SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR February 19, 2018 at 10:02 pm

Paul Plante says:

We are brought back to this thread by a New York Times article entitled “Trump Lawyer’s Payment to Porn Star Raises New Questions” by Maggie Haberman and Charlie Savage on 15 February 2018, wherein the following was stated:

WASHINGTON — The admission by President Trump’s longtime personal lawyer that he sent $130,000 to a pornographic film actress, who once claimed to have had an affair with Mr. Trump, has raised potential legal questions ranging from breach of contract to ethics violations.

end quotes

The key words in there are “ethics violations,” which is really what this thread is about, or said another way, it is ethics violations that are the reason Sonia Sotomayor should not be a United States Supreme Court Justice.

In the NYT article, it was again stated as follows:

The lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, told The New York Times on Tuesday that he had used his own funds to facilitate the payment to the actress, Stormy Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, adding that neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign had reimbursed him for the payment.

He insisted that the payment was legal.

end quotes

It was that statement that a lawyer being a bagman and paying hush money to keep a witness silent which then brings us to the following legal analysis on the subject:

Charles Wolfram, an emeritus professor of legal ethics at Cornell University, said the situation raised a host of potential issues, but that more facts were needed to understand which rules applied to it.

“The thing seems so weird that it invites an inquiry into what you’re doing,” he said.

“Lawyers don’t go around giving $130,000 to strangers, benefiting their clients, without billing their clients.”

end quotes

Pardon me for laughing right out loud here as I just did, but that is such a lawyerly thing for a lawyer to say right there – lawyers do not benefit their clients without making sure to bill for every dime and nickel and penny of it – gouge them for all they are worth, and then some.

Getting back to the NYT:

Mr. Cohen worked as a lawyer for the Trump Organization for roughly a decade, with an office near Mr. Trump’s on the 26th floor of Trump Tower in Manhattan.

Part fixer, part pit bull biting back at anyone who attacked Mr. Trump, Mr. Cohen frequently badgered reporters over stories he found unflattering toward his boss during the campaign.

He was often quoted in interviews lavishing praise on his boss.

end quotes

In my career as an engineer, I have run into many lawyers like that – the ones who think they can badger you into submission with threats to cause you harm, but that is a story for another day.

Getting back to the NYT and the issue of ethics, we have:

Another set of potential issues raised by Mr. Cohen’s admission centers on legal ethics.

As a New York lawyer, he is subject to rules of professional conduct in that state and could face disciplinary action — ranging from private admonishment to losing his license to practice law — if he violated them, although the still-uncertain details make it impossible to precisely identify which standards apply.

“We don’t have the facts,” said Philip Schrag, a Georgetown University law professor and specialist in legal ethics issues.

“There is an awful lot of speculation here about the facts, which we need before we can go into the legal analysis.”

end quotes

With respect to those supposed “legal ethics” in New York state, as this story shows, they are a piece of swiss cheese, a point reinforced by an address to the Albany County Bar Association in New York State, known as the Bar Association of the Stars because of all the high ranking judges who are members of it, by its president in March of 2003, as follows:

Does anyone really think lawyering involves ethical behavior?

Some people do.

There are courses in legal ethics required for admission to the bar.

A separate test in legal ethics is supposed to measure one’s moral fitness for the practice of law.

We are required to have a few hours of ethical training as part of mandatory Continuing Legal Education.

Whoop Dee Doo.

Did you ever sit through one of these lectures?

For the most part they are lessons in how not to get sued, i.e. “Don’t steal your client’s money”; “Don’t take a case if you don’t know what you are doing”; and my personal favorite, “Don’t have sex with your client.”

Does any of this have to do with ethics, i.e. the betterment of society, moral duty or the distinction between good and bad?

I don’t think so.

I recently spoke to a class at Hartwick College on legal ethics.

They were struggling with a truly moral issue, i.e. the termination of life and the role of the health care professional.

As I spoke I realized that the practice of law is essentially amoral.

Our advice to clients is not designed to guide anyone in ethical behavior.

We do not exist to tell anyone what is right and wrong.

We are all but prohibited from doing so.

Our duty is to advise of the legal consequences of actions, and to promote the interests of our client within the boundaries of the legal system.

For this reason, we do not necessarily advise the guilty to accept their punishment, nor do we chastise the adulterer, the negligent driver and the trespasser.

We advise.

****

So, we don’t deal in fairness, we deal in legal results, without regard to ethics.

You think clients come to us for our opinions on good and evil?

Think again, Jack.

We are not the clergy.

After all, it is just “Ethical Considerations” in the Code of Professional Responsibility, as in “OK, I’ve considered it, now here’s what we do.”

– Michael P. Friedman, President

end quotes

That, people, is an insider telling all the other insiders in the legal trade in New York the way things really are, as opposed to the way the suckers and gullible think them to be.

Getting back to the meat of the NYT article, we have:

Last month, Mr. Cohen sent Wall Street Journal reporters a written statement in Ms. Clifford’s name denying that she had had “a sexual and/or romantic affair” with Mr. Trump or “received hush money from Mr. Trump.”

He also issued his own statement saying that Mr. Trump “vehemently denies” any affair with her.

If evidence emerged showing that those statements were false and that Mr. Cohen knew they were false, his role in disseminating them could violate Rule 8.4, several legal ethics specialists said.

It prohibits lawyers from engaging “in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.”

“Lawyers are not allowed to lie,” with some exceptions, said Lisa Lerman, a legal ethics professor at the Catholic University of America, and they are “also not allowed to induce other people to engage in conduct that they are prohibited from.”

end quotes

Lawyers in the corrupt ****hole of New York are not allowed to lie or engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation?

HUH?

That’s bull****.

Of course they can lie and engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, at least if they are with the office of the New York State Attorney General, or if they are a federal judge.

In this case, it is in controvertible that on August 16, 2005, an Assistant Solicitor General under then-New York State Attorney General Eliot “Longshanks” Spitzer named Julie M. Sheridan was lying through her teeth when she submitted a letter to Sotomayor, a circuit judge on the bench of the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City calling for my Amended Petition to be dismissed because my “constitutional claims were not viable, because the very premise of those claims – namely that plaintiff had been involuntarily committed – was false.”

That she was lying through her teeth and that I was in fact seized by Albany, New York VA Hospital staff and involuntarily confined, detained, incarcerated or otherwise committed to the secure mental health ward of the Albany, New York VA Hospital, based on nothing more than the unlawfully issued New York State Mental Hygiene Law 9.45 involuntary commitment order which was unlawfully executed by John Christian Braaten of Samaritan Hospital of Troy, New York on August 22, 2001 was confirmed three (3) years ealier in an affirmation of Assistant New York State Attorney General Lisa Ullman to Rensselaer County Supreme Court dated August 16, 2002, approximately one (1) year after my false arrest, wherein was stated under oath as follows:

Lisa Ullman, being a duly licensed attorney in the State of New York and an Assistant Attorney General in the offices of Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, does hereby affirm under penalties of perjury pursuant to CPLR 2106:

2. This proceeding was commenced by pro se petitioner Plante under Article 78 of the Civil Procedure Law and Rules (“CPLR”), who requested a court order compelling the release of certain mental health records.

Specifically, Petitioner had been involuntarily committed to the Veteran’s Administration Hospital pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law 9.45 for several hours on August 22, 2001, and had obtained redacted versions of documents pertaining to that commitment.

end quote

With that sworn affidavit in the record, the State of New York and Eliot Spitzer were confronted with a major problem, since that sworn affidavit by an Assistant New York State Attorney General was the proof of unlawful incarceration I needed to commence a federal civil rights lawsuit, which in New York State has a three-year statute of limitations.

So what was Spitzer to do?

Ah, yes, find a judge who would make that evidence that I was unlawfully incarcerated disappear.

So, Spitzer and Sotomayor did a deal, and Sotomayor allowed Spitzer to make that August 16, 2002 affirmation of Assistant New York State Attorney General Lisa Ullman to Rensselaer County Supreme Court disappear as if it were never there in the first place, even after I was granted standing in district court based on that sworn admission by Ullman in 2002.

POOF, one day, there was a fire.

And up in flames went the book of lawyer’s ethics and my career as an engineer, as well.

Those with no ethics at all win, and those with ethics lose, and thus is the story of modern-day America told.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-80063
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 6, 2018 at 6:50 pm

Paul Plante says :

And while we are on the subject of the “fitness” of people to serve on the United States Supreme Court, and while we are assessing the fitness of Democrat Dianne Feinstein to be a United States Senator, let me say how pleased I was to scan down through the trending stories to see this title on the list, because a lot has happened since this thread first appeared in the Cape Charles Mirror, starting perhaps with the Guardian story “Chuck Schumer calls on supreme court nominee Brett Kavanaugh to withdraw – Democratic leader says Kavanaugh should withdraw from consideration in light of multiple sexual misconduct allegations” by Lauren Gambino in Washington and Joanna Walters in New York published on 26 Sep. 2018, where Democrat senator from New York City Charley “Chuck” Schumer was quoted as follows, to wit:

“If our Republican colleagues proceed without an investigation, it would be a travesty for the honor of the supreme court and our country.”

“Judge Kavanaugh is being considered for a promotion.”

“He is asking for a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court where he will have the opportunity to rule on matters that will impact Americans for decades,” the letter said.

“The standard of character and fitness for a position on the nation’s highest court must be higher than this.”

end quotes

Oh, really, Charley “Chuck” – if that really is the case that the standard of character and fitness for a position on the nation’s highest court must be higher than what you think Brett Kavanaugh, who has merely been accused, represents, then how the hell did Sonia Sotomayor manage to make it there, then, when in her case there is a lengthy record that proves conclusively that as an appeals court judge on the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City in 2005, she intentionally lied and buried evidence to keep a civil rights suit involving retaliation for my refusal to engage as a public official in “honest services fraud” in New York state out of federal district court for the Northern District of New York?

What’s up with that then, Charley “Chuck?”

For those unfamiliar with the term, “honest services fraud” is a crime defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1346 added by the United States Congress in 1988 which states: “For the purposes of this chapter, the term scheme or artifice to defraud includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.”

It was my refusal as a licensed professional engineer and associate level public health engineer to deprive the residents of Rensselaer County in the State of New York of their right to my honest services that provoked the series of retaliatory acts in clear violation of my civil rights as established by the United States Supreme Court that ended up before Sotomayor as a federal appeals court judge in 2005.

And based on the Press Release from Senator Feinstein entitled “Senator Feinstein Statement Supporting Supreme Court Nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor” on Aug. 04, 2009, Charley “Chuck” can’t say he is unaware of this, because according to his Democrat colleague Dianne Feinstein, before she was selected by Obama as a Supreme Court nominee, her judicial record, like that of Brett Kavanaugh, was gone over, pored over in fact, with a fine-tooth comb, so this lie and the burying of evidence surely could not have escaped scrutiny.

As to that 2009 press release by Schumer ally Dianne Feinstein, it starts out as follows:

Washington, DC – U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today urged the full Senate to confirm the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to become an Associate Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court.

In remarks delivered on the Senate floor, Senator Feinstein praised Judge Sotomayor, noting that her 17-year judicial career shows her to be “a solid, tested, and mainstream federal judge.”

end quotes

And let us stop right there for the moment to ponder that thought Democrat Dianne Feinstein has left us with there – “her 17-year judicial career shows her to be a solid, tested, and mainstream federal judge.”

A “solid, tested, and mainstream” federal judge, indeed, so far as a Democrat like Dianne Feinstein is concerned.

But at the same time, and this is wholly supported by the 609-page record before her in that matter, Plante v. Bechard et. al., 05-2133-CV, it is both incontrovertible and undeniable that she lied and buried evidence.

So, people, seriously, what conclusions can we draw there other than that to Democrat Dianne Feinstein, a “solid, tested, and mainstream” federal judge who belongs on the United States Supreme Court is a federal judge like Sonia Sotomayor who will lie and bury evidence to protect endemic public corruption and honest services fraud in New York State?

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-77384
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 7, 2018 at 7:33 pm

Paul Plante says :

As a benchmark with respect to the fitness of Sonia Sotomayor to be a United States Supreme Court Justice, we today have the CBS News story “Hillary Clinton on Brett Kavanaugh: ‘There’s a lot to be concerned about'” by Emily Tillett on October 2, 2018, to guide us, as follows:

“For anyone who believes there’s such a thing as judicial temperament and that we want judges, particularly those on our highest court to approach issues, approach plaintiffs and defendants with a sense of fairness, that there’s a lot to be concerned about,” Clinton said in remarks Tuesday at The Atlantic Festival in Washington.

end quotes

If that is true, and I certainly take it as such, because it is coming from not an ordinary citizen such as myself, but from a twice-failed Democrat presidential contender, then there is a great deal to be concerned about with respect to Sonia Sotomayor for those like myself who are concerned about judicial temperament and who want judges, particularly those on our highest court, to approach issues, approach plaintiffs and defendants with a sense of fairness.

Hillary, by the way, is about to emerge from her seclusion and political isolation as we are told in the CNN story “Hillary Clinton to headline first public campaign event of 2018” by Dan Merica on 1 October 2018, as follows, which make her words above on judicial temperament that much more timely and relevant, as follows:

Hillary Clinton will headline her first public campaign event of the midterms on Monday, a Clinton spokesman tells CNN, when she attends a roundtable in Chicago with JB Pritzker, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Illinois.

The event, which will include Juliana Stratton, the Democrats’ lieutenant governor candidate, will be a roundtable with high school girls and focus on stressing the importance of leadership, according to the Pritzker campaign.

Clinton has spent much of 2018 out of the political fray or headlining fundraisers for a handful of Democratic groups and campaigns.

Pritzker has long been a prolific Democratic fundraiser and donor and backed Clinton’s failed 2016 presidential campaign.

Clinton also helped Pritzker during his Democratic primary by recording a robocall for the billionaire entrepreneur.

Later this month, Clinton will headline an event with Andrew Gillum, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in Florida who was a campaign surrogate for Clinton in 2016.

end quotes

If we consider the irrefutable facts in this case, where it is clear that Sotomayor lied and buried evidence to protect endemic public corruption in New York State, and at the same time take seriously the admonition of Hillary Clinton that for anyone who believes there’s such a thing as judicial temperament and that we want judges, particularly those on our highest court to approach issues, approach plaintiffs and defendants with a sense of fairness, that there’s a lot to be concerned about, then it is patently clear that Sonia Sotomayor fails that test, for which reason, the House of Representatives should prepare articles of impeachment to remove her from the federal Supreme Court bench where her record should have kept her from in the first place.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-77689
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 8, 2018 at 9:02 pm

Paul Plante says :

And the very last person in this country who should be lecturing us about “such a thing as a judicial temperament” and wanting judges, particularly those on our highest court, to approach issues and plaintiffs and defendants with a sense of fairness, is Hillary Rodham Clinton herself, who gifted us in the State of New York with Conservative Republican District Court Judge for the Northern District of New York Gary Sharpe, a judge whom there’s a lot to be concerned about, as follows:

Congressional Record, Volume 150, Number 7 (Wednesday January 28 2004)

[Pages S304-S307]

From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]

EXECUTIVE SESSION – NOMINATION OF GARY L. SHARPE TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The junior Senator from New York.

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I rise in very strong support of the nomination of Magistrate Judge Gary Lawrence Sharpe who has been nominated to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.

I ask all of my colleagues to support this nomination.

I commend my colleague, Senator Schumer, for the important role he has played on the Judiciary Committee.

I second his comment that in New York we have worked together with the administration to nominate and confirm judges who will be a real credit, not only to the bench but to this administration and to our country.

Magistrate Judge Gary Lawrence Sharpe is at the top of that list.

I think he will not only serve with distinction in New York but demonstrate clearly that this is the kind of conservative Republican nominee whom we could be unanimously confirming.

end quotes

Do you remember that, Hillary?

And while Hillary is prattling on about such a thing as a judicial temperament and that we want judges, particularly those on our highest court, to approach issues and plaintiffs and defendants with a sense of fairness, we have her damn poor judgment in the matter of judicial temperament on full display in this article from the New York Times by Benjamin Weiser on Jan. 28, 2011, as follows:

A federal appeals court in Manhattan overturned a six-and-a-half-year sentence in a child pornography case on Friday, saying the judge who imposed it improperly found that the defendant would return to viewing child pornography “because of an as-of-yet undiscovered gene.”

The judge, Gary L. Sharpe of Federal District Court in Albany, was quoted as saying, “”It is a gene you were born with.”

“And it’’s not a gene you can get rid of,”” before he sentenced the defendant, Gary Cossey, in December 2009.

A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said in ruling on the defendant’’s appeal, “”It would be impermissible for the court to base its decision of recidivism on its unsupported theory of genetics.””

Judges Amalya L. Kearse, John M. Walker Jr. and Rosemary S. Pooler ruled that a sentence relying on findings not supported in the record “seriously affects the fairness, integrity and public reputation of judicial proceedings.”

The panel ordered that Mr. Cossey be resentenced by a different judge, a step it said was taken only where a judge’’s fairness or the appearance of fairness was in doubt.

“This is one such instance,” the panel said.

end quotes

So much for Hillary’s judgment when it comes to federal judges – it is both laughable and pathetic.

As to Gary Sharpe, Hillary’s Conservative Republican judge on the federal District Court for the federal District Court for the Northern District of New York, he plays a starring role along with Sonia Sotomayor in this true story of federal judges who blatantly lie and bury evidence to protect endemic public corruption in New York State, as we clearly see from the following, to wit:

Patrick J. Tomaselli, Attorney at Law
Weatherwax Road Law Offices
P.O. Box 97
Poestenkill, New York 12140

April 25, 2005

Poestenkill Town Board
Poestenkill Town Hall
P.O. Box 210
Poestenkill, New York 12140

RE: PAUL R. PLANTE vs EUGENE BECHARD, Poestenkill Town Code Enforcement Officer, et al
United States District Court – Northern District of New York
Civil Case No. 03-CV-0753 (GLS/RFT)
My File No. 2003.132

Dear Board Members:

As I reported at the last Town Board meeting, the long-pending Federal civil rights action commenced by Paul Plante against Poestenkill Code Enforcement Officer Eugene Bechard and Poestenkill Town Justice David Gebhardt (as well as 20 other named defendants) was recently dismissed, with prejudice, by a March 31, 2005 Decision and Order of United States District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe, a copy of which has been provided to you.

While the Decision is lengthy and cites much case law, its basis is relatively simple.

As stated by Judge Sharpe, “Plante fails to establish any violation of a constitutional right by the defendants” and “As to the numerous conspiracy claims, Plante, likewise fails to provide any facts to support any of them.”

In sum, “This complaint offers only conclusory allegations without any factual support and fails to state a claim.”

Perhaps as indicative of the Court’s impression of Plante’s Complaint as anything in the body of the Decision is the very first footnote thereto wherein Judge Sharpe refers to the fact “This Court has attempted to summarize the litany of unintelligible and conclusory allegations in Plante’s convoluted complaint and attached exhibits.”

While I would hope this matter is now concluded, the possibility of an appeal of course remains.

If you have any questions regarding these matters, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very truly yours,

PATRICK J. TOMASELLI, ESQ.
Poestenkill Town Attorney

end quotes

Hillary’s Conservative Republican judge Gary Sharpe reached that conclusion pro-corruption Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick Tomaselli was crowing and chortling about above here, by burying the sworn affidavit of the Albany, New York Police Officer who got me freed from the involuntary psychiatric confinement I was being held in in the secure mental facility of the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, New York based on a fraudulent New York State Mental Hygiene Law section 9.45 order issued by a political doctor at Samaritan Hospital in Troy, New York, and he also buried the sworn affidavit of Assistant New York State Attorney General Lisa Ullman to Rensselaer County Supreme Court dated August 16, 2002, approximately one (1) year after my false arrest, wherein was stated under oath as follows:

Lisa Ullman, being a duly licensed attorney in the State of New York and an Assistant Attorney General in the offices of Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, does hereby affirm under penalties of perjury pursuant to CPLR 2106:

2. This proceeding was commenced by pro se petitioner Plante under Article 78 of the Civil Procedure Law and Rules (“CPLR”), who requested a court order compelling the release of certain mental health records.

Specifically, Petitioner had been involuntarily committed to the Veteran’s Administration Hospital pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law 9.45 for several hours on August 22, 2001, and had obtained redacted versions of documents pertaining to that commitment.

end quote

And then he did what a Hillary Clinton judge would be expected to do, which is to lie through his teeth in order to protect the endemic public corruption in New York state that Hillary Clinton was a champion and protector of as a United States senator.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-78160
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 9, 2018 at 9:03 pm

Paul Plante says :

Even though Democrats do not want to appear too confident about winning control of the House, some have already raised the issue of investigating Kavanaugh for untruthfulness if they gain the majority and key committee chairmanships come into their hands.

That is a line from the Los Angeles Times story “Calls to impeach Kavanaugh pose awkward challenge for Democrats” by Laura King on 8 October 2018, wherein we are told as follows in the lede, to wit:

WASHINGTON – Even before the judicial oath was administered and Judge Brett Kavanaugh became Justice Kavanaugh, some on the political left were sounding calls to impeach him.

end quotes

If Brett Kavanaugh is going to be investigated for untruthfulness by the Democrats, then by God Sonia Sotomayor had better be investigated as well, because while Kavanaugh might be suspected of untruthfulness, there is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Sonia Sotomayor lied through her teeth in Plante v. Bechard et. al., 05-2133-CV, and so should not be sitting on the United States Supreme Court.

This is a load of crap that the Democrats are going after a Republican for allegedly lying, while protecting a Democrat who has lied.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-78574
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 12, 2018 at 6:34 pm

Paul Plante says:

And people, trust our plucky, although twice-failed Democrat presidential contender Hillary Rodham Clinton to get her mouth fully engaged in hyper-drive in this Brett Kavanaugh matter, now that he is actually seated on the high court, which has her foaming at the mouth and ululating fiercely while at the same time, and this is something Hillary can do which the rest of us can’t do, Hillary is spewing what she thinks are profundities, but are in fact drivel, that critical judgment based on who Hillary Clinton really is, which is the person responsible for putting Conservative Republican Gary Sharpe on the federal bench in 2004, which takes us to a recent appearance Hillary made on the Cuomo News Network, which is the subject of a Cuomo News Network story entitled “Clinton says Trump remarks at Kavanaugh swearing-in undermine Supreme Court” by Mick Krever, CNN on 10 October 2018, where the Cuomo News Network people inform us as follows:

Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that President Donald Trump staged a “political rally” at Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s ceremonial swearing-in that “further undermined the image and integrity of the court.”

“What was done last night in the White House was a political rally.”

end quotes

Oh, really, Hillary?

Then what were you doing on Wednesday, January 28, 2004, Hillary, as is recounted for posterity in the Congressional Record Volume 150 Number 7, as follows:

[Pages S304-S307]

From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]

EXECUTIVE SESSION – NOMINATION OF GARY L. SHARPE TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The junior Senator from New York.

Mrs. CLINTON. Madam President, I rise in very strong support of the nomination of Magistrate Judge Gary Lawrence Sharpe who has been nominated to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.

I ask all of my colleagues to support this nomination.

I commend my colleague, Senator Schumer, for the important role he has played on the Judiciary Committee.

I second his comment that in New York we have worked together with the administration to nominate and confirm judges who will be a real credit, not only to the bench but to this administration and to our country.

Magistrate Judge Gary Lawrence Sharpe is at the top of that list.

I think he will not only serve with distinction in New York but demonstrate clearly that this is the kind of conservative Republican nominee whom we could be unanimously confirming.

I commend him to the Senate.

I thank the Chair.

end quotes

What’s that, Hillary, if not the epitome of a political rally for a Conservative Republican staged by yourself?

Why was it necessary for you to stress to your Senate colleagues, Hillary, that Gary Sharpe was a Conservative Republican, and hence a clear and present danger to our liberties in the Northern District of New York, as this following series of communications involving the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals with respect to a valid complaint I personally filed against this Hillary Clinton Judge in 2015 makes incandescently clear, as follows:

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT In re CHARGE OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT Docket No. 15-90031-jm

ROBERT A. KATZMANN, Chief Judge:

The misconduct complaint alleges that the judge (i) suppressed or “buried” evidence and allowed the defendants “to lie, [and] fabricate and suppress evidence”; (ii) “branded” the Complainant as mentally ill; (iii) was not impartial and helped the defendants “exact revenge” on the Complainant through use of New York’s Mental Hygiene Law.

DISCUSSION

The complaint is dismissed.

An allegation that a judge, in reaching a decision, neglected to consider fully all arguments presented, failed to comprehend the meaning or import of certain statutes or cases, or disregarded certain key facts or witnesses is merely challenging the correctness of the judge’s decision.

Similarly, an allegation that the result of the decision evidences a bias in favor of the prevailing party is also merely an attack on the correctness of that decision.

Robert A. Katzmann
Chief Judge

Signed: New York, New York
April 30, 2015

end quotes

In the federal Northern District of New York, a Conservative Republican federal district court judge appointed by Hillary Clinton can, with the express permission of the Chief Judge for the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals, humiliate a decorated, disabled Viet Nam by uttering malicious falsehoods in a published decision, and he can lie and bury evidence to do so.

That is the clear and unequivocal message there, which takes us back to the Cuomo News Network story above as follows:

“It further undermined the image and integrity of the court,” Clinton, Trump’s Democratic 2016 election opponent, told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour in an exclusive interview.

“And that troubles me greatly.”

“It saddens me.”

“Because our judicial system has been viewed as one of the main pillars of our constitutional government.”

“So I don’t know how people are going to react to it.”

“I think, given our divides, it will pretty much fall predictably between those who are for and those who are against,” Clinton said.

end quotes

What a load of horse****, especially that last sentence in there, and what really undermined the image and integrity of the court was this incredible decision by Chief Judge Robert A. Katzmann, signed: New York, New York, April 30, 2015.

That incredible April 30, 2015 Katzmann Decree, which Hillary Clinton would be well aware of, as would Charley “Chuck” Schumer, proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that our so-called federal “judicial system” cannot be viewed by the common people such as myself to be one of the main pillars of our constitutional government.

It is too rotton to be a support, as this following complaint to the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in response to the Katzmann Decree above clearly shows:

6 May 2015

Clerk of the Court
United States Court of Appeals
For The Second Circuit
Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse
40 Foley Square
New York, New York 10007

RE: Docket No. 15-90031-jm

TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT:

I hereby petition the judicial council for review of the Chief Judge’’s order of April 30, 2015 dismissing Docket No. 15-90031-jm. on the grounds that the dismissal constitutes an unlawful grant of power and authority by and from the Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, which unlawful grant of authority creates an “absolute independence” for United States District Court for the Northern District of New York in violation of those provisions of Canon 1 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, entitled, to wit, “A Judge Should Uphold The Integrity And Independence Of The Judiciary,” wherein is stated in plain and simple language readily understandable by and comprehensible to the common person, “(A) judge should maintain and enforce high standards of conduct and should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved,” and, “(T)he provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further that objective.”

In support of that prayer for relief, in dismissing the above-referenced Complaint of Misconduct, the Chief Judge mistakenly and incorrectly stated that the Complaint of Misconduct “appeared” to fall into the category of “the judge got it wrong, not that the judge engaged in judicial misconduct.”

To the contrary, the Complaint of Misconduct in question did not state that the judge in question, United States District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, “got it wrong.”

It clearly stated that he did wrong, that he intentionally engaged in judicial misconduct, that being conduct “prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.”

But of course, that claim is highly dependent on exactly what the business of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York really is, for what purpose does it really exist and only this Review Panel can answer that question.

Does the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York really exist to provide justice?

Or is that a silly myth?

If so, then this appeal should be dismissed.

In the Northern District of New York, is an independent and honorable judiciary really indispensable to justice in our society?

In the Northern District of New York, should a judge maintain and enforce high standards of conduct and should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved?

Or is that another silly myth for school children to believe in?

Again, if so, then this appeal should be dismissed.

Do the United Stated District Court for the Northern District of New York and United States District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe really exist to protect lawlessness and what U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Preet Bharara described in the April 23, 2013 Times Union as “a culture of corruption” in New York State that “has developed and grown, just like barnacles on a boat bottom,” while acting in a punitive and retaliatory manner towards those like this Complainant, a New York State licensed professional engineer, who challenge that “culture of corruption” in a court of law through the Article 78 process in the State of New York?

Does “judicial independence” in the federal Northern District of New York really mean that the Court is a law unto itself, totally unfettered and unrestrained by the Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges?

If so, and this Review Panel will be the decider of that, then of course, it will dismiss this appeal out of hand, and the matter will be settled.

Respectfully,

Paul R. Plante

end quotes

That, people, is a very clear enunciation of what a Hillary Clinton federal court does in fact look like, which is why Hillary specifically wanted a Conservative Republican judge on the Northern District of New York, as was verified by the full federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in the decision which follows:

JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT

——————————————————-X
In re
CHARGE OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

——————————————————-X

Docket No. 15-90031-jm

Before the Judicial Council of the Second Circuit:

A complaint having been filed on April 1, 2015 alleging misconduct on the part of a District Judge of this Circuit, and the complaint having been dismissed on April 30, 2015 by the Chief Judge of the Circuit, and a petition for review having been filed timely on May 11, 2015

Upon consideration thereof by the Council it is

ORDERED that the petition for review is DENIED for the reasons stated in the order dated April 30, 2015.

The clerk is directed to transmit copies of this order to the complainant and to the District Judge whose conduct is the subject of the underlying complaint.

Karen Greve Milton
Circuit Executive
By Direction of the
Judicial Council

Dated: June 26, 2015
New York, New York

end quotes

So there is how I am reacting to your horse**** on the Cuomo News Network the other day, Hillary; I am calling you out on it – WHY did you put a Conservative Republican on the federal district court bench in Albany, New York?

The candid world would like to know.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-79710
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 13, 2018 at 6:55 pm

Paul Plante says :

And that approval of the April 30, 2015 Katzmann Decree by the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals on June 26, 2015 takes us back in time to December 19, 2005, when the pro-public corruption lawyer Patrick J. Tomaselli, Attorney at Law, was singing the praises of then-appeals court judge Sonia Sotomayor on the same federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City to the Poestenkill town board, as follows:

Poestenkill Town Board
Poestenkill Town Hall
P.O. Box 210
Poestenkill, New York 12140

RE: PAUL R. PLANTE vs EUGENE BECHARD, Poestenkill Town Code Enforcement Officer, et al

United States District Court – Northern District of New York

Civil Case No. 03-CV-0753 (GLS/RFT)

My File No. 2003.132

Dear Board Members:

As indicated in my letter to you of April 25, 2005, the Federal civil rights action by Paul Plante against Poestenkill Code Enforcement Officer Eugene Bechard and Town Justice David Gebhardt (as well as 20 other named defendants) was dismissed, with prejudice, by a March 31, 2005 Decision and Order of U.S. District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe, a copy of which was previously provided to you.

In that lengthy Decision the Court stated that “Plante fails to establish any violation of a constitutional right by the defendants”; that, “As to the numerous conspiracy claims, Plante, likewise, fails to provide any facts to support any of them”, and that “This complaint offers only conclusory allegations without any factual support and fails to state a claim.”

At the time I indicated that while I hoped the matter was concluded, “the possibility of an appeal of course remains”.

Thereafter, Plante did appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and that appeal has been pending ever since and has been often cited by Mr. Plante in various other and obviously unrelated litigation and threatened litigation.

At this juncture, I am pleased to advise that by Order dated December 15, 2005 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has unanimously affirmed the dismissal of Plante’s claim.

A copy of that Order has been separately distributed to you and is self-explanatory, the Court concluding that “Plante’s conspiracy claims were wholly devoid of any supporting detail and Plante’s own exhibits defeated his claim that he had been unlawfully committed.”

While Plante may conceivably apply for certiorari to have this matter reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court, the chance that certiorari would be granted is virtually nil.

Thus, it appears that yet another Plante matter has been concluded successfully (for the Town), albeit after years of protracted litigation.

Very truly yours,

PATRICK J. TOMASELLI, ESQ.
Poestenkill Town Attorney

end quotes

Thus did Sonia Sotomayor firmly establish her bonafides as a political judge who could be counted on to do “the right thing” when the right thing was what was needed to protect and safeguard endemic public corruption involving honest services fraud in New York state, and thus was she set on the path that would then see Barack Hussein Obama reward her for her political reliability with a seat on the United States Supreme Court.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-80063
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 14, 2018 at 6:43 pm

Paul Plante says :

Now, to understand why it was that Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick Tomaselli was giddy with glee over the patent dishonesty of then-2d Circuit Court of Appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor in that December 19, 2005 writing above to the Poestenkill Town Board, wherein Tomaselli gleefully stated to the Poestenkill Town Board, “(T)hus, it appears that yet another Plante matter has been concluded successfully (for the Town), albeit after years of protracted litigation,” and to understand why Sonia Sotomayor should be impeached and removed from the federal bench for the dishonesty Tomaselli was cheering on December 19, 2005, it is necessary to drop back in time to April 25, 1996, to a sworn affidavit I filed with the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme court in Albany, New York, in response to a libelous rant or screed Tomaselli had filed with the same court as Poestenkill Town Attorney in a vain attempt to turn the judges of that Court against me with respect to litigation I was involved in as a plaintiff against endemic public corruption involving the corrupt New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, as follows:

229 AD2d 650

Supreme Court – Appellate Division

Third Judicial Department

75470
______________________________

In the Matter of the

TOWN OF POESTENKILL,

Respondent,

v.

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION,

Appellant.

—————————————————

In the Matter of SUSAN LASCARI et al.,

Respondents,

v.

NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSERVATION et al.,

Appellants.

_______________________________

REPLY AFFIDAVIT

Paul R. Plante, N.Y.S.P.E., being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. I am one of the pro se petitioner/respondents in the above captioned matter, and as such, I am fully familiar with the facts in the matter and the prior proceedings had herein.

2. I make this affidavit in reply to certain averments made under oath in paragraphs 15, 16 and 17 of the April 22, 1996 Answering Affidavit of Poestenkill Town Supervisor John E. Zweig in connection with the above matter (hereinafter “Zweig Affidavit”), a copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit A and made a part of for the Court’s convenience, and in response to certain unsworn and scurrilous allegations made in an April 22, 1996 letter of Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick J. Tomaselli, Esq. annexed to the Zweig Affidavit as Exhibit D.

A copy of the April 22, 1996 Tomaselli letter relied upon by Supervisor Zweig in his April 22, 1996 affidavit is annexed hereto as Exhibit B and made a part hereof for the Court’s convenience.

end quotes

The unsworn and scurrilous allegations made in an April 22, 1996 letter of Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick J. Tomaselli, Esq. annexed to the Zweig Affidavit as Exhibit D submitted to the Appellate Court in New York State was the entrance of lawyer Patrick Tomaselli into this drama that would result in Sonia Sotomayor in December 2005 affirming to Tomaselli and the Poestenkill Town Board that as far as the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals was concerned, I had no civil rights that the Town of Poestenkill need concern itself with, and since I was essentially now locked out of federal court, there was nothing I could do about it, which cheered Tomaselli and the Poestenkill Town Board greatly, because they were then free to violate the law with impunity, knowing Sonia Sotomayer had their back, which takes us back to that sworn affidavit, as follows:

3. At the very outset, I would ask the Court to note that in paragraph 5 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit, Mr. Zweig and the Town of Poestenkill take no position with respect to the relief requested in the April 15, 1996 motion of petitioner/respondent Lorraine Kaskoun, that relief being dismissal of Appeal No. 75470 on the grounds that an appeal from denial of a motion to reargue in the instant matter is improperly taken, since an order denying a motion to reargue cannot be appealed from.

4. That, it is respectfully submitted is where this matter should have begun and ended.

5. If the Town of Poestenkill had no problem with petitioner Kaskoun’s request for relief, or if it had nothing of substance to add to the proceedings vis-a-vis the propriety of petitioner Kaskoun’s request for relief, the Town of Poestenkill should have simply stated as such and concluded the matter with brevity and clarity as to its position in that regard.

6. Instead, Mr. Zweig chose to first burden this Court with a discussion of matters not in the record before the Court in the instant appeal, and then, in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit, Mr. Zweig chose to label me as a “liar.”

end quotes

Here it should be noted that this Mr. Zweig ran openly on a pro-corruption/anti-regulation/anti-law and order platform in the Town, and when he was elected, I literally became an “enemy” of the Town Board, and was outcast, without rights in the Town, for my anti-corruption stance, as we see by returning to the sworn affidavit, as follows:

7. As a result, I am now forced by that circumstance to have to defend my integrity before this Court, and I beg this Court’s indulgence for an opportunity to do so, albeit very briefly.

8. Since the sole “evidentiary” basis and support for Mr. Zweig’s averment that I am a “liar” appears to be an April 22, 1996 letter to this Court from Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick J. Tomaselli, Esq., which is annexed to Mr. Zweig’s affidavit as Exhibit D and which is annexed hereto as Exhibit B, I will deal directly with the statements of Mr. Tomaselli therein, and by so doing, demonstrate to this Court that Mr. Zweig’s statement in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit that I am a “liar” is both unsupported and false, and is made for no other apparent purpose but to deflect this Court’s attention away from the real and sole issue before the Court in petitioner Kaskoun’s motion, to wit, that Appeal No. 75470 should be dismissed outright in the sound exercise of this Court’s discretion.

end quotes

What is happening there is called “muscling.”

Poestenkill Town Attorney Patrick Tomaselli was using his political clout as a lawyer to “muscle” me, to push me aside, so that I would not be able to participate in that appeal, which then would have given the corrupt New York State department of Environmental Conservation a free win in that appeal, which they ended up losing, because I stood up to Tomaselli’s sleaze-bag lawyer’s tricks and did not cave, which takes us back again to that sworn affidavit, as follows:

9. In getting to the facts of the matter to debunk the false and extremely malicious assertions of Mr. Tomaselli’s April 22, 1996 letter to this Court annexed hereto as Exhibit B, and thereby demonstrate the falsity of Mr. Zweig’s averments in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit, it is necessary to go no further than the second paragraph on page one of Mr. Tomaselli’s diatribe where he states as follows, and I quote:

Indeed, Mr. Plante’s very style of “advocacy” seems to be predicated upon ignoring or distorting the facts and/or law pertaining to the actual issues in dispute and concentrating instead on personal insults and name-calling against all involved participants.

(Exhibit B, page one)

end quotes

As we shall see, that lawyer’s bull****, and how they can throw it, was exposed as just another slimeball lawyer’s trick in my sworn affidavit, which put me way over on Tomaselli’s “bad side,” as he called it, which explains his glee at the dishonesty of Sotomayer in December of 2005, which removed me as a threat to on-going public corruption in Poestenkill, which again takes us back to my sworn affidavit, as follows:

10. Based upon a review of the facts in connection with the litigation I have been involved in as a pro se litigant, which upon information and belief Mr. Tomaselli is well aware of in his capacity as attorney for the Town of Poestenkill, it can be readily demonstrated to this Court that the above statement of Mr. Tomaselli which Mr. Zweig relies on in paragraph 16 of his April 22, 1996 affidavit is patently false.

11. Annexed hereto as Exhibit C and made a part hereof is a twenty (20) page decision of Honorable Robert C. Williams, J.S.C. in Matter of Lascari, Kaskoun, Mouawad, Plante, Valentine and Powley v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation et al., Albany Co. Index No. 3943/92, dated May 18, 1993.

12. As the Court will note from a review of the appearances at page two of that decision, I was one of the pro se petitioners therein.

13. At page three, the Court will note that the petitioners in that petition were asking the Court to determine that the DEC’s decision to proceed in issuing a mined land reclamation permit to Mr. Tomaselli’s client R.J. Valente Gravel, Inc. without requiring preparation of an environmental impact statement was unlawful.

14. “Having reviewed the record” says the Court therein, it agreed with the petitioners and accordingly, the permit was annulled.

15. That decision was never appealed from by the State of New York.

16. In that decision at pages 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 18, the Court relied upon factual statements made by this petitioner in sworn affidavits to that Court in annulling the permit at issue in that proceeding.

17. Nowhere in that decision is there any reference to distortion of fact or name-calling or personal insults by this petitioner.

end quotes

And here I will rest for a moment to let that sink in, because what it is saying to the Appellate Court in 1996, is that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation was engaged in criminal activity, which they indeed were, and that as a witness against them in a court of law in New York state, I had made my case stick, despite the efforts of the Office of the New York State Attorney General to have it be otherwise, which is how I became a marked man in New York state with no rights, as was confirmed by Sonia Sotomayor in 2005, and again by Bobby Katzmann of the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in his Decree of April 30, 2015, for which Bobby Katzmann should be impeached, as well.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-80452
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 15, 2018 at 5:57 pm

Paul Plante says :

And let me pause to say here that when I heard Barack Hussein Obama was going to nominate Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, I did not react quite like Christine Blasey Ford is alleged to have reacted when Brett Kavanaugh was nominated, according to the Washington Post story “Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford moved 3,000 miles to reinvent her life. It wasn’t far enough.” by Jessica Contrera, Ian Shapira, Emma Brown, and Steve Hendrix on 22 September 2018, which is as follows:

When Donald Trump won his upset presidential victory in 2016, Christine Blasey Ford’s thoughts quickly turned to a name most Americans had never heard of but one that had unsettled her for years: Brett M. Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh — a judge on the prestigious U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia — was among those mentioned as a possible replacement for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in 2016.

When Trump nominated Neil M. Gorsuch, Ford was relieved but still uneasy.

Then Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced his retirement and Ford, 51, began fretting again.

“Her mind-set was, ‘I’ve got this terrible secret.”

“. . .What am I going to do with this secret?’” her husband, Russell Ford, 56, recalled.

“She was like, ‘I can’t deal with this.'”

“‘If he becomes the nominee, then I’m moving to another country.'”

“‘I cannot live in this country if he’s in the Supreme Court,’” her husband said.

“She wanted out.”

These were the lengths that Ford, a professor and mother of two, once considered to avoid revisiting one of her most troubling memories — one she’d discussed only in therapy and with her husband.

Instead her deeply held secret would come to dominate the headlines, putting her and her family at the center of an explosive debate about the future of the Supreme Court.

end quotes

The future of the Supreme Court, indeed!

As for me, I did not say that I was going to move to another country if Sotomayor became the nominee, because running simply is not my style.

But I must confess that I was beyond uneasy – I was in fact sick to my stomach at the thought of Sonia Sotomayor sitting on the Supreme Court, almost to the point of vomiting.

And when this Blasey Ford story came out, and I started hearing everyone screaming and hollering that Brett Kavanaugh should not be on the Supreme Court, it brought it all back to me, in spades – why is Sonia Sotomayor a United States Supreme Court Justice?

And that feeling of being sick to my stomach at the thought of Sonia Sotomayor sitting on the United States Supreme Court keeps being brought back day after day after day by news stories such as this one from the Cuomo News Network (CNN) entitled “Key House Democrats outline Trump investigations if they take back House Majority” by Lauren Fox and Jeremy Herb on 15 October 2018, as follows:

Nadler (Rep. Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee) has also said he wants more information on Kavanaugh, who was accused in the 11th hour of his confirmation process of sexually assaulting Christine Blasey Ford when they were both teenagers.

“It is not something we are eager to do,” Nadler told The New York Times earlier this month.

“But the Senate having failed to do its proper constitutionally mandated job of advise and consent, we are going to have to do something to provide a check and balance, to protect the rule of law and to protect the legitimacy of one of our most important institutions.”

end quotes

Now, that is interesting because what Rep. Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, is saying there is that in his vision of how things in Washington should work, despite the clear and explicit language of the Constitution, is that now, the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee has an oversight role over the United States Senate, which is pure horse****, but there it is, nonetheless.

As to protecting the rule of law and protecting the legitimacy of one of our most important institutions, that being the United States Supreme Court, Barack Obama and the Senate Democrats, as this thread clearly demonstrates, failed big time on both scores by putting the openly dishonest Sonia Sotomayor on the United States Supreme Court, where she clearly does not belong.

So is Sonia Sotomayor going to get to skate, while Brett Kavanaugh gets tied to the whipping pole?

That is what this thread is now contemplating.

So please stay tuned as this subject becomes more developed as to why Sonia Sotomayor should be impeached for dishonesty and removed from the United States Supreme Court where she does not belong.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... ment-80860
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 73427
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: SONIA SOTOMAYOR SHOULD BE IMPEACHED

Post by thelivyjr »

THE CAPE CHARLES MIRROR October 16, 2018 at 11:02 am

Paul Plante says :

And to put things into their proper perspective here as to the dishonesty of Sonia Sotomayor that should disqualify her as a United States Supreme Court Justice, and to see what it was that Sonia Sotomayor was covering up as a circuit judge on the federal 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City on 2005, a cover-up pro-corruption Poestenkill Town attorney Patrick Tomaselli was cheering to the Poestenkill Town Board in a writing above dated December 19, 2005, the conduct of the corrupt New York State Department of Environmental Conservation complained of in paragraphs 11 through 16 of the April 25, 1996 sworn affidavit I filed with the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme court in Albany, New York, in response to a libelous rant or screed Tomaselli had filed with the same court as Poestenkill Town Attorney in a vain attempt to turn the judges of that Court against me with respect to litigation I was involved in as a plaintiff against endemic public corruption involving the corrupt New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, was a clear violation of New York Penal Law § 175.40, entitled “Issuing a false certificate,” to wit:

A person is guilty of issuing a false certificate when, being a public servant authorized by law to make or issue official certificates or other official written instruments, and with intent to defraud, deceive or injure another person, he issues such an instrument, or makes the same with intent that it be issued, knowing that it contains a false statement or false information.

Issuing a false certificate is a class E felony.

end quotes

That is the course of conduct in corrupt New York State that Sonia Sotomayor was protecting in 2005 as a federal judge.

For doing so, Barack Hussein Obama put her on the United States Supreme Court as her reward!

But the story of her dishonesty does not end there, it only begins, so please, stay tuned.

http://www.capecharlesmirror.com/news/o ... -disgrace/
Post Reply