Posted on 07/15/2014 4:57:42 PM PDT by nickcarraway
How will a judgement be issued and enforced what the defendant cannot be named
“Sorry your honor, but tell us who is liable again? Not my clients.”
That appears to me as bias on the part of the judge. He should recuse himself. He has publically announced by this action what his decision will be.
Why are they afraid of a word? Now if it were Nazis, oh wait, Socialists.
He has already demonstrated that he cannot be an impartial jurist. I would move that the judge immediately declare a mistrial and recuse himself from the case.
“...but the court will not address reality.”
Another useless “piling on” article by the WaPo. It’s so much easier to run this sort of verbal sawdust filler in the newspaper than to report actual news like the VA or IRS scandals or illegal alien invasion scandal.
LOL! I thought the same thing.
The ruling by the court is that SOMEONE is guilty. But we can't tell you who.
Everyone should show up in her courtroom in an RGIII jersey.
I find the name GIANTS to be offensive to us short people.
They should refer to it as The New York Team.
I’m also offended by the Judge’s name. It just sounds offensive. He should be referred to as That Idiot Judge.
But then Idiots might be offended, because most of them are smarter than he is.
BTW his refusal to call a defendant by its legal name is clear evidence of an inability to be impartial.
Now federal judges are banning words. Has this freak banned the use of “idiot” as yet?
This is assinine
To ban the name from court documents, when it is the team name
I wonder how this obviously unprofessional, biased individual did well enough in undergrad, law school, and practice to be placed in a Federal judgeship. It might not be true behind the scenes, but I’d think most any breathing American knows that if you’re supposed to be impartial for legal purposes that you don’t make public proclamations that demonstrate to all that you’ve sold out lock, stock, and barrel to one of the sides in a case that you’re hearing. That level of obvious, public partiality rockets past stupid and hits new territory in the land of absolute ignoramus.
So you’ve noticed.
However, for Congress, I would do the Mohel cutting with an ax or a gulliotine. Nothing like getting a head in politics, or for some of them, including one BJ Clinton, “getting head” in politics.
Remember the old joke? -
If assholes could fly, Congress would be an airport!
Yes and I’ll go a step further saying this should be an impeachable act as I commented on another thread.
Everyone should have their right to be heard in an unbiased court, if this judge doesn’t consider his ruling as bias then he should NOT be sitting on a federal bench.
I agree. This is terrible behavior on the part of a judge.
I take offense at the use of Washington in that context.
The Knights of Ni have spoken. Stop saying “the word”!
Ah screw it. Move the team to Richmond and call them the Rebels.
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.