Preview Subtitle for In The House


If preview looks OK then Download subtitles


0
00:00:01,000 --> 00:00:04,000
Downloaded From www.SubsMax.com

1
00:00:21,355 --> 00:00:22,973
The closer, aha!

2
00:00:23,284 --> 00:00:24,665
16 minutes.

3
00:00:25,063 --> 00:00:27,024
I got lucky with the subway.

4
00:00:27,665 --> 00:00:29,866
How may I be of service?

5
00:00:30,090 --> 00:00:32,060
You mean you don't know why you're here?

6
00:00:32,095 --> 00:00:33,407
Oh, Trudy.

7
00:00:33,523 --> 00:00:35,241
He's my law secretary.

8
00:00:37,055 --> 00:00:39,249
Obviously, I have to get myself one of those.

9
00:00:40,980 --> 00:00:43,079
You have been summoned, as have we all,

10
00:00:43,114 --> 00:00:46,879
to officially welcome Judge
Farnsworth into our little fold.

11
00:00:48,005 --> 00:00:49,005
Welcome.

12
00:00:49,561 --> 00:00:51,152
You're here to settle an argument.

13
00:00:51,187 --> 00:00:52,671
- It's not an argument.
- We were not arguing.

14
00:00:52,706 --> 00:00:55,908
- It was a spirited debate.
- Actually, it's more of a bet.

15
00:00:56,155 --> 00:00:59,877
At issue, Albany's capacity
to eliminate quid pro quo

16
00:00:59,915 --> 00:01:02,768
between elected judges and
local political groups.

17
00:01:02,934 --> 00:01:05,715
And they say judges don't
know how to party.

18
00:01:09,050 --> 00:01:11,611
- What's your position?
- Anybody who gives to a judge

19
00:01:11,646 --> 00:01:13,338
should not get to appear in front of them.

20
00:01:13,373 --> 00:01:17,530
And some real limits on organizational
contributions should do the trick.

21
00:01:17,565 --> 00:01:21,725
And violate a little something called
the first amendment. Am I mistaken?

22
00:01:22,594 --> 00:01:23,771
You are not mistaken.

23
00:01:23,806 --> 00:01:26,246
Buckley v. Valeo laid out
the general principle

24
00:01:26,263 --> 00:01:30,148
which was reaffirmed in 1997
in Randall v. Sorrell.

25
00:01:31,149 --> 00:01:33,104
I told you. He's a savant. Mm.

26
00:01:34,212 --> 00:01:37,740
But if the courts used a
conflict-of-interest analysis

27
00:01:37,775 --> 00:01:40,030
rather than a first amendment one,

28
00:01:40,065 --> 00:01:42,240
well, then, you get the result

29
00:01:43,082 --> 00:01:44,371
without the problem.

30
00:01:44,575 --> 00:01:47,197
The Massey Energy case does
consider that approach.

31
00:01:47,232 --> 00:01:48,691
- Massey.
- But

32
00:01:48,726 --> 00:01:50,812
the facts of that case are too extreme

33
00:01:50,850 --> 00:01:54,040
for its logic to apply in this particular situation.

34
00:01:54,057 --> 00:01:55,903
I believe you lack a precedent.

35
00:01:56,755 --> 00:01:59,504
- And I believe we have a winner.
- Yay!

36
00:02:00,290 --> 00:02:01,521
Thank God.

37
00:02:02,124 --> 00:02:04,444
Now, who's got some good gossip?

38
00:02:06,736 --> 00:02:07,756
Thank you.

39
00:02:09,133 --> 00:02:11,265
I'm gonna buy you a pack of gum.

40
00:02:11,924 --> 00:02:15,667
www.addic7ed.com

41
00:02:15,702 --> 00:02:20,561
"Is There a Doctor in the House?"

42
00:02:20,596 --> 00:02:24,680
Transcripted by chamallow35

43
00:02:24,715 --> 00:02:28,725


44
00:02:28,760 --> 00:02:33,293


45
00:02:40,114 --> 00:02:41,114
Hello?

46
00:02:43,247 --> 00:02:44,247
Hello?

47
00:02:46,346 --> 00:02:47,346
Hello?

48
00:02:49,202 --> 00:02:51,284
Gavin, this is so lame.

49

[...]
Everything OK? Download subtitles