LawTalkers
Page 11 of 335 « First 910 11 12132161111 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Objectively intelligent. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=884)

Adder 01-23-2020 12:02 PM
Re: Debate Revisited.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 526950)
GGG previously lost his challenge that there were no reasonably defensible Trump policies. I give you another. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/imm...women-n1120706
Ah, yes, "reasonable:"

Quote:
Regulating tourist visas for pregnant women is one way to get at the issue, but it raises questions about how officers would determine whether a woman is pregnant to begin with, and whether a woman could get turned away by border officers who suspect she may be just by looking at her.
Turning away women at random to solve a non-problem. Completely "reasonable."

sebastian_dangerfield 01-23-2020 12:19 PM
Re: Debate Revisited.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 526955)
Also, soy milk and oat milk aren't milk. And, we should acquire Greenland.
"There's no such thing as soy milk. It's soy juice. But they couldn't sell soy juice, so they called it soy milk. Because anytime you say soy juice, you actually... start to gag. And they put Soy Milk in with my Moo-Cow fuck milk, and it doesn't belong there, because we all know there's no such thing as Soy milk 'cause there's no soy titty, is there?" - Lewis Black

And Tristan da Cunha.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 01-23-2020 12:57 PM
Re: Debate Revisited.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 526950)
GGG previously lost his challenge that there were no reasonably defensible Trump policies. I give you another. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/imm...women-n1120706
So will women be peeing on sticks at the border or will blood be drawn?

Tyrone Slothrop 01-23-2020 01:50 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Federalists vs. federalism -- who wins?

Hank Chinaski 01-23-2020 01:53 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 526954)
If you were talking to prosecutor, and she said something to you about what criminals do, I'm sure you'd say, you don't have any real world experience -- you don't represent criminals. And that would go over well.

Also, as a lawyer who has worked inside different companies for many years, it's pretty rich to hear an outside lawyer suggest that working in a law firm gives you some special insight into its clients' business. I wish.
Dim....

I once represented a bank in a patent lawsuit about ATM display screens for Casinos. I wouldn't claim to understand the financial crisis. I did learn about how bad degenerate gamblers are. IIRC you were not working in regulating, in fact not working with companies at all, you were involved in prosecuting certain actions against companies.

As to your experiences working inside, and your thoughts about the firms your company hires, you might want to blame your GC.... oh, wait, sorry....no offense.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-23-2020 02:15 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 526960)
I wouldn't claim to understand the financial crisis.
Ask an antitrust lawyer who spent years working in that space.

Hank Chinaski 01-23-2020 02:24 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 526961)
Ask an antitrust lawyer who spent years working in that space.
Why? If he were smart I'd expect he'd tell me to ask Thurgreed.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-23-2020 02:46 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 526962)
Why? If he were smart I'd expect he'd tell me to ask Thurgreed.
If you want to understand why the markets failed, it makes sense to talk to someone who was paid to understand how the markets work, and who worked on clearance for transactions that happened during the crisis.

But, hey, you be you.

Hank Chinaski 01-23-2020 03:04 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 526963)
If you want to understand why the markets failed, it makes sense to talk to someone who was paid to understand how the markets work, and who worked on clearance for transactions that happened during the crisis.

But, hey, you be you.
So if I wanted to know all about how New York City moves, I should to talk Ralph Kramden's friend Norton?

Tyrone Slothrop 01-23-2020 03:53 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 526964)
So if I wanted to know all about how New York City moves, I should to talk Ralph Kramden's friend Norton?
OK, boomer.

Adder 01-23-2020 04:32 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 526963)
If you want to understand why the markets failed, it makes sense to talk to someone who was paid to understand how the markets work, and who worked on clearance for transactions that happened during the crisis.

But, hey, you be you.
I'd ask if you worked on the only 24 hour early termination I've ever personally witnessed, but I don't recall which two banks were involved (and wouldn't name them anyway).

Hank Chinaski 01-23-2020 04:54 PM
Re: Objectively intelligent.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 526966)
I'd ask if you worked on the only 24 hour early termination I've ever personally witnessed, but I don't recall which two banks were involved (and wouldn't name them anyway).
Adder during those years at work he had to only be reading blogs about why W needed to be impeached and posting them here. He had a new theory every day. There is no way he had time to have any significant role in a real matter. The only termination he worked on there was when he left.

sebastian_dangerfield 01-23-2020 05:27 PM
Thou shalt not..
 
predict. Or speculate.

But just for the sake of envisioning this black swan... What if Trump were convicted and removed?

How would he react?
His 40% react?
The market react? (I think it’d do little, perhaps even rise.)

Civil unrest?
End of the GOP?
Bernie crushing Joe as last populist standing?
Joe crushing Bernie in a grand “return to normalcy”?

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 01-23-2020 05:38 PM
Re: Thou shalt not..
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 526968)
predict. Or speculate.

But just for the sake of envisioning this black swan... What if Trump were convicted and removed?

How would he react?
His 40% react?
The market react? (I think it’d do little, perhaps even rise.)

Civil unrest?
End of the GOP?
Bernie crushing Joe as last populist standing?
Joe crushing Bernie in a grand “return to normalcy”?

I'm looking for the "crawl back under their rocks" option. That's what I'm hoping for. That some of these reptiles just get back under the rocks.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-23-2020 09:17 PM
Re: Thou shalt not..
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 526968)
predict. Or speculate.

But just for the sake of envisioning this black swan... What if Trump were convicted and removed?

How would he react?
His 40% react?
The market react? (I think it’d do little, perhaps even rise.)

Civil unrest?
End of the GOP?
Bernie crushing Joe as last populist standing?
Joe crushing Bernie in a grand “return to normalcy”?
Conservatives would love a good stab in the back.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:23 PM.
Page 11 of 335 « First 910 11 12132161111 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com