark3 Posted January 22, 2019 Posted January 22, 2019 The conspiracy stuff is ridiculous as always (though it can be entertaining!). Hope she gets better soon!
KD in CA Posted January 22, 2019 Posted January 22, 2019 Sometimes someone jumps the gun just a little bit..... 2
Recommended Posts