The fact that her blatant conflict of intrest issues and the twisted logic behind her ruling dont get much media play pretty much errect a statue to the media liberal leanings.
That might seem an obvious conflict of interest, but the canons of conduct for federal judges are unclear as to whether Taylor was in violation. Liberal scholars, quick to claim conflict of interest by Justice Antonin Scalia on far less evidence, gave Taylor the benefit of the doubt. Her ACLU ties, said New York University's Stephen Gillers, would not "raise reasonable questions about her partiality on the issue of warrantless wiretapping." Gillers conceded, however, that she should have disclosed the connection "because it avoids suspicion later."
This is the paragraph that just blew me away.
This would be the best example of the error in the liberal mindset I've so far seen.
posted on 08/28/2006 6:13:50 AM PDT
(The U.N. will be the tool of the Anti-Christ)
posted on 08/28/2006 6:20:36 AM PDT
(Chastity prays for me, piety sings...Modesty hides my thighs in her wings...)
To: baystaterebel; P-Marlowe; blue-duncan; jude24; Congressman Billybob
Lower courts should not be permitted to rule on Constitutional level branches of our government. Congress and the President have teams of lawyers and a mandate by their oath to be true to the constitution.
Lower court disagreements should be permitted only as requests for rulings from the US Supreme Court, a parallel Constitutional branch of government.
A district court should be required to request an appeals court to forward a request for ruling to the Scotus.
posted on 08/28/2006 7:19:53 AM PDT
(Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!)
Hey Bob Novak....why not write about the fiasco that you started??? Why don't you EXPOSE Armitage/Powell as the LEAKERS!!
posted on 08/28/2006 8:26:40 AM PDT
by Suzy Quzy
("When Cabals Go Kabooms"....upcoming book on Mary McCarthy's Coup-Plotters.)
she is the robed enemy within. the fisa court approved warrantless wiretapping
There needs to be some form of Judicial censor, when a judge exhibits such blatant conflict of interest and partisan interpretation of the law, twisting the law until it is unrecognizable as an interpretation of the US constitution.
posted on 08/28/2006 9:48:28 AM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson