Really wish DOJ had gone ahead and filed either their own petition for a writ of mandamus or joined with Powell. Would have been cleaner procedurally.
Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts
7,775,518 Views |
49464 Replies |
Last: 50 min ago by flown-the-coop
Pillard is grossly mischaracterizing what happened at Flynn's colloquy hearing.
You can hear it in her voice she doesn't believe what she is saying. She's defending talking points given to her...
Shut her down there!
Jeebus! Wilkins with the same dumb hypothetical again. My god this man has tunnel vision.
Now Wilkins has the Attorney General taking a bribe!
Yep. At least he's not race-baiting today (yet), but instead he's implying the US Attorney (or in this case the AG), is being 'bribed' politically to favor the president's friend/ally. But again it just...doesn't matter. At all.
Under 48a under Fokker the court still has to grant the motion and dismiss; they can't ever get to sentencing.
Under 48a under Fokker the court still has to grant the motion and dismiss; they can't ever get to sentencing.
Surprised he didn't say the "President"
He is certainly has blinders on.....aggiehawg said:
Now Wilkins has the Attorney General taking a bribe!
This guy and his line of questioning is like "a Martian talking to fungo" - Bull Durham.
Following this thread and even understanding only about 50% of it, I am not left with a warm fuzzy feeling about the competency of the federal judiciary.
Elections have consequences. Obama appointed judges are reliably partisan.Quote:
Following this thread and even understanding only about 50% of it, I am not left with a warm fuzzy feeling about the competency of the federal judiciary.
LGB
You shouldn't have one. They are horrible for the most part today.Tailgate88 said:
Following this thread and even understanding only about 50% of it, I am not left with a warm fuzzy feeling about the competency of the federal judiciary.
Good question by Rao on why the DoJ didn't file a separate writ of mandamus.
Wall with a good answer, but I think DoJ should have joined Powell/Flynn or filed writ separately.
Although I am uncertain about the constitutional ramifications.
Wall with a good answer, but I think DoJ should have joined Powell/Flynn or filed writ separately.
Although I am uncertain about the constitutional ramifications.
If X would have happened, then Y ...
Yeah, but the facts are that X didn't happen.
Yes, but if X would have happened...
Let's rule on an actual case based on a hypothetical?
Yeah, but the facts are that X didn't happen.
Yes, but if X would have happened...
Let's rule on an actual case based on a hypothetical?
They are biased in my opinion and not considering the law before them, clear as it may be in my amateur eyes.aggiehawg said:You shouldn't have one. They are horrible for the most part today.Tailgate88 said:
Following this thread and even understanding only about 50% of it, I am not left with a warm fuzzy feeling about the competency of the federal judiciary.
Now Garland is going off course with dumb hypotheticals. And of course doing some Trump bashing in the process.
ETA: Hey Garland! War damn turtle says, "Hello!"
ETA: Hey Garland! War damn turtle says, "Hello!"
Is not the difference that Garland is talking about with Congress and spending and this case the fact that one is criminal and involving due process of an individual versus the executive branch deciding with executive order where to spend money?
Why it was a dumb hypothetical.Jeff84 said:
Is not the difference that Garland is talking about with Congress and spending and this case the fact that one is criminal and involving due process of an individual versus the executive branch deciding with executive order where to spend money?
Your opinion is more valid than mine, but ANY judge that graduated law school since 1990 appears to have been subjected to massive amounts of "hypotheticals", and finding diamonds in the legal rough where it has NEVER existed.Aggie Jurist said:Elections have consequences. Obama appointed judges are reliably partisan.Quote:
Following this thread and even understanding only about 50% of it, I am not left with a warm fuzzy feeling about the competency of the federal judiciary.
So, any judge chosen by a Dem seems to be conditioned to be reliably partisan, even some of the conservative judges--see Roberts and Souter.
Obama managed to put a truly cancerous amount of borderline illiterate people on the bench, and today it's worth reminding folks that the DC Circuit is why Reid got rid of the filibuster for judges. He packed the DC circuit with dumb political/partisans knowing it would benefit his over-reach, and hopefully his successor for many years.Tailgate88 said:
Following this thread and even understanding only about 50% of it, I am not left with a warm fuzzy feeling about the competency of the federal judiciary.
The exception, Srinivasan is actually, ok, and I am not sure how/why he managed to be picked.
Millett still going to a fake hypothetical of the bribe taking place in front of the judge in the courtroom!
Good grief!
Good grief!
AMEN!!!!!captkirk said:
F the "rules". Justice needs to be served and faith in these institutions needs to be restored.
Hearing Garland's nonsense this morning just reiterates that Cocaine Mitch did the right thing keeping that guy off the SC.
Government is the bad guy now but not when they don't turn over brady evidence...
Wilkinson up now.
Saying the government's rememdy is not to answer the judge's questions about their deliberations. Not the way that works, dear.
Saying the government's rememdy is not to answer the judge's questions about their deliberations. Not the way that works, dear.
Trump and McConnell are doing their best to reverse damage done by Obama.Quote:
Obama managed to put a truly cancerous amount of borderline illiterate people on the bench, and today it's worth reminding folks that the DC Circuit is why Reid got rid of the filibuster for judges. He packed the DC circuit with dumb political/partisans knowing it would benefit his over-reach, and hopefully his successor for many years.
Apparently they've 'a long ways to go'.akm91 said:Trump and McConnell are doing their best to reverse damage done by Obama.Quote:
Obama managed to put a truly cancerous amount of borderline illiterate people on the bench, and today it's worth reminding folks that the DC Circuit is why Reid got rid of the filibuster for judges. He packed the DC circuit with dumb political/partisans knowing it would benefit his over-reach, and hopefully his successor for many years.
Audio troubles, lol. Hopefully everyone knows we can still hear them publicly.
Judges still on. Wilkinson unavailable.
Can't wait to get past all this dial-in BS post-CV
Can't wait to get past all this dial-in BS post-CV
Everything sounds like it's back on track.
Wilkinson just stepped into it. She admitted that mandamus was proper when a judge does something improper in the order that set a hearing. That's the entire amicus question.
Oops.aggiehawg said:
Wilkinson just stepped into it. She admitted that mandamus was proper when a judge does something improper in the order that set a hearing. That's the entire amicus question.
Keeping up a lie for a long time is very hard... The truth almost always comes out.
Wilkinson is arguing against the circuit court giving any guidance or instruction as to how Sullivan proceeds with a hearing but she won't say what Sullivan would do.
Wilkinson's repeated assertion that there is "nothing in the record to suggest" Sullivan remains unbiased makes me want to eat glass.
He accused the general of betraying his country, suggested he could be charged with treason, and told Flynn, "You sold your country out" in open court.
He accused the general of betraying his country, suggested he could be charged with treason, and told Flynn, "You sold your country out" in open court.
Habanero Guero
Earley Honeymoon Phase Over Quicker Than Expected
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
63
Nonregdrummer09
Earley Honeymoon Phase Over Quicker Than Expected
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
35