To: Terpfen
So the judge can do that in that state, without the permisssion of one or both of the parties? Bet they fix that loophole. So I guess the question now is what was in it for the judge?
11 posted on
06/25/2004 7:30:13 AM PDT by
mewzilla
To: mewzilla
I guess the judge wanted the lib elected. Who knows. Either way, it's out, both parties didn't want it out, the judge overruled 'em, and it looks like Fitzgerald's coming in to take Ryan's place.
13 posted on
06/25/2004 7:32:51 AM PDT by
Terpfen
(Re-elect Bush; kill terrorists now, fix Medicare later.)
To: mewzilla
"So the judge can do that in that state, without the permission of one or both of the parties?"
- Apparently, the judge ruled that since Ryan was running for political office the records are considered in the public domain. I wonder if the same logic can be used to get the judge to release all of Kerry's Vietnam records, most of which he has so far managed to keep private?
To: mewzilla
So the judge can do that in that state, Just to clarify, it was a California, not an Illinois judge. ". A California judge has decided to make public information the judge calls embarrassing both personally and politically for Ryan." http://abclocal.go.com/wls/news/061704_ns_ryan.html
41 posted on
06/25/2004 10:30:37 AM PDT by
PAR35
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson