SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DMaA who wrote (16756)7/3/1998 1:17:00 AM
From: Catfish  Read Replies (1) of 20981
 
Below are some items posted on Free Republic regarding this Clinton appointed incompetent:

Did Hubbell-Clearing Judge Get Kicked Off Mississippi Supreme Court?

Silicon Valley Logic
7/1/98 Silicon Valley Logic

Could this be the same James Robertson that let Webb Hubbell off the hook today?

"Two years ago, Justice James Robertson was voted off the Mississippi Supreme Court because the attorney general and the prosecutors in that state campaigned against him because of his votes in death penalty cases."

Let's get to work, folks. Research!

freerepublic.com

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
September 14, 1994
PRESIDENT NAMES EIGHT TO FEDERAL BENCH

President Clinton today nominated Karen Nelson Moore to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The President also nominated the following seven individuals to serve on the United States District Court: Roslyn Moore- Silver for the District of Arizona; Maxine M. Chesney for the Northern District of California; Alvin W. Thompson for the District of Connecticut; James Robertson for the District of Columbia; Thomas B. Russell for the Western District of Kentucky; William H. Walls for the District of New Jersey; and Sidney H. Stein for the Southern District of New York.

"These nominees will bring excellence to the federal bench," the President said. "Their commitment to public service and to equal justice for all Americans is outstanding."

James Robertson, 56, has been a partner at Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering in Washington, D.C. since 1973, where he specializes in commercial and general civil litigation. From 1969 to 1972, Robertson served first as Chief Counsel for the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law in Jackson, Mississippi, and then as National Executive Director of the Lawyers Committee. Robertson recently completed a term as the President of the District of Columbia Bar Association. Robertson earned an A.B. degree from Princeton University and an LL.B. from George Washington University. He and his wife, Berit S. Robertson, have three children and live in Rockville, Maryland.

From
sunsite.sut.ac.jp
science/whitehouse-papers/1994/Sep/1994-09-14-President-
Nominates-Eight-Federal-Judges


To: tgiles
The way to find out is to e-mail or fax the Republican Congressman in Mississippi - or the Capital. Ask for his "resume" - BUT don't forget, Starr can set this up so that Hubbell must also COMPLY with the Immunity Agreement, which he did not. Starr shortened his sentence but as Chris Matthews says, Hubbell did not keep his part of the bargain. Hubble gave him "applesauce". Now that the so-called Immunity Agreement has been held up - Starr will insist Hubbell also comply with the agreement and TESTIFY. Which is all Starr wants anyhow. It may have been a brilliant move on Starr's point. Hubbell is so dirty, he goes back, way back with Hillary, Mena, Vince Foster's deal with Israel. Don't forget, Hubbell was with Vince at the last public appearance Vince made at that estate Kathleen Willey was invited to spend the weekend. He is the father of Kathleen's friend - and also has been in front of the Grand Jury on this charge. If I know about this meeting that determined Vince's demise, do you think Starr doesn't know about it. Starr isn't interested in putting Hubbell away for income tax evasion. Dig deeper. Hubbell owes him testimony. Starr gave him immunity for it. This could be a double-entendre.
From: Chanel (kmartin@hcnews.com) *

To: tgiles
It appears that this guy is also a friend of the Tyson folks. This is what I found:
Title: New trial ordered for Tyson lobbyist.

Subject: WILLIAMS, Jack -- Trials, litigation, etc.

Date: 6/5/97

Source: Washington Post, 06/05/97, Vol. 120 Issue 182, pA10

Abstract: Reports that on June 4, 1997, United States District Judge James Robertson ordered another trial for Tyson Foods Incorporated lobbyist, Jack L. Williams. Reference made to Williams' previous conviction; What Robertson said when he overturned the conviction; Comments from Williams' attorney, Barry William Levine.

Maybe someone can find the original article online somewhere.
From: mass55th (mass55th@earthlink.net) *

To: tgiles
It appears that this guy is also a friend of the Tyson folks. This is what I found:
Title: New trial ordered for Tyson lobbyist.

Subject: WILLIAMS, Jack -- Trials, litigation, etc.

Date: 6/5/97

Source: Washington Post, 06/05/97, Vol. 120 Issue 182, pA10

Abstract: Reports that on June 4, 1997, United States District Judge James Robertson ordered another trial for Tyson Foods Incorporated lobbyist, Jack L. Williams. Reference made to Williams' previous conviction; What Robertson said when he overturned the conviction; Comments from Williams' attorney, Barry William Levine.

Maybe someone can find the original article online somewhere.
From: mass55th (mass55th@earthlink.net) *

To: Steven W.
I wish I knew. Consider the following too-
Cutler was Clinton's White House counsel in 1994, right about the time Hubbell was supposed to be cooperating with Starr. Until then, he was of course, a partner in Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering. James Robertson was a parter there too, until 1994, when Clinton appointed himn to the federal bench. Now Judge Robertson has thrown a cream pie in Ken Starr's face, freeing Hubbell; Cutler is back at his old firm, when he isn't appearing on talk shows to defend our President. This has the appearance of a conflict of interest to me. I'll bet you Judge Robertson still has an interest in his former firm's pension plan. Funny. So does Lloyd.

When your former law partner is counsel to a person who is under investigation (the President), should you judge the case of a principal witness in the investigation?
From: Clarity (ferosa@ibm.net) *
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext