Posted on 03/18/2005 4:32:07 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay pledged Friday to hold Florida state judge George Greer in contempt of Congress for ignoring a congressional subpoena for Terri Schiavo's testimony, saying, "No little judge sitting in a state district court in Florida is going to usurp the authority of Congress."
"The Congress will pursue this, if we have to hold him in contempt of Congress," DeLay told radio host Sean Hannity.
Pressed on whether he intended to hold Judge Greer in contempt, the top Republican told Hannity: "Absolutely, absolutely."
"We will do everything to enforce the power and authority of the Congress and no little judge sitting in a state district court in Florida is going to usurp the authority of Congress," he added.
Earlier in the day Judge Greer rebuffed the Schiavo subpoena, telling attorneys in the case, "I have had no cogent reason why the [congressional] committee should intervene." He claimed that the last-minute action on the part of Congress does not nullify years of legal proceedings.
But DeLay told Hannity, "This judge and the Supreme Court of Florida are well known to be liberal judges that have a different worldview and they're imposing their worldview on the law."
The top House leader said that "no sane person" could look at Schiavo and say she's in a persistent vegetative state.
DeLay called a lawyer for Michael Schiavo, who has pressed for years to have his wife starved to death, "the personification of evil."
Right now, the use of filibusters on judicial appointments is a weapon that is only used to block conservative nominees. If we get a Democrat in the White House, that would likely continue to be the case. Given that Republicans are never going to use that weapon, why shouldn't they abolish it?
And you only want to look at this situation through the lens of Terri's situation. It's bigger than that. I'm willing to consider how this might affect the entire country. You won't.
Wrong. I can well see how the precedent established in Terri's case will effect vulnerable people in circumstances similar to Terri's, a fact you choose to ignore.
Suppose I have an invalid ward I want to get rid of. Please explain the problem with the following plan:
There is a saying amongst lawyers "a medical licence is a license to kill."
People lie in court every day. Sworn testimony is only a little better than unsworn testimony. I don't know who is lying in this case. Someone is.
In the absence of a written statement by her, a "will," expressing her wish that "she would not want to live like that," you are wonderfully right on target.
The law in Florida, should have required a jury to review the "lone statement" by her husband.
When I tell people I'm a court reporter, they ask me what I do; I tell them I swear people in and watch them lie.
Sworn testimony is only a little better than unsworn testimony.
Actually, unsworn testimony is not as INFURIATING as sworn testimony, because your head doesn't blow off when you know they're lying under oath. :-)
My hat is off to those on patrol, while, on the other hand, I would like very much to arrest some detectives.
No, it is a must follow because I have litigated them. Generally it is when someone is terminal and alert and they make a decision to stop treatment an let the cancer take its courts. The mother or father tries to step in over the objections of the husband or wife who is the named surrogate.
They are emotional gut wrenching cases but those are cases where intent is well documented, one even used a video in addition to the papers but the mother still would not let her son go. She did not trust her daughter in law.
As my experience indicates, they can TRY and dispute it but it is very hard to overcome.
Perhaps We the People should demand that Terry be given the same rights that defendants are given. Who will stand for Terry? I'm sure many will.
Yes, you are lonely, inside. But hiding it as you can will gain you time from having to deal with your emotions. How sad... If for so long your father asked you that... how often, I wonder, did you make him feel he would be worthless if he was 'not working.' Terrible for you do deal with, I guess.
Most relationships in this world are up and down, but to hear over and over from someone you care for, 'sure. when you're no longer 'working' I'll get rid of you.' I'm sure you did not use those words - but those are what he probably heard in his heart.
Sad, lonely, and scared, I believe you to be.
my bad it was late and I had a brain phart. sorry.
According the to the Court of Appeals there was more than just her husband:
We note that the guardianship court's original order expressly relied upon and found credible the testimony of witnesses other than Mr. Schiavo or the Schindlers. We recognize that Mrs. Schiavo's earlier oral statements were important evidence when deciding whether she would choose in February 2000 to withdraw life-prolonging procedures. See § 765.401(3), Fla. Stat. (2000); In re Guardianship of Browning, 568 So. 2d 4, 16. Nevertheless, the trial judge, acting as her proxy, also properly considered evidence of Mrs. Schiavo's values, personality, and her own decision-making process.
No I didn't just now read it because I'm at work.
And I didn't say that God doesn't bless us when we do good things. I just said that there isn't anything we can do to EARN those things. Doing "good" is a byproduct of having salvation, and having God in our lives and hearts, which is a gift that we cannot earn.
And why would you call it smarmy? It was a well written, clear, to-the-point, trying-to-understand, and trying-to-have-compassion note to someone whom I believe is in pain. Hmm. Must have stepped on your last frayed nerve of the day.
Though your words are great on visuals I don't know if you actually put them down as well as you could, though. I think you may have a problem expressing your true emotions. You might have on that in your communications.
That plan would probably work, although I wasn't aware that lawyers in Florida could choose which judge would hear the case.
We should.
There's every incentive to lie in the courtroom and only the vaguest threat of a penalty.
Since he never stopped, I doubt it.
SO9
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.