lhp, or any other lawyer, is there anything to be made of something John Dean raises in his recent book: The legal wacky opinions they have used in court over the years to bolster their positions turn out to have been written and placed in (non-peer reviewed) Law Reviews by their minions specifically for the purpose of bolstering their positions in court.

If I were arguing in court against a brief which relied exclusively on such bogus articles, I would ream the other side out. I would put the Judge on notice that if he relies on any such articles that he will get some unpleasant scrutiny by the appeals court.

Good judges don’t mind the appeals process, but they really hate to be made to look stupid.

How is using the legal justifications of idiots likeViet Dinh or John Yoo very much different.John Yoo

Marie Roget @ 38

Perhaps. But, once again, as I added to my post, what would she have had to lose?

I dunno, just that they simply would not have show it? I still can’t figure out why the came back late on the abortion question tpo Biden?

They do send this stuff going on during commercial breaks over the satellites, and it is available to lots of people who have access to the direct satelite transmission. It would have come out that she was censored AND it would have given those responding to comment upon her real question. Hard to pare out 4-5 minutes of responses.

It just may have encouraged one of the candidates to point out how “fixed” the debates were in terms of corporate control and restricting time to the major candidates rather than allowing others to join in with their positions. If this had happened it would have indicated that Edwards, Obama and Clinton were actually closer to one another than say, Kucinich or Gravel were on many issues.

Maybe some of these sleazeballs might think twice about servicing Lord Fauntleroy for his remaining 14 months.

Too bad he didn’t think of that in August before they rushed through the ludicrous FISA bill.

So why was Mukasey confirmed again?

Mommybrain @ 35

It sure seems the Dems have been growing some these last few weeks. Kucinich last night taking Wolfie to task for his questions; Reid, whining or no, with the recess thing, DiFi. I’m sure someone can find more. What’s the best Rogaine for balls? Phone calls!

lhp, or any other lawyer, is there anything to be made of something John Dean raises in his recent book: The legal wacky opinions they have used in court over the years to bolster their positions turn out to have been written and placed in (non-peer reviewed) Law Reviews by their minions specifically for the purpose of bolstering their positions in court.

Is there anything to be done about this? Is it all down the rabbit hole now? This just struck me as a key piece of information as to how they have turned everything upside-down.

In the end, the job of the blogosphere (since the MSM won’t do it) will be to expose such “Law Reviews” so that their citation value becmes nil.

In the DOJ Motion (to take away NYS’s right to pick its own voting machines) that I blogged about last week, I was struck by the crazy things the AUSA was citing as “evidence”. He was using position papers by advocacy groups–clearly opinion testimony with no foundation that the opinion giver qualifes as an expert.

So, the “evidence” he was relying on for his motion was mostly inadmissable. I expect the judge to exclude it. The AUSA in question really doesn’t seem to have his heart in what he is doing, and I suspect is the victim of some serious arm twisting from above. He is reported by others who have been in court with him to be a much better lawyer than his performance in this case would indicate.

My point is, some things have more value as citations than others. If there are crappy “law reviews” in sheeps clothing out there, that needs to be made VERY public, so that judges and their law clerks will know which ones they are

If Loosehead is still out there, IANAL but am a historian who has well-tried and road tested sleuthing skills in the bibliographic and credential areas. So if I can help, let me know. I check in to Late-nite early every morning: leave me a message there.

Kucinich gets it right the first time (sometimes at least).
WHERE’s the Cheney impeachment in committee?
What’s next!
TGIF!

raven @ 32

Wonder if there was any delay in the broadcast?

Perhaps. But, once again, as I added to my post, what would she have had to lose?

Nothing. But she may have frozen, or not wanted to rock the boat–or maybe she was just too nervous and disconcerted to think of it.

EvilDrPuma @ 107

Must you forno-cate in public?

Way to give him a pizza your mind, EDP.

I remember the cat Dr. from smirkingchimp.com part the first. Howdy doodily, neighbor!

Now this is what we elected you to do, Harry!