- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:22 pm to cajunangelle
so what happened? where are we at with this travesty?
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:27 pm to boomtown143
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:27 pm to boomtown143
Hearing is over. Judge failed to rule. Let Gleeson ramble without any interruption and did his best to interrupt Powell at every turn. Gleeson was unhinged and did serious damage to Judge Sullivan's assertions of impartiality.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:33 pm to boomtown143
Sounds weird but I am wondering if Sullivan wanted to clear his name of being partisan and now will rule with dispatch to dismiss?
And then I woke up...
No way he dismisses after allowing Gleeson free reign to destroy confidence in the court.
Also, what did it mean when Sidney said emergency transcripts? Judge said, he has nothing to do with that...
Will she be moving on quickly to the next court?
And then I woke up...
No way he dismisses after allowing Gleeson free reign to destroy confidence in the court.
Also, what did it mean when Sidney said emergency transcripts? Judge said, he has nothing to do with that...
Will she be moving on quickly to the next court?
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:34 pm to boomtown143
quote:
so what happened? where are we at with this travesty?
Sullivan gave no indication on when he would make a decision. However, he's giving the parties approx 1 week to produce some documents he (Sullivan) requested, (WHICH HE STATED TO THE APPELATE HE WOULD NOT DO) so, this goes on for at least that long. THen we can assume that Sullivan will "review and contemplate" these useless documents before ruling. That's another 2 weeks, I'm sure.
So now, we're late Oct without a ruling likely
THe upper court clearly said "with dispatch" and I think even in legal terms, Sullivan is pushing the limits of that at this point. Sullivan mentioned it himself, as one of the last things he said, almost to acknowlege it now, so later he can state "well, that's my definition of "with dispatch"
I assume Powell's first instinct is to run this up to a higher court, but that will only delay the outcome even longer. Both Sullivan and Powell are not playing poker with the calendar. It's a risky move for Powell, one that I think she'll take.
Sullivan is cunning, as the big roadblock in a mandamus is that he hasnt "ruled" - The courts cant issue a mandamus against a ruling that hasnt happened. He's going to milk this out for every last drop
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:36 pm to cajunangelle
Ha. That is one thing I can weigh in on. You are at the mercy of the court reporter to get those. And, you usually have to lean on them for a rush job.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:38 pm to Uncle Stu
Can she ask the COA for recusal? It's interlocutory, and I'm not sure if it's been formally requested.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:38 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
Also, what did it mean when Sidney said emergency transcripts? Judge said, he has nothing to do with that...
Will she be moving on quickly to the next court?
I assume she and her team were literally drafting multiple motions in real-time during today's hearing. She's on a mission to force the court to act with the swiftness. I would think she needs the exact quotes from today to finalize her motions.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:41 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
I'm not sure if it's been formally requested.
based on her very first address today, I think she said she was filing for recusal officially today or tomorrow, she said she had it in her hand
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:43 pm to Uncle Stu
This has turned into a hostage negotiation.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:44 pm to Uncle Stu
lead story on the twatters
I also wonder if Flynn is pardoned if it affects him suing the beejebus out of the DOJ until he owns them.
quote:Am I the only one that doesn't see this as a big deal? She wants to try clear him until all is exhausted.
Politics
·
1 hour ago
Michael Flynn’s lawyer tells court she asked Trump not to pardon him
Trending
I also wonder if Flynn is pardoned if it affects him suing the beejebus out of the DOJ until he owns them.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:46 pm to Uncle Stu
quote:
Recusal is required when, objectively speaking, the probability of actual bias on the part of the judge or decisionmaker is too high to be constitutionally tolerable
I'm wondering if the appointment of Gleeson, who wrote an unhinged op-ed 2 days before appointment, combined with his unhinged rant today that was totally outside the case of record, is sufficient to get Sullivan off the case.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:47 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
Am I the only one that doesn't see this as a big deal? She wants to try clear him until all is exhausted.
agree
I think both Flynn and Powell are resolved to see this thru to the end, with full exoneration in the eyes of the courts.
I think Powell now has animus to publicly humiliate Sullivan in the eyes of the Federal Court System
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:47 pm to Godfather1
quote:
Take a second and think about this statement.
Powell and the DOJ attorneys are supposed to be on opposite sides of this case, arguing before the judge. Not jointly arguing against him.
TOTAL
frickING
CLOWN
WORLD
So important it needed repeating, and bolded.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 3:50 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
sufficient to get Sullivan off the case.
probably not
The judiciary is still a good ole boys club. They will be very very resistant to force a recusal. Plus, I think Sullivan has been careful to dance right up to that line of impropriety and yet not cross it, knowing the extremely high threshold it would take
It's not going to stop Powell from dragging his name up and down the courts, and in the media.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 4:03 pm to Uncle Stu
I am not a lawyer but based on this thread it sounds like we have a judge just crapping all over judicial restraint. Lol, this is the moment when lefty judges will throw out any pretext of objectivity. It is like the press that no longer tries to be “objective.”
Posted on 9/29/20 at 4:26 pm to Uncle Stu
Powell is filing a Motion to Recuse...just stated it on Lou Dobbs.
Posted on 9/29/20 at 4:36 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
Powell is filing a Motion to Recuse...just stated it on Lou Dobbs.
yeah, knowing that she told Sullivan in her opening today that she had the motion drafted, I think she's way too smart for Sullivan.
She knew ahead of time he was going to stall/delay or not issue a ruling. The en banc was pretty clear what Sullivan should do "with dispatch." The only thing that today accomplished was give Powell the ammunition to fill in the blanks of her motion to remove Sullivan. She knew he would open his stupid mouth and be incapable of not showing his bias.
This post was edited on 9/29/20 at 4:37 pm
Posted on 9/29/20 at 10:59 pm to Uncle Stu
The Motion to Recuse should have been filed as soon as Sullivan hired the other lawyer.
I've done it twice and it is fairly easy to get a first recusal. In Florida, all you really have to do is file an affidavit indicating that your client feels like a bias exists. Failure to recuse is then appealable.
I've done it twice and it is fairly easy to get a first recusal. In Florida, all you really have to do is file an affidavit indicating that your client feels like a bias exists. Failure to recuse is then appealable.
Page 10 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News