The reward money in the Chris Dorner case is now being rescinded.
The city is trying to get out of paying the million dollar reward, even though they promised it to anyone who helped find and capture him.
California High Speed Rail sues everybody…
The state of California has filed a civil case against everyone – literally, the whole world – seeking to validate $8.6 billion in voter-approved bonds for its $69 billion high-speed rail project.
The lawsuit, titled “High-Speed Rail Authority v. All Persons Interested,” is meant as a pre-emptive strike so the state can confirm that it’s definitely legal to issue some of the bonds needed to begin bullet train construction this summer. By citing a somewhat obscure California civil code, the state can use the “sue now or forever hold your peace” strategy to prevent a string of future lawsuits and, instead, deal with the legal issues in one fell swoop.
Anyone interested in trying to block the project can sign up with the court, put their endless hours of “Law & Order” watching to use, wear their best suit and show up at a hearing to argue their case. They would join lawyers who are already suing the rail authority in other cases and go toe-to-toe with the state Attorney General’s Office, which is representing the rail authority.
The state’s biggest-ever project is also one of its most controversial, which has led the rail authority to swat away lawsuit after lawsuit since California voters approved the bullet train in November 2008.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
California High Speed Rail sues everybody…
The state of California has filed a civil case against everyone – literally, the whole world – seeking to validate $8.6 billion in voter-approved bonds for its $69 billion high-speed rail project.
The lawsuit, titled “High-Speed Rail Authority v. All Persons Interested,” is meant as a pre-emptive strike so the state can confirm that it’s definitely legal to issue some of the bonds needed to begin bullet train construction this summer. By citing a somewhat obscure California civil code, the state can use the “sue now or forever hold your peace” strategy to prevent a string of future lawsuits and, instead, deal with the legal issues in one fell swoop.
Anyone interested in trying to block the project can sign up with the court, put their endless hours of “Law & Order” watching to use, wear their best suit and show up at a hearing to argue their case. They would join lawyers who are already suing the rail authority in other cases and go toe-to-toe with the state Attorney General’s Office, which is representing the rail authority.
The state’s biggest-ever project is also one of its most controversial, which has led the rail authority to swat away lawsuit after lawsuit since California voters approved the bullet train in November 2008.
You gonna sue MaximusB?
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
California High Speed Rail sues everybody…
The state of California has filed a civil case against everyone – literally, the whole world – seeking to validate $8.6 billion in voter-approved bonds for its $69 billion high-speed rail project.
The lawsuit, titled “High-Speed Rail Authority v. All Persons Interested,” is meant as a pre-emptive strike so the state can confirm that it’s definitely legal to issue some of the bonds needed to begin bullet train construction this summer. By citing a somewhat obscure California civil code, the state can use the “sue now or forever hold your peace” strategy to prevent a string of future lawsuits and, instead, deal with the legal issues in one fell swoop.
Anyone interested in trying to block the project can sign up with the court, put their endless hours of “Law & Order” watching to use, wear their best suit and show up at a hearing to argue their case. They would join lawyers who are already suing the rail authority in other cases and go toe-to-toe with the state Attorney General’s Office, which is representing the rail authority.
The state’s biggest-ever project is also one of its most controversial, which has led the rail authority to swat away lawsuit after lawsuit since California voters approved the bullet train in November 2008.
You gonna sue MaximusB?[/quote]
Shit man, I might just for the sake of saying “fuck you” to this Democratic Mafia.
I would absolutely tool Kamala Harris and Jerry Brown when it comes to this.
The guy who wrote the original proposal for High Speed Rail is also suing, goes to show you how bad this is.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
California High Speed Rail sues everybody…
The state of California has filed a civil case against everyone – literally, the whole world – seeking to validate $8.6 billion in voter-approved bonds for its $69 billion high-speed rail project.
The lawsuit, titled “High-Speed Rail Authority v. All Persons Interested,” is meant as a pre-emptive strike so the state can confirm that it’s definitely legal to issue some of the bonds needed to begin bullet train construction this summer. By citing a somewhat obscure California civil code, the state can use the “sue now or forever hold your peace” strategy to prevent a string of future lawsuits and, instead, deal with the legal issues in one fell swoop.
Anyone interested in trying to block the project can sign up with the court, put their endless hours of “Law & Order” watching to use, wear their best suit and show up at a hearing to argue their case. They would join lawyers who are already suing the rail authority in other cases and go toe-to-toe with the state Attorney General’s Office, which is representing the rail authority.
The state’s biggest-ever project is also one of its most controversial, which has led the rail authority to swat away lawsuit after lawsuit since California voters approved the bullet train in November 2008.
You gonna sue MaximusB?[/quote]
Shit man, I might just for the sake of saying “fuck you” to this Democratic Mafia.
I would absolutely tool Kamala Harris and Jerry Brown when it comes to this.
The guy who wrote the original proposal for High Speed Rail is also suing, goes to show you how bad this is. [/quote]
I got your back, and might show up if you do.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
And in other news from 40 years ago: your present day Secretary of State.[/quote]
I didn’t know Jane Fonda was our Secretary of State? Oh you are talking about that dweeb John Kerry. His face lift is horrendous.
The city of Stockton is eligible for bankruptcy protection, Federal judge says…
A federal judge ruled Monday that Stockton is eligible for bankruptcy protection, despite the objection of creditors who argued the city could come up with more money.
Stockton is the biggest U.S. city to file for bankruptcy.
When it filed last June, Mayor Ann Johnston said there were no alternatives.
“We are extremely disappointed that we have been unable to avoid bankruptcy,” Johnston said in a statement at the time.
"This is what we must do to get our fiscal house in order and protect the safety and welfare of our citizens. We will emerge from bankruptcy with a solid financial future.?
Stockton was one of three cities that filed for bankruptcy in California last year.
San Bernardino filed in August. San Bernardino declared more than $1 billion in liabilities and $1 billion in assets in the first of what will be many court filings. Mammoth Lakes also filed.
When is “the real news” going to comment on how Matthews couldn’t pass highschool sociology or history?
…and in other news,
“the Student Government Association at Johns Hopkins University denied the pro-life student group Voice For Life the status of official student club. While SGA members compared VFL to white supremacists, they approved a new group called Students for Justice in Palestine?which has a history of anti-Semitism and campus disruption.”
Well, I guess abortion will be a-okay for many many years to come. Can’t even put a club together against it.
^Oh and you’re a racist (but not an okay racist against Israel) if you are against abortion. Awesome…
Oh and MD increased my cost of gas and restricted my Second Amendment rights all in a matter of hours this past week. Thank you MD!
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Oh and MD increased my cost of gas and restricted my Second Amendment rights all in a matter of hours this past week. Thank you MD![/quote]
Don’t you worry my friend, those increased gas prices are meant for you to take a bus, ride a bike, walk, or ride a fucking skateboard for your daily transit. And this is all in the name of Global Warming, when we are only barely 4% of the world population. And in your case, you are .08% of the world population. Can you breathe easier yet ?
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Oh and MD increased my cost of gas and restricted my Second Amendment rights all in a matter of hours this past week. Thank you MD![/quote]
Don’t you worry my friend, those increased gas prices are meant for you to take a bus, ride a bike, walk, or ride a fucking skateboard for your daily transit. And this is all in the name of Global Warming, when we are only barely 4% of the world population. And in your case, you are .08% of the world population. Can you breathe easier yet ?
[/quote]
The increased revenue is supposed to be to improve transportation. Heard that before 
Shit cracks me up. Before the increase passed all I kept hearing was, “the % hasn’t changed since the 90s.” I’m not sure MD understands how a % works.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Oh and MD increased my cost of gas and restricted my Second Amendment rights all in a matter of hours this past week. Thank you MD![/quote]
Don’t you worry my friend, those increased gas prices are meant for you to take a bus, ride a bike, walk, or ride a fucking skateboard for your daily transit. And this is all in the name of Global Warming, when we are only barely 4% of the world population. And in your case, you are .08% of the world population. Can you breathe easier yet ?
[/quote]
The increased revenue is supposed to be to improve transportation. Heard that before
Shit cracks me up. Before the increase passed all I kept hearing was, “the % hasn’t changed since the 90s.” I’m not sure MD understands how a % works.
[/quote]
I dont think any Democrat understands how a % works.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Oh and MD increased my cost of gas and restricted my Second Amendment rights all in a matter of hours this past week. Thank you MD![/quote]
Don’t you worry my friend, those increased gas prices are meant for you to take a bus, ride a bike, walk, or ride a fucking skateboard for your daily transit. And this is all in the name of Global Warming, when we are only barely 4% of the world population. And in your case, you are .08% of the world population. Can you breathe easier yet ?
[/quote]
The increased revenue is supposed to be to improve transportation. Heard that before
Shit cracks me up. Before the increase passed all I kept hearing was, “the % hasn’t changed since the 90s.” I’m not sure MD understands how a % works.
[/quote]
I dont think any Democrat understands how a % works.[/quote]
Maybe you can explain to me how (in the name of Global Warming), banning bonfires on the beach is going to help save the polar bears ?
LOL I swear not even Hollywood could invent this shit !
I’m telling ya’ll its time to get a horse. You can ride on any road built with fed money (not interstates) and 20 ft on either side of a state road is public (grass), so ya got gas for your ride right there. Also, cops refuse to give a ticket to a man on a horse, they have to figure out what to do with the horse first!
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
When is “the real news” going to comment on how Matthews couldn’t pass highschool sociology or history?[/quote]
That guy is just as bad or worse than anybody at FOXNEWS, but NEVER gets called out on it.
When Sharpton is on his show…I can just about feel the brain cells dying.
Republican Logic:
Thump the consitution for the amendments you like, and totally disregard the ones you don’t
Usually it is the 14th or the 16th…pretty weird they are now wiping their ass with the first…