My fund raising for consrvatives is not important

Yurt said:
lol...onceler ran away in shame from his dishonest hackery
Click to expand...

What did I run away from? You're the energizer bunny of denial. I just bail after awhile because it's boring.

I don't have to keep trying to prove you're a koolaid-guzzling hack. You do that with almost every post.
:)
 
Onceler said:
What did I run away from? You're the energizer bunny of denial. I just bail after awhile because it's boring.

I don't have to keep trying to prove you're a koolaid-guzzling hack. You do that with almost every post.
:)
Click to expand...

translation:

i lied and got busted
 
Onceler said:
Busted translator. You're the 2nd or 3rd biggest GOP apologist on here (depending on the day)...

:clink:
Click to expand...

translation:

i claimed yurt always defends any republican, got caught in that lie, so i altered the claim to any republican in power, got caught in that lie....so now i'll just wildly claim his a big ol' gop apologists

LOL....keep hacking away onceler, it only makes you look like a fool
 
Yurt said:
translation:

i claimed yurt always defends any republican, got caught in that lie, so i altered the claim to any republican in power, got caught in that lie....so now i'll just wildly claim his a big ol' gop apologists

LOL....keep hacking away onceler, it only makes you look like a fool
Click to expand...

No, no - only hacks who apologize for their party all of the time look like fools.
 
Code of Conduct for United States Judges,

A justice should not "solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to a political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a ticket for a dinner or other event sponsored by a political organization or candidate."

So is this magazine a candidate?....NO
So is this magazine a political orgnaization? NO
So is the Intercollegiate Studies Institute a candidate?....NO
So is the Intercollegiate Studies Institute a political orgnaization? NO

Wheres the beef ?
 
bravo said:
Code of Conduct for United States Judges,

A justice should not "solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to a political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a ticket for a dinner or other event sponsored by a political organization or candidate."

So is this magazine a candidate?....NO
So is this magazine a political orgnaization? NO
So is the Intercollegiate Studies Institute a candidate?....NO
So is the Intercollegiate Studies Institute a political orgnaization? NO

Wheres the beef ?
Click to expand...

Canon 4C. A judge may attend fund-raising events of law-related and other organizations although the judge may not be a speaker, a guest of honor, or featured on the program of such an event. Use of a judge’s name, position in the organization, and judicial designation on an organization’s letterhead, including when used for fund raising or soliciting members, does not violate Canon 4C if comparable information and designations are listed for others.
 
Q: Does the commentary have actual legal authority? If so, then being a keynote was a violation. If not, then there is no violation.

Also, if the commentary does have legal authority, then the commentary definition of political organization could possibly apply:
The term “political organization” refers to a political party, a group affiliated with a political party or candidate for public office, or an entity whose principal purpose is to advocate for or against political candidates or parties in connection with elections for public office.
Click to expand...
What is the principle purpose of American Spectator magazine?

Not being a lawyer, I don't know the authority of commentary in the canons, so I do not know in what manner they can be applied.

However, in general, it is not reasonable to expect judiciary figures to recluse themselves from society in order to maintain some idealized perception of absolute neutrality in all things. So while it may "stink" for some to have a judge rule on a case involving corporate rights, then go have lunch with the local Chamber hierarchy, my question is this: do you expect judges to abandon personal relationships in order to be a justice? Are they to disavow their political philosophy? In short, are they to become non-human in order to perform their jobs?
 
NigelTufnel said:
You're right that I read the portion of 4C to quickly and that a judge can assist nonprofit law-related or civic or charitable or educational or religious or social organizations in planning fund-raising activities. The problem is that Alito didn't merely assist in planning fund-raising activities, he was a keynote speaker at an American Spectator fund-raiser, which is prohibited by Canon 4.

Is it your contention that Alito can be a keynote speaker at such an event and not violate Canon 4?
Click to expand...

Michelle Bachman was the keynote speaker, not Alito.
 
Note Alito's name is no where noted on the events sponsors (contributors) or presenters:

Keynote SpeakerCongresswoman Michele Bachmann

bachmann.jpg


Presentation of
The Barbara Olson Award for
Excellence in Journalism

Presenters
Alfred S. Regnery,
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
and Other Friends

Entertainment
Alex Donner & His Orchestra

sidebar2.jpg




Current Sponsors of the 2010 Bartley Gala
Platinum Sponsors:
» Lawrence Auriana
» Paul Charnetzki
» T. Boone Pickens
Gold Sponsors:
» Charles Brunie
» Joseph W. Donner
» Eagle Publishing
» Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher LLC
» John Hinton
» Nina Rosenwald
» Paul Singer
» Wall Street Journal
» William Lanham Walton
Silver Sponsors:
» Americans for Prosperity
» The Atlas Economic Research Foundation
» Ave Maria School of Law
» The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
» Cooper & Kirk, PLLC
» Eberle Associates, Inc.
» Editorial Experts Inc.
» Richard A. Holt
» Intercollegiate Studies Institute
» Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund
» League of American Voters
» Media Research Center
» The Hon. Daniel Oliver
» James Piereson
» Shirley & Banister Public Affairs
» William E. Simon
» Straus & Boies, LLP
» The Fund for American Studies
» Andrew Whist
» White House Writer's Group
» John Wohlstetter
» Young America's Foundation
The Robert L. Bartley Gala Dinner is a "widely attended" event pursuant to Senate and House Ethics Rules. The American Spectator Foundation is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator and its companion website www.spectator.org.

The American Spectator Foundation
1611 North Kent Street, Suite 901
Arlington, VA 22209

More info on the event
 
Yurt said:
i did read a source that said he spoke.....i don't remember it though

regardless....he has been a speaker at past events
Click to expand...

He attended one other time 2 years ago. I have searched and cannot find any proof that he spoke at all. Indeed the article by Fang does not even bring that charge, only that he attended.

OK I stand corrected I found this from 2008:

The capstone was the keynote address by Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito. He was classy, witty and substantive in an oration worth many times the price of admission. He began with some self-deprecating humor about the article he submitted to the Spectator years ago -- rejected! -- and set up a running gag poking fun at Vice-President-elect Joe Biden. Biden had been embarrassed into dropping out of the 1988 Presidential primary after being caught plagiarizing. Alito kept quoting Biden, giving him tongue-in-cheek credit for such lines as Bob Dylan’s “The times they are a-changing”.

His central message was a very powerful insight. He demonstrated that although many cases are still decided with too much influence from liberalism, the powerful revolution by the law schools in the 60s and 70s has been largely pushed back. The attempt to substitute the judge’s conscience for the letter of the law has been significantly contained, and even liberal judges are forced to argue within the text. “We are all originalists now,” he cited Laurence Tribe.
 
Last edited:
Ice Dancer said:
He attended one other time 2 years ago. I have searched and cannot find any proof that he spoke at all. Indeed the article by Fang does not even bring that charge, only that he attended.
Click to expand...

The claim is he headlined the event in 2008. No idea if that is true or not.
 
Ice Dancer said:
He attended one other time 2 years ago. I have searched and cannot find any proof that he spoke at all. Indeed the article by Fang does not even bring that charge, only that he attended.
Click to expand...

if he didn't speak at this event....no biggie

but the other event, it appears from the commentary section....that it was a violation
 
Yurt said:
if he didn't speak at this event....no biggie

but the other event, it appears from the commentary section....that it was a violation
Click to expand...
But, like I asked, what is the legal authority of the commentary section? If is has legal authority, then it would be a violation. If not, then not.

Also, if the commentary section DOES have legal authority, then IMO the prohibitions are unnecessarily strict. The only place where a justice should refrain from described activities, such as speaking as a guest at a non-profit fund raiser is if the particular instance provides a conflict of interest for current cases.
 
Good Luck said:
But, like I asked, what is the legal authority of the commentary section? If is has legal authority, then it would be a violation. If not, then not.

Also, if the commentary section DOES have legal authority, then IMO the prohibitions are unnecessarily strict. The only place where a justice should refrain from described activities, such as speaking as a guest at a non-profit fund raiser is if the particular instance provides a conflict of interest for current cases.
Click to expand...

as i said earlier....i'm assuming the commentary section has the same force of law....

often in ethic treatises or other legal treatises, the commentary section is not necessarily the cited section in terms of direct authority, however, it has authority and if a lawyer were to use the commentary section, it would be persuasive and a court would likely uphold the commentary section....then if a court were to cite or use the commentary section, it would become precedence if the court were a precedent setting court and the decision published
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top