Judge smacks ‘luminaries’ defending Libby.
Judge smacks ‘luminaries’ defending Libby.
A dozen mostly libertarian and conservative legal scholars, including rejected Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, submitted an amicus brief to Scooter Libby trial Judge Reggie Walton “arguing that that there are serious constitutional questions about the legal authority” of Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. Emptywheel highlights this bitingly sarcastic response from Judge Walton:
It is an impressive show of public service when twelve prominent and distinguished current and former law professors of well-respected schools are able to amass their collective wisdom in the course of only several days to provide their legal expertise to the Court on behalf of a criminal defendant. The Court trusts that this is a reflection of these eminent academics’ willingness in the future to step to the plate and provide like assistance in cases involving any of the numerous litigants, both in this Court and throughout the courts of our nation, who lack the financial means to fully and properly articulate the merits of their legal positions even in instances where failure to do so could result in monetary penalties, incarceration, or worse. The Court will certainly not hesitate to call for such assistance from these luminaries, as necessary in the interests of justice and equity, whenever similar questions arise in the cases that come before it.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
THWACK!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:29 pmOf course they'd love to do some pro bono work for criminal defendants from the inner city, put them to some good use for a change!
What a senile old fart (the judge that is)!!!!!!!!!!!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:30 pmLibby has a lot of friends for being basically a Cheney butt protector.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:30 pmSharp comment that.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:31 pmShorter Judge Walton: "Bite me you criminal bitiches."
June 8th, 2007 at 6:31 pmThese twelve "luminaries" can do pro bono work for the Gitmo detainees.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:32 pmPerhaps those luminaries can file a friend-of-the-court brief for poor old Paris Hilton. Looks like she's gonna do some hard time, too, and heaven knows she's near destitute . . . oh, no, that was "prostitute", wasn't it?
June 8th, 2007 at 6:32 pmWhat a senile old fart (the judge that is)!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Mr. President — June 8, 2007 @ 6:30 pm
Mr. Pee, I'm just wondering what in the judge's statement led you to the conclusion that he's a "senile old fart"? Could you elaborate?
June 8th, 2007 at 6:34 pm#2 From your devoid ethical baramoter he would know that assertion is a compliment.
Rape-Public-Cans = Fascists placing party before Nation or law.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:36 pmScooter ain't gettin' outta this, folks. If Paris Hilton is forced to serve her entire time what makes you think Ol' Scooter gots a chance? Scooter doesn't have her looks nor legs or her rack. Scooter, yo' is sunk!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:39 pmIt's been a long time since an attorney (which is what a judge is) has impressed me.
Perhaps there is some justice in this land afterall.
Hope reigns!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:39 pmNice one, Judge! Seriously, that was brilliant.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:39 pmScooter doesn’t have her looks nor legs or her rack. Scooter, yo’ is sunk!
Comment by Armando Gomez
Scooter is probably a lot cleaner, though. She's just nasty.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:41 pmMr. Pee, I’m just wondering what in the judge’s statement led you to the conclusion that he’s a “senile old fart� Could you elaborate?
Comment by spit take — June 8, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
The sarcasm.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:41 pm#9
I can answer that spit take.
You see Mr. Pee,
He just don't agree
he don't see eye to eye
with da Judge Reggie
Now, Mr. Pee
he never wrong
so that leaves Reggie
doddering on the bench
no matter how far Mr. Pee
June 8th, 2007 at 6:42 pmhas wandered from reality.
That's another judge added to Bush's list of 'Bad Lib'rul activist judges.'
Thanks for defending the integrity of the court, Mr. Walton. Our eyes are on your superiors.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:42 pmOh, snap! More please!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:43 pmHey look at me!!!
I'm one of the retards on this page who mentions Paris Hilton!!!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:43 pmNow that was an awsome smackdown!!!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:44 pmCalling Judge Walton a 'hero' for these comments would be a bit much, but it is a breath of fresh air to see someone, anyone, stand up to these scumbags.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:44 pm#9
It is because the judge used his brain, is right and makes sense, so now the fascists have nothing left but to smear.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:44 pmJudge Walton sounds like he's parroting Lawrence O'Donnells' rant from Countdown the other day.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:46 pmRemember Folks - IGNORE THE TROLLS - They are running scared now and are foaming at the mouth.
You make their day when their stupid posts made to hit an emotional cord in you makes you respond - DON’T RESPOND TO THEIR POSTS
They are losers in real life and do this because everyone hates them, so they try to lash out at anything they can - DON’T READ THEIR POSTS
Join the Club, it will do wonders for you, and everyone else here.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:47 pmWord of the day = Misprision
Misprision. A word used to describe an offense which does not possess a specific name. (1) a contempt against the sovereign, the government, or the courts of justice, including not only contempts of court, properly so called, but also all forms of seditious or disloyal conduct and leze-majesty; (2) maladministration of public office; neglect or improper performance of official duty, including peculation of public funds; (3) neglect of light account made of a crime, that is, failure in the duty of a citizen to endeavor to prevent the commission of a crime, or, having knowledge of its commission, to fail to reveal it to the proper authorities. As in;
Scooter Libby's misprision during his post directly hindered the Federal investigation of the outing of a covert CIA operative.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:47 pmHey look at me!!!
I’m one of the retards on this page who mentions Paris Hilton!!!
True enough, GDumbya. Trouble is, though, that you're so stupid that you think it's a hotel in France.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:47 pmI’m one of the retards on this page who mentions Paris Hilton!!!
Comment by Mr. President
You never had to mention her before to show you're a retard.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:48 pm=D
It is because the judge used his brain, is right and makes sense, so now the fascists have nothing left but to smear.
Comment by Ashen Shard — June 8, 2007 @ 6:44 pm
Oh... I'm sorry... did YOU read the briefs?
Because if we don't know what was actually said, neither of us can say if this Judge is acting appropriately.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:49 pmI just realized that I must have a better background than all those "so called" accomplished idiots.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:49 pmOh, I have to look at being a lawyer at 63?
True enough, GDumbya. Trouble is, though, that you’re so stupid that you think it’s a hotel in France.
Comment by Tom — June 8, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Actually... IT IS
June 8th, 2007 at 6:50 pm--these eminent academics’ willingness in the future to step to the plate and provide like assistance in cases involving any of the numerous litigants--
Yeah when Hell freezes over or Chimpy McFlightsuit changes his mind.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:50 pmOhhhhh, SNAP!!
Hell yeah, Judge Walton!
June 8th, 2007 at 6:55 pmThe Judge's comments were on point, yet I agree with #7 as well. If the thought of defending dark skinned minorities and poor AMERICANS in general, is repugnant for those "scholarly REPUGNICANS"....THEN I think that defending THE DARK SKINNED (mostly) falsely imprisoned Gitmoees should be a requirement.
Kudos to Judge Walton.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:56 pmRobert Bork-Nixon's hatchet man in the 'Saturday Night Massacre' in the Watergate investigation. Aren't you glad that when Reagan nominated him for the US Supreme Court, that he was 'Borked"? I shudder to think if that party hack made it to the bench.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:02 pm#15 Mr. Peee: Sarcasm is an indicator of senility?
Wow. What must your life experience be like?
June 8th, 2007 at 7:13 pmUncle Ho......
June 8th, 2007 at 7:14 pmSo sad Jerry Ford had to be such a naive "nice-guy" and let Nixon and all of his hoodlums slip away into the woodwork.
Cheney was Ford's Chief of Staff, we can bet he was the true wormtongue in all of this.
And look where we are today.
AHHH HAAA HAAA HAAA HAAA!!!!!!!!!
*wipes tear from eye*
Oh wow.... what an AWESOME response from the judge. I don't give a flying f*** what happens to Libby, but I love how he griddled these asshats for their conspiratorial trolling. If justice were about how many resources you could summon to bear against the truth, this would be a sorry state. Guys like Walton patrol that barrier, and we owe them thanks for the times they reveal their spine.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:16 pmperfect! -- i think nexthurrah
and i had it within four minutes
of each other this afternoon. . .
a gaggle (that's an even dozen, in
non-legal parlance!) of law professors
just got paid a pile tohave askedto weigh-in on scooter libby's pending
motion for bail, while his appeals are
handled by the courts. . .
and, of course -- the aim is to suggest
that it is a "close question" as to whether
judge walton's ruling -- sustaining patrick
fitzgerald's authority under the independent
counsel statutes, was correct. . .
forget the "all the grand-standing
bigacademics love" facetsmoney can buy
to this motion -- and simply focus on that clearly-
well-grounded, solid and street-wise judge -- reggie walton. . .
so -- what judge walton just said was that he
will expect to be able to call these esteemed
men of the law, for in-depth, well-researched,
and nearly-instant, guidance -- in the future,
for truly penniless criminal defendants of no
notoriety. . . and, he will expect similar
snap-to-it performances!
excellent use of snark, judge walton!
i am in awe. and i am disgusted that
these professors want to make scalia's
dissent (i.e. not binding law) the basis
for the assertion of a "close question". . .
arguing for the change of existing
law is not the same as presenting a close,
or conflicting set of cases, under unsettled
law. . . scalia's dissent in morrison has
no effect whatsover as law. nor does this
largely spurrious amicus motion, drawn with all
the
resources of the r.n.c./scooterlegal accumenlibby defense fund could buy
mustered by these wise-old-graybeards.
here endeth my rant.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:16 pmgood stuff
More than a super majority of Americans wanted Libby to pay for his crimes before and after his convictions.
And these morons want a judge to just let him go. What a hoot!
June 8th, 2007 at 7:19 pmHow ironic that in essence, these luminaries are arguing that too MUCH prosecutorial discretion is a bad thing. Typically, legal abuses occur when too Little discretion is exercised.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:25 pmTo #14, gummitch:
Yo’ sniffin’ thet th’ wrong crotch, boy. Paris isn’t “nasty.†A real nasty is a neo-conservative. And the ones that stunk the most are them neo-cons, like Ol’ Scooter, himself. He outer a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame, another hottie. Paris has never cost the lives of millions as Scooter did. Now you just get down on your kneepads and apology to sweet Paris by kissing her sweet bottom and begging her pardon—YOU HEAR!!
June 8th, 2007 at 7:27 pmWhat a senile old fart (the judge that is)!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by Mr. President
Oh psshaw... Judge Walton knew exactly what he was saying, he said it well, and if ya don't like, here's fifty cents. Go call someone who cares...
June 8th, 2007 at 7:29 pmJudge Walton sounds like he’s parroting Lawrence O’Donnells’ rant from Countdown the other day.
Comment by Badmoodman
Kinda like the way trolls parrot their Masters' talking points?
Maybe the good Judge, like many of us, is simply fed up w/ whining, mealy-mouthed righties who blanche when it comes time to do their time.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:33 pmJust another case of these guys who put on suits and think (maybe not the best word here) that makes what they say valuable.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:34 pmThese guys hang out with each other and create a yes loop that has elevated their ego to such inflated levels they now see themselves as upright.
That is serious brain cell adjustment.
"Yo’ sniffin’ thet th’ wrong crotch, boy. Paris isn’t “nasty.†A real nasty is a neo-conservative."
Paris Hilton is a NeoCon. The whole entire Estate Tax fight is over people like Paris Hilton and the Bush Twins. Not to mention Bush himself.
No thanks. Paris goes in the Anne Coulter book of skinny b!tches that are famous for being famous.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:38 pmNow that is what a smack in the mouth looks like!!! Keep em coming judge.
June 8th, 2007 at 7:40 pmThe sarcasm alone is world-class. This is one federal judge who knows the reality of the neocongame, and he is countering the efforts to warp justice by putting those "looninaries" on notice!
June 8th, 2007 at 7:51 pmTo #45, Spudge_Boy:
It ain't Paris fault that she benefit from Estate Tax. So quit targeting her just to cover your resentment against her. But as for Anne Coulter, well, is fair game, that admonition against nature. As with Paris, don't confuse "skinny" with sleek. And she isn't a "bitch" but "bitchin' ".
June 8th, 2007 at 8:02 pmWow, talk about betting bitch slapped. You go Judge Walton. But, I think you can kiss that cushy job they offered you on the FISA court goodby. You are definitely not a team player.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:02 pm"It ain’t Paris fault that she benefit from Estate Tax."
No, but it is her fault that she is a stupid worthless piece of sh!t that doesn't contribute a damn thing to this world other than guys like you thinking she is "bitchin'"
Ugh. Do you even know what "bitchin'" means?
June 8th, 2007 at 8:05 pmOh yeah and the word "resentment" is way to nice. I hate Paris Hilton's guts. You need to use something stronger to try to categorize me.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:06 pmThe whole Rightwing commentary on the Scooter trial was disgusting. Everyone going on about how there was no crime, the prosecution was biased, an aquital was the only just verdict. Come on. Where was the fair & balanced commentary? Where were the observations that Bush lied about wanting to get to the bottom of the leak. From what I read, the fair reporters knew he'd be convicted on at least one charge and weren't sure of what the sentence would be.
But the judge was fair and just. A stiff sentence was required because this seriously undermined the authority of government. And his sarcastic comment to the Twelve Luminaries is also fair as their interest in Scooter is purely partisan and has nothing to do with justice.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:07 pmSpudge_Boy, my boy, the problem with America isn't those that don't contribute but those who subtract. There should be a law against being an neo-con, those admonible parasites. But our Bills of Rights gives us the "right" to "not" to contribute.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:15 pmBut our Bills of Rights gives us the “right†to “not†to contribute.
Comment by Armando Gomez
Actually Paris is not a bad kid. She does charity work (Toys forTots, etc ), when not party hopping.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:34 pmShe also has never ventured into the political arena.
Most people that know her say she is a actually pretty nice person.
"Spudge_Boy, my boy, the problem with America isn’t those that don’t contribute but those who subtract."
Yes and Paris Hilton subtracts intelligence from the gene pool of America and the world for that matter.
I am just glad my 18 year old is past the needing a role model stage and my 12 year old can recognize a moron when she sees one.
June 8th, 2007 at 8:34 pmYa think Walton's underwhelmed? Maybe now Scooter's saying to himself, "with friendslike these, who needs enemies?..."
Cheers,
June 8th, 2007 at 8:36 pmI just love it!
June 8th, 2007 at 8:39 pmSmack! Bash! Pow!
I am highly impressed by Walton's reply. Wow.
Do you all know that Bork is suing the Yale Club because he tripped on the dais? He wants a million bucks, plus punitive damages -- this from the guy who decried such lawsuits in the past and advocated a cap on lawsuits with no punitive damages for pain and suffering.
Hypocrites, one and all. IOKIYAR.
June 8th, 2007 at 9:04 pmMarie,
There's a thread about the hypocritical Bork below. :)
June 8th, 2007 at 9:09 pmOh, darn! Zooey.
See, I have been so busy lately I have had to shorten my time at TP and I miss some threads -- here I am thinking I have something to share and it turns out that I am the one arriving late! :(
Oh well, he's still a hypocritical jerk.
June 8th, 2007 at 9:15 pmspeaking truth to corrupt power.
this judge is a national hero and treasure, even if not too many know it.
June 8th, 2007 at 9:41 pmUgh, me too, I remember thinking what was the big fuss about Bork, then, years later after smartening up, realizing just what a complete W style "Justice" Bork would have been, an overwhelming disaster of arrogant incompetence for real-world conditions which render absolute shades of black & white moot
Bork's obviously been a bitter old bastard ever since getting destroyed out of a Supreme Court slot he considered as Divine Right, as well as a complete hypocrite about "tort deform", wanting his legal claims to move forward while trying to restrict that same ability on the part of those injured or killed by unsafe products or unsafe working conditions/dangerous personnel-think medical malpractice & police brutality here
I doubt this immensely satisfying smacking of Bork's overwrought histrionics by Judge Walton-one of W's first judicial appointees ironically enough-will make Bork's dour & sour expression and outlook suddenly brighten in pure joy of the most innocent kind
And expect Mt Bork to smolder and steam even more should his laughable legal action about not properly balancing himself on a stairway be summarily dismissed
Well, Libby's team was right about one thing, there would be much public mockery of those rushing in to defend Libby, and yes, it's LOTS of fun to publicly poke these swine and vermin in the most insulting, withering manner possible
June 8th, 2007 at 9:49 pmyes, it’s LOTS of fun to publicly poke these swine and vermin in the most insulting, withering manner possible
Comment by KingCranky
After 6 yrs of this insanity, totally w/ you on that one, KingC...
June 8th, 2007 at 9:53 pmHere's an idea for you... want to forn a pool to see which Bushitter implodes next? Put a little money down?
June 8th, 2007 at 9:54 pmActually Paris is not a bad kid. She does charity work (Toys forTots, etc ), when not party hopping. She also has never ventured into the political arena. Most people that know her say she is a actually pretty nice person.
Have you lost your mind?
This is a girl who, with every financial advantage, dropped out of high school, leads an utterly useless existence, got popped for dui (drugs and booze), broke probation 3 times, and has one excuse after another how it's somebody else's fault. She didn't know she wasn't supposed to drive (she was pulled over on a suspended license TWICE) because her "publicist told her she could drive."
It's only for the grace of Zeus that she hasn't killed anybody with her MB.
Now she claims that she can't serve her jail sentence because she's mentally ill. Why is she allowed to drive at all?
June 8th, 2007 at 10:05 pmits not fair!!!! waaaaaah!
June 8th, 2007 at 10:35 pmRobert Bork, such a distinguished pariah, just filed suit for $1,000,000 plus punative damages against the Yale Club of New York City because he fell going on stage for a speech (and he is a big proponent of tort reform). This man is a menace. Remember, he fired special prosecutor Archibald Cox for Nixon after both AG Elliott Richardson and Deputy AG William Ruckelshaus refused to do so. Actively anti-law enforcement. What is going on??
June 8th, 2007 at 10:44 pmPure rhetorical beauty in the truest American vein. Jefferson, and all that followed in the pursuit of the Founding Father's dream of a perfect construct of Democracy would be proud.
And a hell of a smack-down!
June 8th, 2007 at 10:47 pmNow she claims that she can’t serve her jail sentence because she’s mentally ill. Why is she allowed to drive at all?
Comment by Jess
Hey, I also have called her a "poor", spoiled, little rich girl.
She has more money than she has common sense.
And that is why children are not raised right if you give them everything they want.
She definately needs to grow up.
That is her parent's fault as much as it is hers.
But my previous post is also true.
People always have more than one side.
Judging stereotypes rather than facts is why we are bogged down in Iraq now.
June 8th, 2007 at 11:39 pm=)
I LEAVE FEW MINUTES AND MOFOS START TALKING ABOUT THAT STUPID BITCH AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Un-fukin-believable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You guys didn't get the message when I posted this:
"Hey look at me!!!
I’m one of the retards on this page who mentions Paris Hilton!!!
Comment by Mr. President — June 8, 2007 @ 6:43 pm"
THIS is why TP covers that bitch. NOT because they are showing how lame the media is, but rather, because THEY are lame.
June 8th, 2007 at 11:52 pmComment by Mr. President
quit yer b*tchin' child.
June 9th, 2007 at 12:05 amWayne at #54 says: "Actually Paris is not a bad kid. She does charity work (Toys forTots, etc ), when not party hopping. She also has never ventured into the political arena. Most people that know her say she is a actually pretty nice person."
Yah, reeee-ally. It's so nice she can fit in 'Toys for Tots' when she's not partying. Wow, I'm impressed. Thing is, m'dear - there's a whole bunch of us who do the same thing, we volunteer even when it's inconvenient, even when it cuts into our "partying time" (i.e., toilet cleaning, laundry and cooking time), and none of us have EVER ventured into the political arena other than to vote and fact is - most of *us* folks are pretty nice people too. Poor, but nice. Thing is, we don't have access to high priced lawyers when we screw up, so if we do, we do the time, STFU and take our medicine. As should the erstwhile self-identified porn star with access to millions. Being a "pretty nice person" doesn't give you a free pass out of jail if you did a crime. Just ask Scooter, this time next week.
Meantime -- kudos to Judge Reggie Walton for his cutting and incisively correct footnote. Way to go Reggie! I'm old enough to remember when black folks couldn't register to vote without taking their lives in their hands -- now they're in a position to sentence former heavy duty White House Administration folks to time in jail. Holy friggin' cow! Maybe there is justice after all. Sure as hell looks good from this side of the 49th parallel -- maybe there's actually been progress down your way. If so, good on ya -- but you still got a long way to go. Getting rid of Bush/Cheney would be a start, if you start working on it tomorrow.
Do it, do it now. Time's a wastin'!
June 9th, 2007 at 12:18 amBeing a “pretty nice person†doesn’t give you a free pass out of jail if you did a crime.
Comment by Canuck observer
Show one of my comments that excused or "give ... a free pass out of jail if you did a crime."
I have nothing but contempt for the way she has acted with the crap she has pulled trying to avoid her time for the crime and for the media coverage.
Does anyone ever really read and think things out anymore, or just browse looking for something to b*tch about?
June 9th, 2007 at 12:35 amLMAO
NEWS FLASH! CONSERVATIVES ARE SUCH FRICKEN HYPOCRITES. This self proclaimed conservative at my office was harping on and on how Paris Hilton (sorry) should go to jail. She was exhuberant when the judge ordered it so. For the record, I was pleased with that as well. I digress. This woman kept going on and on about how everyone should be treated equally under the law. "If you do the crime, then do the time" she kept saying. I baited her a little about how any time a jury finds someone guilty and all legal procedures are followed, that the verdict and the sentence should be respected. She enthusiastically concurred. For about 5 minutes we went on about due process and the rule of law. Just as she triumphantly proclaimed that justice was served by Ms. Hilton's return to jail, I told her that Scooter Libby should also do the time. Her response? "Well people shouldn't go to jail due to a fishing expidition." I reminded her about the grand jury, the judge, the jury, the verdict, the sentence, and due process. Her response was that he didn't commit any crime. Judge and jury concluded otherwise, I chimed in. Then she had the audacity to say that it's still not known whether any crime was commited or even that scooter lied tothe FBI investigators. Conclusion, the justice system is fair only when it holds NON CONSERVATIVES accountable for violating the law. CONSERVATIVES ARE THE MOST IGNAORANT, STUPIDEST, BIGGEST HYPOCRATES ON EARTH. I hope the earth opens up and swallows them all.
June 9th, 2007 at 1:40 amwell dantheman the Bush regime thinks that every little thing they do is an act of defending the country and not subject to oversight by the congress or courts.
Hopefully when this is done, and Libby has served his 30 months, we'll be able to REclarify the roles of the individual parts of the gvernment.
June 9th, 2007 at 9:31 amcheck out these links:
Simply Repulsive
By: John Amato @ 6:36 AM - PDT
These Scooter Libby apologists have lost their minds. I give you…Foad Ajami and the disgusting “Casualty of Warâ€
Words really can’t describe this buffoon with innocent Iraqis and our own soldiers being killed and maimed, but I’ll let Mona give it a whirl.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/06/09/simply-repulsive/
... a WSJ opinion piece comparing scooter to a fallen soldier...
...disgusting...
as one commentor on mona's site noted:
June 9th, 2007 at 11:12 amWSJ transformation to Fox News complete. Congratulations Mr. Murdoch. You’ve done it. -sy
.
The Bushies want a two tier justice and economic system based on skin color and wealth. It colors all their thinking from cheap immingrant labor to who should go to jail and who should suck all the milk off the government teat while others starve.
June 9th, 2007 at 11:13 ami have offered a few thoughts
on the very scant "merits" of
the gaggle of graybeards'
amici filing of yesterday. . .
p e a c e
June 9th, 2007 at 11:21 am