Page 50 of 50 FirstFirst ... 40484950
Results 1,471 to 1,480 of 1480

Thread: Comrade Trump

  1. #1471
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    27,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creekster View Post
    lol. I really dont think so. I don't try cases in such rarefied air as the guys we are talking about, but for us regular down-in-the-mud types that is really not that unusual and certainly is not way out of line, at least not on the transcript. Maybe you heard audio or have video, which could make a difference, I guess. But if you have a cranky judge, and by all accounts I have seen this guy is one, that sort of stuff happens all the time.
    A judge basically calling a prosecutor a cry-baby seems over the line to me.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  2. #1472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    A judge basically calling a prosecutor a cry-baby seems over the line to me.
    totally commonplace in those rough and tumble blue collar courts creek punches his time card at
    Te Occidere Possunt Sed Te Edere Non Possunt Nefas Est.

  3. #1473
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    21,104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by old_gregg View Post
    totally commonplace in those rough and tumble blue collar courts creek punches his time card at
    Exactly. And, tbh, if his little feelings were hurt and he was tearing up, then he deserved it.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

  4. #1474
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    21,104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    A judge basically calling a prosecutor a cry-baby seems over the line to me.
    I am surprised you find that going too far, given what I have experienced in Vegas courts, which are full of wacky judges, IMO. I had one trial in front of a stocky woman judge whose name I can't recall and she was all over the place. At some point during the trial I think she threatened every attorney (and one client), at least once, with either jail or physical harm or both. OTOH, I also had a 6 month trial in Vegas that was in front of a judge who was obsequious and pleasant all the time, although her rulings were very one-sided.

    "Over the line" isn't a judge being snarky outside the presence of the jury (if the judge said this in front of the jury it would absolutely be improper). That sort of snarkiness is just not uncommon with a cranky judge. The line is more easily crossed, in my mind, when the judge acts arbitrarily or capriciously with respect to evidentiary or other procedures. Once, when I was doing public defender work, a judge cut me off from cross-examining a cop on things he did not note in his police report which, as I am sure all the lawyers here know, is a very common c-x tactic. It was totally improper but a very difficult appellate issue and, for a misdemeanor case, not something that would ever be likely to get serious review. Now that, to me, was way over the line. (it was resolved when the entire public defenders office informed the court administrator at lunch they would immediately and permanently adopt a department policy to paper that judge unless he reversed his position, which he did within an hour.)

    Also, my crack about rarefied air was not snark nor inaccurate. Cases like Manafort's, which are heavily scrutinized in the media and where there are teams of lawyers on both sides, are extremely different from the sort of case I typically try. They are handled very differently by judges, I believe, because they know their every step will be immediately reviewed by the press.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

  5. #1475
    𐐐𐐄𐐢𐐆𐐤𐐝 𐐓𐐅 𐐜 𐐢𐐃𐐡𐐔 Uncle Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where ∑ ★ = 1
    Posts
    18,876

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueK View Post
    What office does she hold now or is she running for? I keep forgetting.

    But if you haven't found that dirt yet maybe there wasn't any and the Russians were just running a scam.
    So let me get this straight... the dems are all upset because the Drumpf campaign got scammed by the Russians? How much did they lose on this Russian dirt-on-hillary scam exactly? Was it as much as the dems lost on the BS Steele dossier that was created by an unsuitable source?
    "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
    "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
    "Yet I still see wisdom in that which Uncle Ted posts." -creek.
    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  6. #1476

    Default

    Devin Nunes (aka Uncle Ted's House of Representatives spirit animal) was caught on tape talking about the need to protect Trump from Mueller. He's one of the main reasons the House Intelligence investigation turned into some counter investigation into the FBI, and failed to call a lot of important witnesses etc.


    GOP Rep. Devin Nunes was secretly recorded telling supporters that the Republicans have to keep control of the House to protect President Trump in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, according to a report.

    “If [Attorney General Jeff] Sessions won’t unrecuse and Mueller won’t clear the president, we’re the only ones,” Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said at a private fundraiser July 30, NBC News reported Wednesday.

    “Which is really the danger. … I mean we have to keep all these seats,” he continued. “We have to keep the majority. If we do not keep the majority, all of this goes away.”

    Nunes was recorded while speaking at a closed-door event for Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Calif.) in Spokane, Wash.

    It was released by the progressive group Fuse Washington and aired on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show.”

    Nunes’ spokesman called the congressman’s comments “sensible ideas,” The Hill reported.

    The California Republican, a Trump ally who worked on his transition team, has been highly critical of the FBI investigation into the president and claims it was launched by biased agents out to get Trump.

    During the fundraiser, Nunes also said conservative Republicans decided to table the idea of impeaching Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who’s overseeing the Mueller probe, because it could endanger the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

    Nunes said, “It’s a bit complicated” because “we only have so many months left, right?”

    “So if we actually vote to impeach, okay, what that does is that triggers the Senate then has to take it up,” Nunes told the supporters. “Do you want them to drop everything and not confirm the Supreme Court justice, the new Supreme Court justice?”

    He went on to say he supports Rosenstein’s impeachment, but “the question is the timing of it right before the election.”

    Reps. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), members of the House Freedom Caucus, introduced a resolution last month to impeach Rosenstein.


    https://nypost.com/2018/08/09/nunes-...rce=reddit.com
    "Just watched the speech. He lit up both sides. I loved it." -Shaka

  7. #1477

    Default

    I don't know what Trump is so worried about. His base is all he cares about and they won't give a flying flip over anything the Mueller probe publishes, no matter how bad it is.

  8. #1478
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    27,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creekster View Post
    I am surprised you find that going too far, given what I have experienced in Vegas courts, which are full of wacky judges, IMO. I had one trial in front of a stocky woman judge whose name I can't recall and she was all over the place. At some point during the trial I think she threatened every attorney (and one client), at least once, with either jail or physical harm or both. OTOH, I also had a 6 month trial in Vegas that was in front of a judge who was obsequious and pleasant all the time, although her rulings were very one-sided.

    "Over the line" isn't a judge being snarky outside the presence of the jury (if the judge said this in front of the jury it would absolutely be improper). That sort of snarkiness is just not uncommon with a cranky judge. The line is more easily crossed, in my mind, when the judge acts arbitrarily or capriciously with respect to evidentiary or other procedures. Once, when I was doing public defender work, a judge cut me off from cross-examining a cop on things he did not note in his police report which, as I am sure all the lawyers here know, is a very common c-x tactic. It was totally improper but a very difficult appellate issue and, for a misdemeanor case, not something that would ever be likely to get serious review. Now that, to me, was way over the line. (it was resolved when the entire public defenders office informed the court administrator at lunch they would immediately and permanently adopt a department policy to paper that judge unless he reversed his position, which he did within an hour.)

    Also, my crack about rarefied air was not snark nor inaccurate. Cases like Manafort's, which are heavily scrutinized in the media and where there are teams of lawyers on both sides, are extremely different from the sort of case I typically try. They are handled very differently by judges, I believe, because they know their every step will be immediately reviewed by the press.
    Late response to this, but I think that personal marks like "are you going to cry now," insinuating that the lawyer is being a baby, is just plain outside of the realm of common decency. Just because you are a judge and you are "cranky" doesn't give you license to insult your colleagues. I'm sorry that you have been so badly treated in your career that you think this is normal or acceptable.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  9. #1479
    Pre-Historic Man
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Allendale County, SC
    Posts
    11,217

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    Late response to this, but I think that personal marks like "are you going to cry now," insinuating that the lawyer is being a baby, is just plain outside of the realm of common decency. Just because you are a judge and you are "cranky" doesn't give you license to insult your colleagues. I'm sorry that you have been so badly treated in your career that you think this is normal or acceptable.
    I don't know how many trials Creekster's had in Vegas, but given the limited number of cases I've had in California, about three, I could also speak about whacky judges in California, or even on the 9th Circuit.

    Now, I'm not stating we have the most erudite, or most polite set of judges, but I'm doubtful Nevada or Vegas are worse than any place else. Outsiders usually get home-towned wherever you are, that's why you associate local counsel.

    We have several judges who seem to think they are smarter than counsel and therefore show their disrespect to counsel, trying to embarrass them or to smack them down. Not much judicial demeanor there.
    "Guitar groups are on their way out, Mr Epstein."

    Upon rejecting the Beatles, Dick Rowe told Brian Epstein of the January 1, 1962 audition for Decca, which signed Brian Poole and the Tremeloes instead.

  10. #1480
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    21,104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    Late response to this, but I think that personal marks like "are you going to cry now," insinuating that the lawyer is being a baby, is just plain outside of the realm of common decency. Just because you are a judge and you are "cranky" doesn't give you license to insult your colleagues. I'm sorry that you have been so badly treated in your career that you think this is normal or acceptable.
    Outside the bounds of common decency? Snowflakes, indeed. I read the actual transcript of that exchange (which was outside the jury's presence) and it just doesn't strike me as that bad or even unusual. And, honestly, if you cant take that from a judge then you probably shouldn't be a litigator who handles trials. Sometimes you need to push very hard on a judge and judges can get pissed off. As you may have seen in the news, in subsequent days the trial judge admitted he had acted improperly before the jury and gave an instruction to that effect. This did not involve the "are you crying?" exchange.

    BTW, Nevada is no worse than California. The worst judge I have ever seen is a guy in the Northern District of CA. Its just the nature of trials. People get excited when the stakes are high.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •