Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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.
1 posted on 08/28/2006 6:06:05 AM PDT by baystaterebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: baystaterebel
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.

2 posted on 08/28/2006 6:13:50 AM PDT by uptoolate (The U.N. will be the tool of the Anti-Christ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: baystaterebel

bump


4 posted on 08/28/2006 6:20:36 AM PDT by Skooz (Chastity prays for me, piety sings...Modesty hides my thighs in her wings...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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.


6 posted on 08/28/2006 7:19:53 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and proud of it! Supporting our troops means praying for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: baystaterebel

Hey Bob Novak....why not write about the fiasco that you started??? Why don't you EXPOSE Armitage/Powell as the LEAKERS!!


10 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.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: baystaterebel

she is the robed enemy within. the fisa court approved warrantless wiretapping


11 posted on 08/28/2006 9:33:01 AM PDT by stan_sipple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: baystaterebel

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.


14 posted on 08/28/2006 9:48:28 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson