(06-12-2020 08:57 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

LAW AND ORDER! vs. Rule of law

(06-12-2020 09:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 08:57 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

LAW AND ORDER! vs. Rule of law

You really should look up Gleeson's past, dude.

Here is a starter course here, whack a mole.

First, he has already made very public statements on Flynn --- kind of disqualifies him at the start to act in the way that Sullivan tapped him for, but, we know Sullivan didnt tap him for that.

Not to mention that Sullivan is getting his ass spanked today at the Fed Circuit. It is fun listening to it. I can send you the live audio feed if you want.

Second, previously, in one case before him, he served as the advocate to higher authorities to get a sentence reduction for a convicted criminal. Actually advocated for the defendant. Then turned right around, and in the same case he acted as an advocate in, served as the actual sentencing judge.

Further, look at HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125, 136 (2d Cir. 2017).

There, as the trial judge, he did pretty much the same thing that Sullivan did by plopping himself into the middle of the propriety of a deferred prosecution agreement. Said he had all sorts of power to jump into the middle.

The Appellate Court there spanked him pretty hard for that.

If one bothers to look up his background -- he is an interventionist tool that many times simply makes up what he should do, even if it runs contrary to the written rules of evidence, procedure, or Judicial Canons for that matter.

You really should do a bit more than that surface crap like you do above. I would somewhat expect that from a Rice graduate.

(06-12-2020 08:19 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  I am not a fan of cancel culture and I don't want to live in a world were opposing views are suppressed. I'd like to pick up the paper and read an opinion piece that is wildly different from my world view. I think it's dangerous to drive culture towards a singular "groupthink".

(06-12-2020 09:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 08:57 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

LAW AND ORDER! vs. Rule of law

You really should look up Gleeson's past, dude.

Here is a starter course here, whack a mole.

First, he has already made very public statements on Flynn --- kind of disqualifies him at the start to act in the way that Sullivan tapped him for, but, we know Sullivan didnt tap him for that.

Not to mention that Sullivan is getting his ass spanked today at the Fed Circuit. It is fun listening to it. I can send you the live audio feed if you want.

Second, previously, in one case before him, he served as the advocate to higher authorities to get a sentence reduction for a convicted criminal. Actually advocated for the defendant. Then turned right around, and in the same case he acted as an advocate in, served as the actual sentencing judge.

Further, look at HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125, 136 (2d Cir. 2017).

There, as the trial judge, he did pretty much the same thing that Sullivan did by plopping himself into the middle of the propriety of a deferred prosecution agreement. Said he had all sorts of power to jump into the middle.

The Appellate Court there spanked him pretty hard for that.

If one bothers to look up his background -- he is an interventionist tool that many times simply makes up what he should do, even if it runs contrary to the written rules of evidence, procedure, or Judicial Canons for that matter.

You really should do a bit more than that surface crap like you do above. I would somewhat expect that from a Rice graduate.

(06-12-2020 12:39 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 09:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 08:57 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

LAW AND ORDER! vs. Rule of law

You really should look up Gleeson's past, dude.

Here is a starter course here, whack a mole.

First, he has already made very public statements on Flynn --- kind of disqualifies him at the start to act in the way that Sullivan tapped him for, but, we know Sullivan didnt tap him for that.

Not to mention that Sullivan is getting his ass spanked today at the Fed Circuit. It is fun listening to it. I can send you the live audio feed if you want.

Second, previously, in one case before him, he served as the advocate to higher authorities to get a sentence reduction for a convicted criminal. Actually advocated for the defendant. Then turned right around, and in the same case he acted as an advocate in, served as the actual sentencing judge.

Further, look at HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125, 136 (2d Cir. 2017).

There, as the trial judge, he did pretty much the same thing that Sullivan did by plopping himself into the middle of the propriety of a deferred prosecution agreement. Said he had all sorts of power to jump into the middle.

The Appellate Court there spanked him pretty hard for that.

If one bothers to look up his background -- he is an interventionist tool that many times simply makes up what he should do, even if it runs contrary to the written rules of evidence, procedure, or Judicial Canons for that matter.

You really should do a bit more than that surface crap like you do above. I would somewhat expect that from a Rice graduate.

So, how does a guy get away with that and still remain a judge? If you did equivalent misconduct in the private sector, you'd be canned quickly and probably blackballed in your industry as well.

(06-14-2020 04:44 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 12:39 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 09:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 08:57 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

LAW AND ORDER! vs. Rule of law

You really should look up Gleeson's past, dude.

Here is a starter course here, whack a mole.

First, he has already made very public statements on Flynn --- kind of disqualifies him at the start to act in the way that Sullivan tapped him for, but, we know Sullivan didnt tap him for that.

Not to mention that Sullivan is getting his ass spanked today at the Fed Circuit. It is fun listening to it. I can send you the live audio feed if you want.

Second, previously, in one case before him, he served as the advocate to higher authorities to get a sentence reduction for a convicted criminal. Actually advocated for the defendant. Then turned right around, and in the same case he acted as an advocate in, served as the actual sentencing judge.

Further, look at HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125, 136 (2d Cir. 2017).

There, as the trial judge, he did pretty much the same thing that Sullivan did by plopping himself into the middle of the propriety of a deferred prosecution agreement. Said he had all sorts of power to jump into the middle.

The Appellate Court there spanked him pretty hard for that.

If one bothers to look up his background -- he is an interventionist tool that many times simply makes up what he should do, even if it runs contrary to the written rules of evidence, procedure, or Judicial Canons for that matter.

You really should do a bit more than that surface crap like you do above. I would somewhat expect that from a Rice graduate.

So, how does a guy get away with that and still remain a judge? If you did equivalent misconduct in the private sector, you'd be canned quickly and probably blackballed in your industry as well.

Once a federal judge, the only ways out are death, resignation, retirement, or impeachment.

I can think of only 1 judge in the last 25 years who got spanked 'in the profession' -- The 5th Circuit ordered that Judge Sam Kent in Galveston had to have his docket 'restructured' and 'monitored'. He had 85 cases reassigned from his docket to others, and all of those cases had two specific attorneys on them.

If you ever want to get a rise from a Houston politician, one of those attorneys recently ran for mayor of Houston.

Of course, Kent was indicted 7 years later, and convicted. Only in prison was impeachment brought, but he resigned and the impeachment was dropped.

And in all honesty, Gleeson's first issue above is the most concerning -- his actions were absolutely violation of judicial ethics. In the second, he got simply got overrruled --the opinion is harsh though.

(06-13-2020 08:09 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Since people love to talk about Biden's health.....

(06-15-2020 02:47 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(06-13-2020 08:09 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Since people love to talk about Biden's health.....

The only conversations I've seen about Biden's health have revolved around his inability to stay on task/remember things.

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department moved abruptly Friday night to oust Geoffrey S. Berman, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan overseeing key prosecutions of President Donald Trump’s allies and an investigation of his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani. But Berman said he was refusing to leave his post and his ongoing investigations would continue.

(06-14-2020 04:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:44 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 12:39 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 09:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 08:57 AM)At Ease Wrote:  

LAW AND ORDER! vs. Rule of law

You really should look up Gleeson's past, dude.

Here is a starter course here, whack a mole.

First, he has already made very public statements on Flynn --- kind of disqualifies him at the start to act in the way that Sullivan tapped him for, but, we know Sullivan didnt tap him for that.

Not to mention that Sullivan is getting his ass spanked today at the Fed Circuit. It is fun listening to it. I can send you the live audio feed if you want.

Second, previously, in one case before him, he served as the advocate to higher authorities to get a sentence reduction for a convicted criminal. Actually advocated for the defendant. Then turned right around, and in the same case he acted as an advocate in, served as the actual sentencing judge.

Further, look at HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125, 136 (2d Cir. 2017).

There, as the trial judge, he did pretty much the same thing that Sullivan did by plopping himself into the middle of the propriety of a deferred prosecution agreement. Said he had all sorts of power to jump into the middle.

The Appellate Court there spanked him pretty hard for that.

If one bothers to look up his background -- he is an interventionist tool that many times simply makes up what he should do, even if it runs contrary to the written rules of evidence, procedure, or Judicial Canons for that matter.

You really should do a bit more than that surface crap like you do above. I would somewhat expect that from a Rice graduate.

So, how does a guy get away with that and still remain a judge? If you did equivalent misconduct in the private sector, you'd be canned quickly and probably blackballed in your industry as well.

Once a federal judge, the only ways out are death, resignation, retirement, or impeachment.

I can think of only 1 judge in the last 25 years who got spanked 'in the profession' -- The 5th Circuit ordered that Judge Sam Kent in Galveston had to have his docket 'restructured' and 'monitored'. He had 85 cases reassigned from his docket to others, and all of those cases had two specific attorneys on them.

If you ever want to get a rise from a Houston politician, one of those attorneys recently ran for mayor of Houston.

Of course, Kent was indicted 7 years later, and convicted. Only in prison was impeachment brought, but he resigned and the impeachment was dropped.

And in all honesty, Gleeson's first issue above is the most concerning -- his actions were absolutely violation of judicial ethics. In the second, he got simply got overrruled --the opinion is harsh though.

But he is a hero to AtEase.

(06-20-2020 12:21 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:44 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 12:39 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 09:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  You really should look up Gleeson's past, dude.

Here is a starter course here, whack a mole.

First, he has already made very public statements on Flynn --- kind of disqualifies him at the start to act in the way that Sullivan tapped him for, but, we know Sullivan didnt tap him for that.

Not to mention that Sullivan is getting his ass spanked today at the Fed Circuit. It is fun listening to it. I can send you the live audio feed if you want.

Second, previously, in one case before him, he served as the advocate to higher authorities to get a sentence reduction for a convicted criminal. Actually advocated for the defendant. Then turned right around, and in the same case he acted as an advocate in, served as the actual sentencing judge.

Further, look at HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125, 136 (2d Cir. 2017).

There, as the trial judge, he did pretty much the same thing that Sullivan did by plopping himself into the middle of the propriety of a deferred prosecution agreement. Said he had all sorts of power to jump into the middle.

The Appellate Court there spanked him pretty hard for that.

If one bothers to look up his background -- he is an interventionist tool that many times simply makes up what he should do, even if it runs contrary to the written rules of evidence, procedure, or Judicial Canons for that matter.

You really should do a bit more than that surface crap like you do above. I would somewhat expect that from a Rice graduate.

So, how does a guy get away with that and still remain a judge? If you did equivalent misconduct in the private sector, you'd be canned quickly and probably blackballed in your industry as well.

Once a federal judge, the only ways out are death, resignation, retirement, or impeachment.

I can think of only 1 judge in the last 25 years who got spanked 'in the profession' -- The 5th Circuit ordered that Judge Sam Kent in Galveston had to have his docket 'restructured' and 'monitored'. He had 85 cases reassigned from his docket to others, and all of those cases had two specific attorneys on them.

If you ever want to get a rise from a Houston politician, one of those attorneys recently ran for mayor of Houston.

Of course, Kent was indicted 7 years later, and convicted. Only in prison was impeachment brought, but he resigned and the impeachment was dropped.

And in all honesty, Gleeson's first issue above is the most concerning -- his actions were absolutely violation of judicial ethics. In the second, he got simply got overrruled --the opinion is harsh though.

But he is a hero to AtEase.

Didn't Sullivan appoint Gleeson specifically because of the editorial? - to argue the contrary position.

(06-20-2020 12:21 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:44 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 12:39 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 09:16 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  You really should look up Gleeson's past, dude.

Here is a starter course here, whack a mole.

First, he has already made very public statements on Flynn --- kind of disqualifies him at the start to act in the way that Sullivan tapped him for, but, we know Sullivan didnt tap him for that.

Not to mention that Sullivan is getting his ass spanked today at the Fed Circuit. It is fun listening to it. I can send you the live audio feed if you want.

Second, previously, in one case before him, he served as the advocate to higher authorities to get a sentence reduction for a convicted criminal. Actually advocated for the defendant. Then turned right around, and in the same case he acted as an advocate in, served as the actual sentencing judge.

Further, look at HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 863 F.3d 125, 136 (2d Cir. 2017).

There, as the trial judge, he did pretty much the same thing that Sullivan did by plopping himself into the middle of the propriety of a deferred prosecution agreement. Said he had all sorts of power to jump into the middle.

The Appellate Court there spanked him pretty hard for that.

If one bothers to look up his background -- he is an interventionist tool that many times simply makes up what he should do, even if it runs contrary to the written rules of evidence, procedure, or Judicial Canons for that matter.

You really should do a bit more than that surface crap like you do above. I would somewhat expect that from a Rice graduate.

So, how does a guy get away with that and still remain a judge? If you did equivalent misconduct in the private sector, you'd be canned quickly and probably blackballed in your industry as well.

Once a federal judge, the only ways out are death, resignation, retirement, or impeachment.

I can think of only 1 judge in the last 25 years who got spanked 'in the profession' -- The 5th Circuit ordered that Judge Sam Kent in Galveston had to have his docket 'restructured' and 'monitored'. He had 85 cases reassigned from his docket to others, and all of those cases had two specific attorneys on them.

If you ever want to get a rise from a Houston politician, one of those attorneys recently ran for mayor of Houston.

Of course, Kent was indicted 7 years later, and convicted. Only in prison was impeachment brought, but he resigned and the impeachment was dropped.

And in all honesty, Gleeson's first issue above is the most concerning -- his actions were absolutely violation of judicial ethics. In the second, he got simply got overrruled --the opinion is harsh though.

But he is a hero to AtEase.

Didn't Sullivan appoint Gleeson specifically because of the editorial? - to argue the contrary position.

(06-20-2020 12:59 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-20-2020 12:21 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:44 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-12-2020 12:39 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  So, how does a guy get away with that and still remain a judge? If you did equivalent misconduct in the private sector, you'd be canned quickly and probably blackballed in your industry as well.

Once a federal judge, the only ways out are death, resignation, retirement, or impeachment.

I can think of only 1 judge in the last 25 years who got spanked 'in the profession' -- The 5th Circuit ordered that Judge Sam Kent in Galveston had to have his docket 'restructured' and 'monitored'. He had 85 cases reassigned from his docket to others, and all of those cases had two specific attorneys on them.

If you ever want to get a rise from a Houston politician, one of those attorneys recently ran for mayor of Houston.

Of course, Kent was indicted 7 years later, and convicted. Only in prison was impeachment brought, but he resigned and the impeachment was dropped.

And in all honesty, Gleeson's first issue above is the most concerning -- his actions were absolutely violation of judicial ethics. In the second, he got simply got overrruled --the opinion is harsh though.

But he is a hero to AtEase.

Didn't Sullivan appoint Gleeson specifically because of the editorial? - to argue the contrary position.

If so, then Sullivan was not seeking an unbiased opinion, but a specifically biased one.

(06-20-2020 01:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-20-2020 12:59 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-20-2020 12:21 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:44 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Once a federal judge, the only ways out are death, resignation, retirement, or impeachment.

I can think of only 1 judge in the last 25 years who got spanked 'in the profession' -- The 5th Circuit ordered that Judge Sam Kent in Galveston had to have his docket 'restructured' and 'monitored'. He had 85 cases reassigned from his docket to others, and all of those cases had two specific attorneys on them.

If you ever want to get a rise from a Houston politician, one of those attorneys recently ran for mayor of Houston.

Of course, Kent was indicted 7 years later, and convicted. Only in prison was impeachment brought, but he resigned and the impeachment was dropped.

And in all honesty, Gleeson's first issue above is the most concerning -- his actions were absolutely violation of judicial ethics. In the second, he got simply got overrruled --the opinion is harsh though.

But he is a hero to AtEase.

Didn't Sullivan appoint Gleeson specifically because of the editorial? - to argue the contrary position.

If so, then Sullivan was not seeking an unbiased opinion, but a specifically biased one.

And if so, Sullivan has abdicated the position of the being a judge in his courtroom and taken over the role of being an advocate in his own courtroom.

Fairly bad; one might say unethical according to the the Canons of Judicial Ethics.

(06-20-2020 03:52 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-20-2020 01:51 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-20-2020 12:59 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-20-2020 12:21 PM)ausowl Wrote:  

(06-14-2020 04:55 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  But he is a hero to AtEase.

Didn't Sullivan appoint Gleeson specifically because of the editorial? - to argue the contrary position.

If so, then Sullivan was not seeking an unbiased opinion, but a specifically biased one.

And if so, Sullivan has abdicated the position of the being a judge in his courtroom and taken over the role of being an advocate in his own courtroom.

Fairly bad; one might say unethical according to the the Canons of Judicial Ethics.

But still a hero to some.

(06-21-2020 12:29 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Just think of this: it is the following types of shitbirds that are orgasmic about mail-in voting. Not to mention the literal gloating of interference with free speech.

A friend messaged me this Facebook post on her post: “Fraudulent ticket reservations? I think we just learned exactly what will happen with mail in voting. We should thank AOC for demonstrating this.”

(06-21-2020 12:52 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Says the trumpbot who loves the fact that our president and commander-in-chief uses twitter as his main form of communication. We're one hacker away from Trump declaring war on North Korea or maybe Venezuela via tweet.
I'm a lot more worried about that than mail-in voting, which is already being used effectively by at least 10 percent of the population (just guessing a number - it might be much higher than that).