[massmike]

Full title:

MassResistance reveals disturbing background of federal judge who issued vitriolic ruling against Pastor Scott Lively.

[pieceofthepuzzle]

No matter what side of this, or any other issue being considered, this kind of conflict of interest should always be grounds for recusal. If not, it makes a mockery of the legal system.

[healy61]

I can’t imagine the cards getting stacked any worse. Complaints need to be filed at as many controlling state controlling offices as soon as possible.

[massmike]

homosexual agenda ping

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

I missed the ruling against the pastor. Would someone briefly relate what happened to Reverend? Thanks in advance.

[trebb]

Kind of like having a serial killer/cannibalistic judge presiding over Jeffrey Dahmer’s case....

[realcleanguy]

“He” seems to have a lot of lesbian issues in “his” family. Is anyone sure “He” isn’t a female to male transsexual? I mean, his first with is a lesbian, his 2nd wife appears to be a lesbian, and his daughter now. I’m thinking he is really a she all along.

This is just an observation. I have nothing against lesbians as my mother in law was one (She passed away) and I have a cousin who is one.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

What is happening here is that the federal judge has allowed an unconscionable lawsuit to go forward, fully aware that it will almost certainly be overturned on appeal, but will achieve several punitive goals against a defendant he hates.

It is highly unethical and unjust, but is done anyway.

The two goals are, for the judge, are to first run up enormous expenses on the part of the defendant, but not on the complainant, who is in this case have “deep pocket” resources, but insulate the party responsible, George Soros, from any potential counter suit liability.

Second, by opening the defendant up to extensive legal discovery, which can be used by the complainant and others to harm the defendant in the future.

There is also a third potential goal of suppressing free speech by the defendant and others in the future, which is the “chilling effect”.

A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

The plaintiff’s (complainants) goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate.

Which is exactly what this Soros-funded complainant and this federal judge hope to accomplish.

As such, it would be grounds for impeachment and removal from the federal bench, were a conservative majority congress in office. Though congress is usually loathe to do so except for blatant criminal offenses, which permits bad and corrupt federal judges a free hand.

[Menehune56]

Thank you for posting this outrageous story, I had not heard of it. It reminds me of Federal Judge Vaughn Walker who overturned California's Proposition 8 defining marriage as 1 woman and 1 man. Only after his ruling did this wretched man came out of the closet. That alone should have been grounds for overturning his decision with prejudice.

[MacNaughton]

Pastor Lively is the co-author of ...

1995

Scott Lively’s and Kevin Abrams’ controversial book, The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, was published. Its theme was that “butch” (ultra masculine) homosexuals within the Nazi Party contributed to the extreme militarism and barbarism of Nazi Germany. The authors maintained that a key to understanding the cause of the German social collapse, which culminated in the atrocities of the Third Reich, was found in the conflict of Hellenic and Hebrew (Judeo-Christian) value systems. This war of philosophies, as old as Western civilization itself, pit the homoeroticism of the Greeks against the marriage-and-family-centered heterosexuality of the Jews. Although the Nazis included homosexuals in their persecutions (though at a much lower level than homosexualists contend), the homosexuals they persecuted were almost exclusively the effeminate members of the homosexual community (who they claimed were also very active in the communist party, and therefore political rivals) in Germany. Persecution of the femme homosexuals provided a degree of public cover for their own homosexuality. Lively and Abrams also contended that much of the mistreatment in the concentration camps was administered by masculine homosexuals who despised effeminacy in all its forms. The book, and authors, have been subjected to heavy criticism from the homosexual lobby, segments of the Jewish population, and others.

The Pink Swastika", 4th edition, on-line

The Pink Swastika as Holocaust Revisionist History

Uganda passes tough new anti-homosexuality bill