Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

RE: The "stated" intent/purpose

Posted on: February 5, 2017 at 12:45:52 CT
tigerdb MU
Posts:
58182
Member For:
24.36 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
however the president & rudy have each made statements that are not consistent with that stated purpose. A judge/judges will frequently go beyond stated words and look to intent.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

The appeals court wasn't impressed with tRump's argument - tigerdb MU - 2/5 11:08:01
     It's the 9th circuit aka the most liberal - Sal KC - 2/5 11:50:39
          "their reasoning isn't even legal"...wtf is that supposed to - tigerdb MU - 2/5 12:04:54
          Could save a lot of money by simply - GA Tiger MU - 2/5 11:56:18
     That's why we have higher appeals courts... - Salty Dog MU - 2/5 11:15:42
          that was the 9th circuit - gmmm98 MU - 2/5 11:22:51
               You mean the 9th that always leads in the number of cases - DHighlander KC - 2/5 11:44:55
                    They are trying to assume what - Sal KC - 2/5 11:56:37
                         except it does work that way - gmmm98 MU - 2/5 12:13:42
                              Radical Christians in those countries are killing us. - Coors4bob MU - 2/5 14:40:27
                              I know the 9th circuit feels it's their job to do so - Sal KC - 2/5 12:28:56
                              No it doesn't. The wording of the order is what determines - DHighlander KC - 2/5 12:24:14
                                   RE: No it doesn't. The wording of the order is what determines - gmmm98 MU - 2/5 12:38:42
                                        The intent/purpose - Sal KC - 2/5 12:39:58
                                             RE: The "stated" intent/purpose - tigerdb MU - 2/5 12:45:52
                                                  the stated intent/purpose is stated in the order (nm) - 90Tiger ATL - 2/5 13:28:05
                                                  And again, if he wanted it to be a Muslim ban - Sal KC - 2/5 12:49:59
                                             no one denies that is the stated purpose contained - gmmm98 MU - 2/5 12:43:08
                                   Over 90% of Muslims aren't even impacted by the EO - Sal KC - 2/5 12:33:01
                                        whether this order is effective in banning all muslims - gmmm98 MU - 2/5 12:41:17
                                             The entire argument is he wants to ban Muslims - Sal KC - 2/5 12:49:11
                                                  You don't believe his word - nor Giuliani's? - tigerdb MU - 2/5 12:55:49
                                                       Why these 7? - Sal KC - 2/5 13:05:28
                                                  that's not the argument as to this order at all - gmmm98 MU - 2/5 12:53:32
               Correct...But my assessment of the 9th Circus stands... (nm) - Salty Dog MU - 2/5 11:38:03
     RE: The appeals court wasn't impressed with tRump's argument - MOCO SON MU - 2/5 11:09:10
          So many tears - JayHoaxH8r MU - 2/5 11:11:24
          He never imposed these types of limitations(nm) - tigerdb MU - 2/5 11:11:02
               The Hell he didn't! He imposed a 6 month ban on Iraq in 2011 - Salty Dog MU - 2/5 11:17:30
                    That ban wasn't similar to tRump's ban/noban/extreme vetting - tigerdb MU - 2/5 11:22:44
                         Trump's order is not a "muzz ban" (nm) - Salty Dog MU - 2/5 11:38:46
                              tRump promised a muzz ban; ruby said that tRump told - tigerdb MU - 2/5 12:07:46




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard