Lank
NES Member
He's referring to the immense pressure brought to bear on Chief Justice Roberts.
I am convinced he was blackmailed somehow
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.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
He's referring to the immense pressure brought to bear on Chief Justice Roberts.
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.
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.
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
Correct, and I'm sure it happens every day.
Plenty of "discussions" going on between judges and politicians.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.
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.
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.
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.
So?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.
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.
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.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.
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
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-/
This. Talk to lawyers, they know this sort of thing happens all the time.You're kidding. Judges have friends just like everyone else.
176 Filed: 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)
175Filed: 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)
Request
174 Filed: 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)
173 Filed: 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)
172 Filed: 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)
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
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey’s office will not comply with a subpoena received Thursday from a congressional committee seeking documents in connection with her office’s investigation into Exxon Mobil Corp., Healey’s office said.
Um I didn't think subpoenas were optional.... What is the recourse here?
Is there a way to view it without creating an account?
Oops, is Maura's plan falling apart?
Dimples, the out-of-control tyrant, is feeling the heat for her excessive, over-the-top leftist insanity and I love it. Can't wait for the Contempt of Congress citation.