Posted on 08/27/2016 6:27:20 PM PDT by MThomp
This takes place in Texas, a state with Republican governors.
Republican governors did nothing to stop this.
This is why the Liberal movement has gotten so powerful and has taken over American society.
Our Republican "leaders" sit idly by and allow it.
And it's been going on for decades.
“Law” is a concept who’s time is passed.
The law, now, is whatever one person says it is.
This is exactly how the Soviet Union operated.
I understand.
So I wonder if Donald Trump is aware of any of this.
I recall reading that quote from this judge before. He should have been impeached just for saying that.
This is something that Donald Trump is promising, at least, to try to reverse.
How does a “US District Judge” get pay in that capacity from a “State”? Your assertion raises doubt from a different angle.
If it is the case that he’s getting something from the UNT connected with his past career as a state jurist, and something else from Uncle Sam connected with his later career as a Federal jurist, this looks even MORE damning, not less. A state good-old-boy was raised by a Demon-rat president to a stature where he carried on as a king for the benefit of the interests he once had known.
I’m not sure this would fly even with all of the left wing of the USSC.
Dean, University of North Texas at Dallas College of Law, 2013-
More payback.
Especially since he knows Traitorcongress will do.............................................................................................. nothing.
Should sitting jurists even be allowed to do this? This is asking for political favoritism to intrude into the public courthouse.
Well they may not, but it looks like Trump trouble is coming.
Jeff Baron’s mother maintains a facebook page and responds to inquires there: https://www.facebook.com/savejeff
bookmark
As I recall, retired judges can sometimes still hear cases.
Hmm...so they still have to be impeached?
and convicted?
I’m not sure he can still hear cases. They take ‘senior’ status at a certain point (65 with 15 years of service or younger if the age plus service equals 80) , and they can still work as much as they want at that point, but they don’t have to work.
Furgeson took Senior status as soon as he saw that Obama won in 2008, freeing up a slot for Obama to appoint another liberal; but he took retirement in 2013. Once he retired, he could take another job, but he wouldn’t be assigned to hear cases by the chief judge of the court.
He doesn't, and no one said he did.
If it is the case that he’s getting something from the UNT connected with his past career as a state jurist,
He never worked as a judge for the state. Look up his bio. He did work as an assistant county attorney in Texas, but that may have been on a county payroll, not the state.
Maybe he got railroaded, but most people who feature in these sorts of screed are lunatics or people who think they can frustrate the course of justice by bad-faith or made-up procedural maneuvers.
I know I would have responded, “That’s cute, judge, but so long as all men bleed they remain equal, for if it bleeds, you can kill it.”
Story says:
“The receiver assigned to Baron’s case is Peter Vogel, an attorney who, before presiding over Baron’s company and personal assets, was a special master (adjunct judge) in Judge Furgeson’s court. Vogel’s appointment as receiver is illegal, according to 28 U.S.C. 958, which mandates that a person employed by any judge of the United States may not at the same time be appointed a receiver,” reports Texas Insider.
The Fifth Circuit actually said:
"Baron did in fact contend that the appointment of the receiver was in bad faith or collusive but fails to convince. He supported the argument by saying the appointment was prohibited by law by virtue of the receiver's previous appointment as special master. Baron relied on this statutory language: “A person holding any civil or military office or employment under the United States or employed by any justice or judge of the United States shall not at the same time be appointed a receiver in any case in any court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 958. The trustee pointed out that a special master is neither an employee of the United States nor of the judge who appointed him. While the special master is subject to the court's supervision, his fee is paid by the parties to the litigation, not the court. Fed.R.Civ.P. 53(g)(2). The fact that the receiver was previously special master is no indication of bad faith or collusion in the appointment of the receiver."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.