[justlurking]

Also, not a bad October surprise!!!

Unfortunately, not likely. Once you trace the various article references back to the WSJ source, the last paragraph of that article states:

Those following the trial, including several people who wouldn’t speak on the record for this article, think it is unlikely Judge Gerber would rule on the matter before the November election.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

...it is unlikely Judge Gerber would rule on the matter before the November election.

And it's equally unlikely that the lamestream RATagandists will report on it inside that same time-frame...if at all.

[JohnBovenmyer]

Even if it doesn't happen until after the election it would be good for the country for GM the UAW to go through an honest bankruptcy process.

[Rusty0604]

So they can blame Romney if he wns

[faucetman]

You said: “Once you trace the various article references back to the WSJ source, the last paragraph of that article states:”

“Those following the trial, including several people who wouldn’t speak on the record for this article, think it is unlikely Judge Gerber would rule on the matter before the November election.”

I'm not positive, but it looks to me that these are two DIFFERENT articles about the same subject. The Washington Free Beacon article does not reference or credit the WSJ article, that I can find. They both appear to be original articles.

The conclusion at the end of the WSJ article”

“Several people” WOW, credible source.

“wouldn’t speak on the record” WOW REALLY credible

Let's be “Fair & Balanced”

Several people, who have followed this on FreeRepublic, who are WILLING to speak ,on the record (using their screen names), “Think that judge Gerber WOULD rule on the matter before the November election”, thus canceling out your conclusion.

Actually my conclusion is STRONGER than yours, I WIN!