Slashdot Mirror
Judge Orders 'Intentionally Deceptive' DOJ Lawyers To Take Remedial Ethics Class (zerohedge.com)
According to the Daily Caller, "The judge overseeing the challenge by 26 states to President Obama's executive action in immigration has ordered all lawyers 'employed at the Justice Department in Washington, D.C. who appears, or seeks to appear, in a court (state or federal) in any of the 26 Plaintiff States annually attend a legal ethics course.'"
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Zero Hedge: In writing the ruling, Hanen quoted from the scene in "Miracle on 34th Street" when the boy is called to testify to Santa's existence and saying that everyone knows not to tell a lie to the court. Hanen went on to say that that the Justice Department lawyers have an even stricter duty: Tell the truth, don't mislead the court, and don't allow it to be mislead by others. "The Government's lawyers failed on all three fronts. The actions of the DHS should have been brought as early as December 19, 2014. The failure of counsel to do that constituted more than mere inadvertent omissions -- it was intentionally deceptive." Judge Hanen wrote in his ruling. Hanen ordered that the classes must be "taught by at least one recognized ethics expert who is unaffiliated with the Justice Department." I wonder if the judge could order the lawyers to jail for contempt of court?
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Zero Hedge: In writing the ruling, Hanen quoted from the scene in "Miracle on 34th Street" when the boy is called to testify to Santa's existence and saying that everyone knows not to tell a lie to the court. Hanen went on to say that that the Justice Department lawyers have an even stricter duty: Tell the truth, don't mislead the court, and don't allow it to be mislead by others. "The Government's lawyers failed on all three fronts. The actions of the DHS should have been brought as early as December 19, 2014. The failure of counsel to do that constituted more than mere inadvertent omissions -- it was intentionally deceptive." Judge Hanen wrote in his ruling. Hanen ordered that the classes must be "taught by at least one recognized ethics expert who is unaffiliated with the Justice Department." I wonder if the judge could order the lawyers to jail for contempt of court?
I'm not saying the story's wrong, but could you have found better sources than the Daily Caller and Zerohedge?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
When a judge rules that a member of the Peasant Class has been intentionally deceptive; they do hard time for the crime of perjury. Has anyone written an app to cross reference: wealth, political affiliation, political connections, legal immigration status, and whether you are a member ofthe Bar, etc. to decide what laws apply to you and in what way. It gets complicated.
Nixon can't wipe 18.5 minutes of magnetic audio tape but Hillary can wipe all the platters on a magnetic hard drive. See, it gets tricky.
Both articles quote the judge's order and then... y'know... LINK the order.
And you scream "I'll believe it when a source I approve of says it?" (HINT: And not the judge's actual order...)
Bet you would've said the same if Slashdot had posted a Daily Kos article about a judge slamming Bush' DoJ...
Whose attorney general Eric Holder waited until after the statute of limitation expired to decide whether or not to prosecute banks, then went to work for the same banks at a 10 million+/ year salary ?
The same DOJ whose attorney general Loretta Lynch has been doing such a wonderful job on defending constitutional rights like proclaiming she would prosecute anti muslim hate speech in the wake of the San Bernadino attacks, would not prosecute Lois Lerner for abuse of office at the IRS, and will likely let Hillary skate on her violations of national security law ?
Well I am shocked that attorneys from that DOJ would have ethics violations.
Lynch and Holder have run the most overtly corrupt (and therefore like most corrupt) DOJ in history.
I don't care much for Trump but I sure as hell hope he wins at this point because we need someone with the stones to actually look into and prosecute members of the former administration for their misdeeds. I can understand why that isn't a precedent most politicians want to see set, but its the only way we are going to get things cleaned up.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
This post is spinning so fast it's hard to read.
What was *really* said and which side is in trouble?
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
So?
You quote left-wing rags, founded and subsidized by sociopaths and psychopaths, ALL THE TIME!
I do? Maybe you've looked through my posting history and saw something I'm forgetting but I try to keep my sources pretty respectable. And yes this means I try to avoid citing the HuffPo.
The Washington Times is not a reliable source of information. I'm sure they report lots of good stories, but if you go to the Washington Times as a primary source it's really hard not to come away with a severely distorted view of events.
I stole this Sig
The same judge who took (and is still taking!) Orly Taitz' birther case seriously. Really.
So the deal is that a judge who is so unethical and biased that his decisions are guaranteed to be reversed on appeal still has some power -- before he makes a decision. So he keeps the cases going on and on, throwing around the full power of a federal judge, even though he's a nationally recognized disgrace. Basically if WorldNetDaily had the power to appoint judges, they'd have a hard time topping this clown.
Why not impeached yet? It would require Congressional action, and his antics draw conservative praise while not actually causing any long-term harm since they'll be overruled. So he's there for life.
Have gnu, will travel.
Yes there are automated aggregators now, including Google. Slashdot still relies entirely on human editors. The main benefit of Slashdot is the discussion, not the speed of breaking stories.
"Slashdot is not the Wall Street Journal. It is not The New York Times. Slashdot is an informal meeting ground. A town hall. A pub. A bulletin board in the quad on campus. Here people might not properly capitalize a proper noun. They might transpose letters in 'thier'. They might use jargon that isn't in oxford. And all of that is OK with me." -Cmdr Taco https://news.slashdot.org/stor...
You're welcome to go somewhere else if you want the most up to date breaking stories, but we have decreased the window of old stories drastically since the site changed ownership hands a few months ago. Looking back at comments from 16 years ago though, and not much has changed with the "this isn't breaking news" or "this isn't news for nerds" gripes. Guess it's somewhat of a hobby.