• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Federal judge orders AG Healey to appear for deposition Dec 13th

M1911 said:
Huh?

That was a federal statute, passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President. You are comparing that to illegally pressuring a judge? Really?

FFS.
Click to expand...

It went to the Supreme Court and there has been more than passing speculation that Roberts was "Convinced " to change his mind and rule it constitutional as others have said above.
I don't think for a second that judges are above political B.S.
That's how a fair number got to be judges in the first place.
 
Judges and VP level executives in corporate america have one thing in common - although they got their politically, the first rule of the job is to tell everyone that you "don't play politics". I nearly threw up each time I heard a VP at my former job make that claim.
 
Dadstoys said:
It went to the Supreme Court and there has been more than passing speculation that Roberts was "Convinced " to change his mind and rule it constitutional as others have said above.
I don't think for a second that judges are above political B.S.
That's how a fair number got to be judges in the first place.
Click to expand...

If political pressure was brought to influence the outcome in that case, it was a perversion of the criminal justice system and was illegal and unethical.

If political pressure is placed upon the judge in the Exxon case, it too would be illegal and unethical.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
M1911 said:
If political pressure was brought to influence the outcome in that case, it was a perversion of the criminal justice system and was illegal and unethical.

If political pressure is placed upon the judge in the Exxon case, it too would be illegal and unethical.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Correct, and I'm sure it happens every day.
 
42! said:
Correct, and I'm sure it happens every day.
Click to expand...

I think it happens rarely. Do judges make decisions based on their political views and then go through legal contortions to justify their decision? Yes, I think that happens all the time. But does someone with political power call up a judge and lean on them to change their decision? I don't think that happens often.
 
M1911 said:
I think it happens rarely. Do judges make decisions based on their political views and then go through legal contortions to justify their decision? Yes, I think that happens all the time. But does someone with political power call up a judge and lean on them to change their decision? I don't think that happens often.
Click to expand...
Plenty of "discussions" going on between judges and politicians.

Influence goes both ways.

Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk
 
M1911 said:
I think it happens rarely. Do judges make decisions based on their political views and then go through legal contortions to justify their decision? Yes, I think that happens all the time. But does someone with political power call up a judge and lean on them to change their decision? I don't think that happens often.
Click to expand...

I would bet that with ira magaziner's drunk wife some phone calls got tossed around.
 
M1911 said:
I think it happens rarely. Do judges make decisions based on their political views and then go through legal contortions to justify their decision? Yes, I think that happens all the time. But does someone with political power call up a judge and lean on them to change their decision? I don't think that happens often.
Click to expand...

You're kidding. Judges have friends just like everyone else.
 
M1911 said:
I think it happens rarely. Do judges make decisions based on their political views and then go through legal contortions to justify their decision? Yes, I think that happens all the time. But does someone with political power call up a judge and lean on them to change their decision? I don't think that happens often.
Click to expand...

You have a myopic view of the judicial system then.
 
But does someone with political power call up a judge and lean on them to change their decision? I don't think that happens often.
Click to expand...
It doesn't take a phone call. The judge need only understand the political leanings of the power broker who can nominate him/her to a higher court.

It's similar to the gun advertisement/article game. No gun writer will ever say "Buy ads in our magazine, and we will do a really nice review of your great gun". In fact, if you ask for the quid pro quo, they will tell you they have "journalistic integrity" (oxymoron alert) and the two are unrelated. BUT, if you are not buying ads, you don't have articles done about your gun (I'm talking modern, current production guns). One need only look at the article/ad correlation for STI, Baer and SVI. Gun mags used to do lots of articles about SVI guns back when they bought ads; they stopped covering the products when SVI stopped buying ads. STI and Les Baer still buy ads, so they get lots of feature articles. And all if it is done without a phone call or request, just an unspoken arrangement.
 
M1911 said:
If political pressure was brought to influence the outcome in that case, it was a perversion of the criminal justice system and was illegal and unethical.

If political pressure is placed upon the judge in the Exxon case, it too would be illegal and unethical.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct.
But it's never stopped them yet.
 
Nice chambers you have here judge. I hear the ones at the federal bench are much nicer. It sure would be a shame if you never had a chance to find out. Oh, by the way, how are things going with that latest case before you?
 
Hmm, The lefty AG's aren't happy with this development. Elections have consequences.*******
For a decade, he has used open-records laws to pry loose some of the EPA’s secrets. Now Christopher Horner is on the inside, part of President-elect Donald Trump’s landing team at the Environmental Protection Agency, preparing the way for the next administration.

Perhaps no issue will see a greater change Jan. 20 than energy and environmental policy, and the EPA will be the epicenter of that upheaval, moving from a leadership committed to global warming science to a band of skeptics eager to upend the past eight years.

It’s the latest evidence that elections have consequences and in some cases ignite strange chain reactions — such as Mr. Horner being posted to the EPA.

Mr. Horner is one of the Trump transition’s “landing teams,” who are deployed to each department and agency to learn about the latest operations and any in-the-works policies, with the goal of a smooth changeover come Jan. 20.

Some agency transitions can be friendly, and others are more hostile. The appointment of Mr. Horner to the nine-member EPA team suggests that will be one of the latter.
The most recent targets in his FOIA battles have been state officials — a number of liberal attorneys general who, he says, teamed up with environmental activists to try to punish climate change skeptics by launching investigations into their activities.

It’s unclear how EPA employees are reacting to the news that Mr. Horner will be on the inside and working alongside them. But his critics outside the agency say they don’t see him as a constructive force.

“Chris Horner has a history of targeting individual scientists and government employees and, through his years of FOIA work, has sought to pull phrases out of context to embarrass people in lieu of actually implementing policy,” said Lauren Kurtz, executive director of the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund. “If the goal at EPA is to work on policy solutions — rather than target individual civil servants — he is an odd and likely ineffective choice.”

Other environmentalists appear to have been shocked into silence. A number of high-profile groups that have battled Mr. Horner over the years have not responded to requests for comment about his appointment.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/18/christopher-horner-goes-behind-enemy-lines-at-epa-/
 
rwl1955 said:
Hmm, The lefty AG's aren't happy with this development. Elections have consequences.*******
For a decade, he has used open-records laws to pry loose some of the EPA’s secrets. Now Christopher Horner is on the inside, part of President-elect Donald Trump’s landing team at the Environmental Protection Agency, preparing the way for the next administration.

Perhaps no issue will see a greater change Jan. 20 than energy and environmental policy, and the EPA will be the epicenter of that upheaval, moving from a leadership committed to global warming science to a band of skeptics eager to upend the past eight years.

It’s the latest evidence that elections have consequences and in some cases ignite strange chain reactions — such as Mr. Horner being posted to the EPA.

Mr. Horner is one of the Trump transition’s “landing teams,” who are deployed to each department and agency to learn about the latest operations and any in-the-works policies, with the goal of a smooth changeover come Jan. 20.

Some agency transitions can be friendly, and others are more hostile. The appointment of Mr. Horner to the nine-member EPA team suggests that will be one of the latter.
The most recent targets in his FOIA battles have been state officials — a number of liberal attorneys general who, he says, teamed up with environmental activists to try to punish climate change skeptics by launching investigations into their activities.

It’s unclear how EPA employees are reacting to the news that Mr. Horner will be on the inside and working alongside them. But his critics outside the agency say they don’t see him as a constructive force.

“Chris Horner has a history of targeting individual scientists and government employees and, through his years of FOIA work, has sought to pull phrases out of context to embarrass people in lieu of actually implementing policy,” said Lauren Kurtz, executive director of the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund. “If the goal at EPA is to work on policy solutions — rather than target individual civil servants — he is an odd and likely ineffective choice.”

Other environmentalists appear to have been shocked into silence. A number of high-profile groups that have battled Mr. Horner over the years have not responded to requests for comment about his appointment.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/18/christopher-horner-goes-behind-enemy-lines-at-epa-/
Click to expand...

That's not thunder you hear, it's the sound of a thousand sphincters puckering at once.
They have been a boarder line Eco Terrorist group for a long time now.
bye bye.
 
For anyone that wants to torture themselves, Healey and Schneiderman complied with Judge Kinkeade's order to file their Briefs on 2/1/17 stating why they believe that he has no jurisdiction over them. In Maura's brief, one of the statements made by her is that, "The Texas long-arm statute does not reach out-of-state officials sued solely in their official capacity, as Attorney General Healey is so named here." However, it's no problem for her to sue an out-of-state company over warming climate BS.


176Filed: 2/1/2017, Entered: None
Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Eric Tradd Schneiderman re 133 MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint, 164 Order,, In Further Support of Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Bexley, Tyler) (Entered: 02/01/2017)

website.png
175		Filed: 2/1/2017, Entered: None
Appendix in Support filed by Exxon Mobil Corporation re 174 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion In Support of This Court's Personal Jurisdiction Over the Defendants (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) A - B, # 2 Exhibit(s) C - D, # 3 Exhibit(s) E - H, # 4 Exhibit(s) I - M, # 5 Exhibit(s) N - R) (Duggins, Ralph) (Entered: 02/01/2017)
server_go.png
Request
transparent.gif

174Filed: 2/1/2017, Entered: None
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THIS COURT'S PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER THE DEFENDANTS filed by Exxon Mobil Corporation re 164 Order. (Duggins, Ralph) (Entered: 02/01/2017)

173Filed: 2/1/2017, Entered: None
Appendix in Support filed by Maura Tracy Healey re 172 Brief in Support of Dismissal for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Kamprath, Richard) (Entered: 02/01/2017)

172Filed: 2/1/2017, Entered: None
Brief in Support of Dismissal for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction filed by Maura Tracy Healey. (Kamprath, Richard) (Entered: 02/01/2017)
Click to expand...

https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/3...strict-court/exxon-mobil-corporation-v-healey
 
Glockster30 said:
For anyone that wants to torture themselves, Healey and Schneiderman complied with Judge Kinkeade's order to file their Briefs on 2/1/17 stating why they believe that he has no jurisdiction over them. In Maura's brief, one of the statements made by her is that, "The Texas long-arm statute does not reach out-of-state officials sued solely in their official capacity, as Attorney General Healey is so named here." However, it's no problem for her to sue an out-of-state company over warming climate BS.




https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/3...strict-court/exxon-mobil-corporation-v-healey
Click to expand...

Or threaten to sue out of state companies for shipping legal items to MA .....fricken HYPOCrits
 

Similar threads

Nashville School Shooting: Federal Judge Orders Release of Transgender Shooter’s Journals
Replies
7
Views
272
bejay
B
Federal Judge Finds Pennsylvania Law Barring 18-20 Year-Olds from Concealed Carry Unconstitutional
Replies
0
Views
68
Reptile
Reptile
Federal Judge Rules Millions Of NRA Members Exempt From ATF Pistol Brace Rule
Replies
12
Views
551
1919FAN
1919FAN
District Judge: Gun Ban For Illegal Immigrant Unconstitutional
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
3K
Kurtz
Kurtz
Tyrant NY judge says Second Amendment doesn't exist in her court room
2 3
Replies
72
Views
2K
paul73
paul73
Back
Top Bottom