Favorite team:LSU 
Location:Baton Rouge
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:973
Registered on:1/14/2006
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
You're right. The article didn't specify that it was referring to the U.S. Supreme Court once. It did say towards the end that: "The Indiana Court of Appeals sided with the state, and the Indiana Supreme Court declined to review the case", which is what confused me. :cheers:
The Indiana Supreme Court declined to take up this case. This doesn't involve the U.S. Supreme Court or ACB.

The article states this towards the end of the article.
The OP should have specified that the Indiana Supreme Court declined to take up this case. This doesn't involve the U.S. Supreme Court or ACB.

Nonetheless, I agree that stories like these are infuriating and scary.
quote:

SB 84 – Provides for motion for judgment on offer of judgment
Proposed law provides that if the final judgment obtained by the plaintiff-offeree is at least 25% less than the amount of the offer of judgment made by the defendant-offeror or if the final judgment is in favor of the defendant, the offeree must pay the offeror's costs and attorney fees incurred after the offer was made, as fixed by the court.


This one confused me because we already have offers of judgment per La.C.C.P. 970, so I looked up SB 84. Then, I realized what this was about.

Senator Seabaw says that he wants to amend 970 "to provide for costs and attorney fees; to provide relative to parties; to provide for certain terms, conditions, and procedures; and to provide for related matters" when it really just changes the law so that only defendants (no longer "any party") can send and move to enforce offers of judgment. Well, it also allows the defendants to get attorney fees now.

Why doesn't good ole Seabaw just say that he only wants defendants to benefit from Offers of Judgments because 970 is currently too fair to both sides? Why hide the ball when the Republican Party controls both chambers of the state legislature?
Unfortunately, it was a rough interview for Foster, but I know for a fact that he is a really good guy. I've met him and know lots of people who are really close to him. He's really just a big kid at heart.

What I take from the story he told to Bussin With The Boys is that he was trying too hard to impress his teammates. Immediately after Foster told the story, he realized it came off bad and said he's grown a lot since then.
What's strange to me is that if the video conclusively proves that Ruby and her daughter were passing a "ginger mint" instead of a USB Drive, wouldn't one of the hundreds of articles written about Guiliani's false statement include the video (or photos of the frames of the video) that proves it was actually a "ginger mint" instead of a USB Drive?

It was difficult to even find the video in question, but I eventually did find it. It is linked below:

Video of USB or Mint being passed The pass takes place at the 1:45 minute mark of the linked video.

To me it still looks way more like a USB Drive than a "ginger mint". Also, if one is passed a "ginger mint", would it make much sense for that individual to then immediately place said "ginger mint" in their back pocket?

Further, it should be noted that Guiliani's reported admission that he made a false statement does not mean that these ladies automatically win their civil defamation case against him. These ladies still must prove that this reported false statement was made with prior knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false, with the intent to harm the target's reputation.

I think any unbiased individual who looks at the linked video would acknowledge that the item passed looks more like a USB Drive than a "ginger mint", so I see no intent or reckless disregard of whether it was false. However, this lawsuit was filed in DC (i.e., the land of the biased and compromised), so you know how that usually goes for Republicans.

re: Hunters plea deal is dead

Posted by LSU28605 on 7/26/23 at 12:33 pm
The Judge did not accept the revised plea deal.

"US District Judge Maryellen Noreika said she was not ready to accept the plea deal, and the hearing ended with Hunter Biden pleading not guilty for the time being.

The judge asked the sides to file additional briefs explaining the plea deal’s legal structuring."

re: Fence company needed in BR

Posted by LSU28605 on 2/26/22 at 12:38 pm
Thanks for the recommendation. I ended up going with Highland Fence Co.,and we could not be more pleased with the work, price and professionalism. Stewart and his wife,Melissa,seem like really good people who care about making their customers happy.
This physician organization (FLCCC) will help you find a physician to prescribe ivermectin. I believe they've even helped patient's families win court battles when hospitals have refused to administer the prescribed ivermectin.

LINK
We have two physicians in the family who strongly believe that it is very effective in treating Covid early and after admission.They prescribe it to their patients, and they even take it themselves to prevent getting Covid. They aren't vaccinated and haven't gotten Covid despite lots of contact with Covid patients.

My friend, who posts on TD too, is in the hospital and was not doing well - consistently low 02 sats for days. The day he started the ivermectin (this past Thursday),he did a little better. The following day, he was remarkably better. He gets discharged today. It could be a coincidence, but he credits the Ivermectin.

There are favorable studies and protocols out there. Lots of physicians don't have a lot of time to look at the studiea.

Ivermectin is available in Baton Rouge pharmacies. I hear it's hard to find in the Lafayette area.

It's something that should be considered. It's a low risk medication, but do a conflict check with her other medications. If any of my family gets Covid, they will be started on Ivermectin immediately.

re: Official CryptoTalk Thread

Posted by LSU28605 on 3/16/21 at 4:09 pm
I have 22 ETH, but I'm thinking about minimizing risk and selling some or all of it to buy more BTC. The thought right now is 1) buying .5 BTC and leaving the rest in ETH, 2) buying .5 BTC and using the rest to buy LINK, or 3) selling all my ETH to buy as much BTC as I can.

The other option is just keeping my 22 ETH and continue to HODL.

What would y'all do?

re: Official CryptoTalk Thread

Posted by LSU28605 on 2/9/21 at 7:50 pm
I don't know how to read code, but I do have a good feel for b.s. when I'm reading it. When I read a lot of the negative articles about bitcoin, it seemed really obvious to me that it was just a bunch of scared old dudes that weren't comfortable with technology or intellectual property. They couldn't wrap their minds around the fact that they couldn't actually place the bitcoins in their chubby little hands.

re: Official CryptoTalk Thread

Posted by LSU28605 on 2/9/21 at 7:37 pm
Before I invested in btc and etc, I read everything I could to gain an understanding about the technology. It was way over my head at first and a lot of it still is to be honest, but I slowly started to understand the basics the more I read about it. Once I was fairly confident that it was a real technology that was here to stay, I invested some and kept reading about it. It was still a very risky investment, so I invested accordingly.

When btc went to the 20k all time high, I took 1/2 out and let the rest ride. All my friends later got out altogether when btc and eth crashed. I didn't because I was confident that crypto were the future. I really wish that I would have invested more at that moment, but I at least didn't abandon ship and invested a little more.

Now that I thin I'm ready to branch out into alts a bit, I'm looking to others who have already done the research for recommendations. I'll then do my own research and make the plunge with the goal of making lots of money in alts that will later be transferred to btc and/or eth for holding longterm.

re: Official CryptoTalk Thread

Posted by LSU28605 on 2/9/21 at 6:51 pm
That's a good question. To me, it means an alt with a really unique use, technology and/or purpose -- not just some made up pump and dump that the creators know is really going nowhere from day 1.

re: Official CryptoTalk Thread

Posted by LSU28605 on 2/9/21 at 6:10 pm
All I've had for a few years is btc and eth. You've inspired me to branch out brother.

What's your prediction for the alts that are ready to and/or are going to continue to breakout during alt season? I'm not ready to dive into smaller shite coins without decent fundamentals.

re: Official CryptoTalk Thread

Posted by LSU28605 on 2/8/21 at 6:58 pm
Who thinks Bitcoin is going to hit 50k tonight?

re: Jordy Culotta Out at 104.5 ESPN

Posted by LSU28605 on 1/14/21 at 11:04 am
Hunt and T-Bob wouldn't be bad. They wouldn't be as entertaining, but that combination would work. The problem is that I don't think Hunt wants to do that show every morning.

re: Jordy Culotta Out at 104.5 ESPN

Posted by LSU28605 on 1/14/21 at 10:58 am
Yeah, I like T-Bob, but he's not good as the lead guy or on his own.

I've noticed that Jordy was off the air more than usual lately. On the day of the Florida game Hannagriff mentioned that Jordy had to deal with something that came up unexpectedly.
I agree with you. It wasn't the speech, in which he told them to be peaceful, that incited them. They were incited because they reasonably believed that the election was stolen. Reasonable people knew that it was going to be stolen as soon as the swing States started changing their laws to allow mass mail in voting with virtually no limits.

re: Trump's Speech - Link to Full Text

Posted by LSU28605 on 1/11/21 at 5:17 pm
Those with TDS aren't really looking for the facts; it's all about how bad Trump makes them feel. However, I'll make it even easier for them to find the "incitement".

The PBS video of the speech is linked. Also, I included below the relevant excerpts from the speech with the corresponding times from the video, so everyone can verify the "incitement" for themselves.

At 56:43 minutes, Trump says:

"After this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down. We’re going to walk down any one you want, but I think right here. We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women."

At 57:35 minutes, Trump says:

"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections."

At 1:51:49, Trump says in conclusion:

"So we’re going to, we’re going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, I love Pennsylvania Avenue, and we’re going to the Capitol and we’re going to try and give… The Democrats are hopeless. They’re never voting for anything, not even one vote. But we’re going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country."

LINK PBS Video