Vinson Gives Regime Seven Days
March 3, 2011BEGIN TRANSCRIPTRUSH:
Here's an update on Judge Vinson and his ruling, and it ain't bad. It isn't as bad as the original slug that we got from Reuters, and our clarification here comes from ABC News. "Judge Vinson Clarifies Florida Ruling, Maintains That Entire Health Care Law Is Unconstitutional -- In a harshly worded opinion, Judge Roger Vinson, the Florida federal judge who struck down the entire health care law in January, gave the [regime] seven days from today to appeal his ruling with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. ... In the [20-page] ruling Vinson is critical of Justice Department lawyers for waiting nearly two weeks before filing a 'motion to clarify.'"'While I believe that my order was as clear and unambiguous as it could be,' Vinson wrote, 'it is possible that the defendants may have perhaps been confused or misunderstood its import.'"
Ohhhh, that is a slam, folks. That's why when I saw that first Reuters thing, I refused to get depressed. I knew what they were trying to do with that first slug. Vinson "said he had expected the government lawyers to immediately seek a stay of the ruling. 'It was not expected' he wrote, 'that they would effectively ignore the order and declaratory judgment for two and one-half weeks, continue to implement the Act, and only then file a belated motion to "clarify."'"
He didn't expect them to sit around for two-and-a-half weeks and ignore his ruling, but that's what they did. So in effect what Vinson has done, he's issued a seven-day stay of his previous ruling -- in effect -- and if the regime does not appeal within seven days, it looks like the regime is gonna be forced to stop implementing Obamacare. So the original post that we got on this, the slug from Reuters, "Judge refuses to stop implementation of health care law," well, it turns out, ladies and gentlemen, that's not quite the intent of Judge Vinson's ruling. Now, PMSNBC is saying that if the regime does not appeal in seven days the 26 states that sued can consider the law invalid.
That's not insignificant!
You schlubs at Reuters, you gotta try your tricks with other people. It's just not gonna work here. "Judge refuses to halt implementation"? That's their first slug: "Judge refuses to halt [regime] at implementing health care law"? Hardly. So Judge Vinson has maintained again the entire health care law is unconstitutional. He can't believe that he was unclear. He was totally clear. He can't believe they waited two weeks before filing a "motion to clarify." He "expected the government lawyers to seek a stay of the ruling immediately," that they would effectively ignore the order and judgment for two-and-a-half weeks and continue to implement the act and only then file a belated "motion to clarify." That was not expected.
He thought he had been perfectly clear in what he said, and we thought we were perfectly clear in our analysis. He said it was unconstitutional and he has stayed the thing. He had vacated the law, and they continued to implement it as though he didn't exist; and now according to the MSNBC (which cannot be happy about this, by the way) if the regime doesn't appeal in seven days... He's given they happen seven days. What Vinson's done is essentially stayed his own ruling for seven days. A nice guy. "All right, I'll give you another week, you regime guys, and if you don't do anything in seven days -- if you don't file this appeal in seven days -- then the 26 states that sued can consider the law invalid."
He's throwing down the gauntlet. I'm happy to be able to pass that on to you. END TRANSCRIPT