Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (94)	12/14/2000 7:12:41 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

<<John Scalia accepted a position with the Miami-based firm Greenberg Traurig on November 7. The next day, Barry Richard, a partner in the firm, said he was called about representing Bush in Florida. If Justice Scalia was bribed by way of a job offer to his son financed by Bush and the Republican party, well that would be impeachable for both of them. TP >> Do you have a link to the conflict of interest charges? I've been told, w/o substantiation, that two, not one, Scalia sons were working with Bush law firms. And I've read that the Heritage Foundation, with which Thomas's wife has a paying job, was researching candidates for Bush Supreme Court nominations. EDIT: and there's the business of O'Connor and Rehnquist both having said they wouldn't retire under a Dem prez.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (94)	12/14/2000 9:54:09 PM
From: E	Respond to of 93284

Bribery can't be proved, of course. In Scalia's heart, you may be sure he wasn't feeling as though he was accepting a bribe. He wasn't. He voted his beliefs. He isn't a criminal, he's merely a person who had a conflict of interest, evidently, and declined to consider that when he participated in the decision. Judges are not only not supposed to accept bribes, they are supposed to recuse themselves when they have conflicts of interest. It is generally not considered adequate just try real hard to rise above them, is it? Judge Ito in the OJ case had a wife who was a detective, or had some connection, anyway, to the LA police. And he disclosed it publicly and offered to recuse himself. His recusal offer was turned down by the Dream Team, but the disclosure and offer were made. Now if Scalia has two sons, one of whom is a partner in Bush lawyer Olson's (he argued for Bush before the SC) law firm (I think that's right) and the other of whom goes to work for a firm hired, instanter, by the Bush people, shouldn't Scalia have at least asked both sides whether they had any problems with his judging their case? Same with the others. Shouldn't they have asked the way Ito did? Does anyone know of any other cases in which judges whose sons' or daughters' or spouse's employment was connected to either the plaintiff or the defendant in a case, and in which this was considered a perfectly fine state of affairs, non-disclosable, and not grounds for discussing recusal? Any single other case?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (94)	12/15/2000 1:14:56 AM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

Re Greenberg Traurig....you may find this of interest, especially when you note where the PAC money and individual money went....looks like the majority to Dems!! opensecrets.org Greenberg Traurig donate 54% to Dems, 46% to Reps $120,000 to Dems thru Pacs, $60,000 individual contributions opensecrets.org Lawyers & Lobbyists PAC Contributions to Federal Candidates, 1999-2000 Total Amount: $7,854,909 Total to Democrats: $4,608,572 Total to Republicans: $3,234,587 Number of PACs Making Contributions: 152 Lawyers/Law Firms: $7,188,993 $4,334,646 (60.4%) to Dems $2,843,097 (39.6%) to Repubs Lobbyists: $665,916 $273,926 (41.2%) to Dems $391,490 (58.8%) to Repubs opensecrets.org greenberg traurig donations ....