Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Not: An Ignorant Analysis Of The Lynne Stewart Case.
NRO ^ | 02-23-05 | Andrew McCarthy

Posted on 02/23/2005 7:31:28 AM PST by MamaLucci

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last
To: SoFloFreeper

That paragraph you highlighted is particularly shameful.........will Napolitano issue a correction of the record?


21 posted on 02/23/2005 7:59:01 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Thanks for the interesting insight on the NJ judicial system.

My highly negative impression of the NJ system was formed by its blatant flouting of the law in permitting Lautenberg to take the place on the ballot of the disgraced Robert Torricelli.


22 posted on 02/23/2005 8:00:10 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest (Watching the Today Show since 2002 so you don't have to.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
I would agree that Fox News is merely the "least of all evils", but until something
better comes along (and it WILL), I watch Fox News.
23 posted on 02/23/2005 8:04:44 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci; LibertyThug

I read that this morning, what a smackdown.

Napolitano has a book to sell, so he's very quick to judge anything and everything as an assault on the Constitution. I keep waiting for him to declare E.D. Hill's hair unconstitutional. Heck, I might even support that one...


24 posted on 02/23/2005 8:08:00 AM PST by Akira (Experience is a hard teacher, but fools will have no other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tacis
If we can put her away for 25 years, the country will be a better place.

Yes, and that is precisely why the commies are squealing so loudly..............
they don't WANT the country to be a better place.
I didn't see it, but heard that Stewert cried like a baby after being convicted.
It made me think that there were many reasons that the left not only
wanted Gore to win in 2000,.............they NEEDED him to win.
Thank GOD for big favors.

25 posted on 02/23/2005 8:12:57 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Akira
Napolitano has a book to sell, so he's very quick to judge anything and everything as an assault on the Constitution. I keep waiting for him to declare E.D. Hill's hair unconstitutional. Heck, I might even support that one...

ROFL!! It's true.....and McCarthy nailed him brilliantly for it.
By (erroniously) using the Stewert conviction to prop up the premise of his book,
the good "Judge" made an ass of himself.

26 posted on 02/23/2005 8:17:11 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"But I have steadfastly refused to watch Fox since the day they hired Geraldo Rivera Jerry Rivers.

He IS a charlatan 'journalist' isn't he. I had decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and had endured his over-hyped irrelevancies until the other day.

On that day he finally pulled the Kimono wide open and had Amarosa (The incompetent, devious, Race baiting failure who appeared on the equally inane 'Apprentice' Reality Show) as his 'Expert' commentator on - Racism and Micheal Jackson's trial - A double dose of ignorance and depravity. That was it for me. I keep the clicker handy just in case they sneak him in at some unexpected point.

27 posted on 02/23/2005 8:17:11 AM PST by drt1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci

I said 2 weeks ago he really showed himself to be an a-s
with that article.
Traffic court judge maybe


28 posted on 02/23/2005 8:19:39 AM PST by italianquaker (CATHOLIC AND I VOTE BUSH=MANDATE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci

Anything I need to know, I learn on FreeRepublic.


29 posted on 02/23/2005 8:21:34 AM PST by Alberta's Child (I'm not expecting to grow flowers in the desert.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: italianquaker
Traffic court judge maybe....

Ouch!

30 posted on 02/23/2005 8:22:15 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci
Thanks for this post! I read Napalitano's Lynne Stewart "oped" last week and even my slow brain was wondering how John Ashcroft could have violated so many rights when the blind shiek's trial was over years before Ashcroft was AG.

I know nothing about legal issues but everytime I hear Napolitano I get the feeling he's an ignorant windbag.It's so great to have my gut feeling confirmed by genuine smart guy Andrew McCArthy!

31 posted on 02/23/2005 9:23:20 AM PST by Blumtoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blumtoon

My pleasure. ;)


32 posted on 02/23/2005 10:22:27 AM PST by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci
Any bests as to how long it tkes for Bill O'MeMeMe! to find a reason to make some snarky comments about McCarthy? O'BuyMyStuff and Napolitano are buds, and Mr. "Who's Looking To Get Money From You" will jump to defend Napolitano if it means he'll need to find another guest host for his radio program.
33 posted on 02/23/2005 10:25:32 AM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jokelahoma
"bests" should read "bets", of course. I hate laptop keyboards.
34 posted on 02/23/2005 10:26:19 AM PST by Jokelahoma (Animal testing is a bad idea. They get all nervous and give wrong answers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci
Of course, had Napolitano taken the few minutes necessary to read the indictment (which is freely available online), he might have learned that all of the conversations and actions that resulted in Stewart's conviction took place about two years or more before the post-9/11 regulation (which the, er, Judge, in any event, mischaracterizes). That is: before George W. Bush was president, before John Ashcroft was attorney general, and before 9/11 ever happened. This investigation was very ably conducted by, and took place under the auspices of incontestably proper regulations imposed by, the Clinton Justice Department.

SMACK! I've found myself wanting to throw a sock at the TV many times when "Judge" Napolitano was bloviating about some constitutional issue. Good to see Mr. McCarthy take him to the woodshed.

35 posted on 02/23/2005 10:47:36 AM PST by PogySailor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

As I said, they are still liberal and that is the problem. There is also corruption and incompetence, but NJ has a pretty strong system in place and judges do get reprimanded or removed for misconduct. It'sa good system similar to the federal judiciary, and obviously there are problems at the federal level at well. But there is a lot to be said for a professional judiciary as opposed to the zoo atmosphere existing in many state courts.


36 posted on 02/23/2005 10:54:14 AM PST by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest

Well .. actually, he is entitled to be called judge, just as former presidents are entitled to be called Mr. President, or as former Ambassadors are allowed to be called Mr. Ambassador.

I don't object to that part. I've just noticed a distinct dislike for Ashcroft and the Patriot Act.

I remember a private investigator (Mark Furman) who said of the Patriot Act that all it did was allow police units to do what private investigators had been able to do for years. While I'm not a big fan of Furman's, he went on to explain some of the things which police could now do which Mark said he has always been allowed to do - so Mark didn't think the Patriot Act was such a big deal.

It's like anything else which is put in front of you - it's up to YOU to choose if you will accept it or not. I rarely agree with the "Judge" - but that doesn't mean everything he says is an incorrect interrpretation of the law.

But .. FOX also employs Bob Beckel who hired a whore and brought her into his own home (while his wife was away). FOX also employs Robert Frost, a Texas representative who is hell bent on destroying Tom DeLay - and Frost's own aide was seen on video going into DeLay's office and STEALING a copy of DeLay's redistricting plan. I've been yelling at FOX over these 2 for months.


37 posted on 02/23/2005 11:05:50 AM PST by CyberAnt (Pres. Bush: "Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci

I am just tired of "Judge" Napolitano bashing John Ashcroft. Every chance he gets.


38 posted on 02/23/2005 11:23:14 AM PST by PatriotGirl827 (Member of the Vast Right Wing Pajama Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci; nothingnew; Ghost of Philip Marlowe; jan in Colorado
"The Times ought to be embarrassed. Fox News ought to be more embarrassed."

Good for Andrew McCarthy. It's about time that a seasoned journalist took "the Judge-at-Fox" to task. I've consistently disagreed with this judge's interpretations on legal matters. In my opinion, he really isn't all that bright, and as this article says, he is an embarrassment to Fox News. "Senior Judicial Analyst," - my eye. He should be let go. He is actually so off the mark, that he's somewhat comical. I feel like muttering, "Here come da judge" every time he appears on any of the many shows at Fox where they showcase this inferior legal mind.

As some of you have pointed out, he is affable enough, but he's a cocky little fellow who thinks he's "somethin' else" in the lofty pantheon of legal minds! He exudes an aura of oddly amiable, avuncular omniscience with respect to the law, when his views are based upon insufficient familiarity with their complexities, or even their basic foundation. Some retooling is needed over at Fox.

I say: "Let's draft Mark Levin!" I'm all for that!

Char :)

39 posted on 02/23/2005 11:56:16 AM PST by CHARLITE (glad to see lib Dem rats on sinking ship, unable to disembark)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Victoria Delsoul

Interesting legal analysis ping.


40 posted on 02/23/2005 5:15:32 PM PST by Alberta's Child (I'm not expecting to grow flowers in the desert.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson