8/19/05

Why Didn't Judge Roberts Recuse Himself?

OK... So Roberts has a few problems... And, of course, those people, the kind that are rabid about ruining the Constitution by inserting religion into politics, are running around New Milford now with TWO FLAGS on their car because ONE FLAG hasn't been patriotic enough to gloss over their lies, corruption, and flat out anti-patriotic stupidity as they do idiotic things like run over memorials to fallen soldiers at Camp Casey.

Thank God there are many soldiers that are supporting the efforts of Cindy Sheehan! Count me as one, and my brother in-law, who leaves for Iraq in a month or so for his second tour, would be two.

Cindy had this to say about their move to a piece of property that will be a little bit safer than the ditch bush's secret service originally forced them into.
We are moving to a place that doesn't have much shade and I put out an appeal for tarps and a soldier from Ft. Hood brought some to us that he "borrowed" from Ft. Hood for us to use. I have had a lot of soldiers from Ft. Hood come out and tell me to keep it up and that I am doing a good thing. We are doing this to honor Casey and the other fallen heroes in their memories. But we are doing it FOR the people of Iraq and the other soldiers who are in harm's way right now. Right after we heard about the crosses last night, a Camp Casey volunteer found out that a pen pal she had in Iraq was KIA on August 12th. This has to stop, now. We will stop it.

As noble as Cindy Sheehan's cause is, that isn't what this blog is about. Susanhu has a little info on Roberts that might be worth knowing:

Why Didn't Judge Roberts Recuse Himself?

by susanhu
Thu Aug 18th, 2005 at 10:30:27 PM EDT

"Roberts was part of a three-judge panel that handed President Bush an important victory the week before he announced Roberts' nomination to the bench," reports Democracy Now!.

"The appeals court ruled in the Hamdan V. Rumsfeld case that the military tribunals of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, could proceed. The decision also found that Bush could deny terrorism captives prisoner-of-war status as outlined by the Geneva Conventions." Said Georgetown law professor David Luban today in today's DN! interview:

[Roberts] knew that he was on the three-judge panel as early as last December. The case was argued, the oral argument was April 7. Six days before ... he had an interview with Att'y Gen. Gonzales. [W]hile the case was deliberated, there's a gap between April 7, when the oral argument took place, and July 15, when the court issued the decision. He had numerous other interviews for the Supreme Court judgeship. [T]hat's the period of time in which he is deliberating and presumably discussing with the other judges on the panel what the ruling should be in the case.

Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights (see the blogroll on the left), said:

[M]y reaction [is] utter amazement ... [O]n April 1, a week before the argument, [Roberts met] with Gonzales, the Attorney General who was the architect of the entire policy that the Geneva Conventions shouldn't apply to [Guantanamo detainees], that they should use military commissions, and he’s meeting with this guy at the same time that he is sitting on a case that's going to determine whether or not the Geneva Conventions apply.

[A]t a minimum, as David's article clearly says in Slate, his impartiality might reasonably have been questioned [and Judge Roberts] should have disqualified himself. There's not any issue about it.

I would go further. It reminds me of a case when Ellsberg [Pentagon Papers] was on trial for espionage. During the trial President Nixon, briefly, but other people in his office, Ehrlichman and others, met with the trial judge to offer him to be the head of the F.B.I. [T]he outcry [was] huge. ...

Listen/watch/read all. Goodman also asks both men about the missing documents. Emphases mine.


I know this has to be just a bit of a conflict of interest here... But I have morals and values, so I don't count political CYA by bush as a good thing when it comes to crimes against humanity. If bush really wanted to cover his ass all he had to do was ask the White House GOP prostitute Jeff Gannon, or if he was in this town he could ask Jay Lewyn... Same diff...

I really ought to go and see what "4 on the floor 4 bush" Jay and all of his "GOP talking point brigade" have to say about all of this at "Jay Lewin - For the love of God CENSOR ME!"... But I have already read the GOP talking points, so why waste my time, huh?

Nevermind the fact that if Jay isn't feeling gay enough about what he says in this town, well, he just goes back and tries to change the wording of the town records... Can't afford to look too stupid...

How many flags for you and your GOP buddies Jay?
One or two?
DOH!

No comments: