Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Is this legal? [Andrewmc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrewmc wrote:
F@@king barristers.........does that need to be in pink

Pink? Hell no. I'd put in in BOLD!


;-p

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Is this legal? [veganerd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
veganerd wrote:
TheForge wrote:
Well when you say a one liner like you did, you open yourself up to interpretation. Even I assumed you were saying they weren't comparable. If you aren't clear in your position, people will fill in the gaps. That's just the way the world works.

Take that tyrod idiot. He only says one liners that are often negative comments on republicans. We can use this lack of intelligence to assume a lot of things. Here is a brief list.

1. He is child or college student who doesn't know shit yet.
2. He is a play idiot.
3. He isn't informed.
4. He is a democrat operative (possible but unlikely since he hasn't said anything compelling).
5. He is gay (he did get a little weird with my cockholster reference to his mouth).

The list is endless, because he has never said anything substantial. Just one liner insults.


the trump quote was entirely applicable to the thread. trump made it sound like those practices would stop under his presidency. they havent, which i why i said it. trying to take that as some sort of argument that im ok with unions doing the same thing, was wrong. then jsa doubled down and said that my position on soros and unions was well known. i invited him to put up or shut up. he wont because he cant, but will walk away thinking he is correct.

good times.





If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Is this legal? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
wasusnowme wrote:
Moonrocket wrote:
How is it not considered a bribe to a public official? Or a kickback?


It's an 'incentive'. This is straight from the people who gave us the idea that a corporation has the same rights as a person.


The Koch brothers gave us that idea? Really?

Interesting. And here I thought the concept was determined in the United States in 1790. See, The Rev John Bracken v. The Visitors of Wm & Mary College (7 Va. 573; 1790, Supreme Court of Virginia).

Then, of course, in 1818, the US Supreme Court decided Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819). Beginning with this opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court has continuously recognized corporations as having the same rights as natural persons to contract and to enforce contracts.

Then, of course, in 1886, the US Supreme Court held that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment applied to corporations. We saw the expansion of corporate rights as "persons" By the US Supreme Court in 1906, 1938, 1949, 1957, 1978 and so on.

But, I'm certain you know more about this than I, so, please, carry on ...

Is it correct that it is also the concept that allows a corporation to be sued for wrongdoings rather than its shareholders?
Quote Reply
Re: Is this legal? [J_R] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
J_R wrote:
Is it correct that it is also the concept that allows a corporation to be sued for wrongdoings rather than its shareholders?

Basically, yes. You can only sue a legal person. It is what allows a corporation to be sued for the conduct of its employees/agents/officers.

If a corporation was not a legal person, Exxon could not be sued for the Valdez spill, tobacco companies could not have been sued, the asbestos lawsuits could not have taken place, etc., etc.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply

Prev Next