| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 28 |
| Nodes: | 6 (1 / 5) |
| Uptime: | 58:46:36 |
| Calls: | 424 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,025 |
| Messages: | 90,903 |
| Posted today: | 1 |
On 5/5/2025 7:32 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 13:59:43 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 16:16:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 3:46 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 12:17:54 PM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 2:33 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 10:58:17 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 1:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On May 3, 2025 at 8:30:06 AM PDT, "moviePig"
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
You are attempting to draw a distinction with no
difference. You think that, because she's a judge,
she can disregard a legal warrant based solely on
her personal opinion of it.
Again... she allegedly believed the warrant invalid,
not as a matter of "personal opinion" but as one of
fact.
Again, her personal belief is of no more consequence
than any other random person on the street. This wasn't
occurring in her courtroom and was not within her
jurisdiction as a judge.
If some random citizen walked up to ICE agents in the
middle of an operation in their neighborhood and
demanded to see the warrant (and assuming they showed it
to humor him), his opinion that it isn't valid would
make absolutely no difference and have no relevance to
ICE's actions. They'd just say "Okay, buddy, whatever.
Now go away or you'll be arrested for obstruction and
interference."
This judge is just a random citizen with regard to a
federal ICE operation. Her status as a state court judge
gives her no special authority or jurisdiction to
declare warrants valid or invalid and have that somehow
affect what ICE is doing. They are free to completely
ignore her, just as they would that guy I described
above and if she takes further action to frustrate or
impede their operation, she goes to jail.
In this example, I'm ascribing to her "personal belief" no
more legal authority than I would to yours. The
(hypothetical) fact is that she *believed* the warrant
invalid, and acted accordingly, as you would.
Even if I thought they were operating with bad paper, I
would no more take active measures to interfere in an ICE
operation than I would litigate my case on the side of the
road with a cop during a traffic stop.
In both instances, I would recognize that issues like the
validity of warrants and whether I came to a complete stop
or not are matters for a court to decide, not for me to take
into my own hands at the scene.
But if, for whatever reason, considerable damage would be done
by a successful apprehension, you might be more stinting in
your cooperation.
Which is not what we're talking about here. This judge wasn't
asked for her cooperation and she wasn't arrested because she
refused to give it. She took proactive measures to obstruct and
interfere. That's what put her in handcuffs.
She sent them out a "side door", which wasn't illegal, per se.
Uh yeah it is.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...
Tell us what she was arrested for. You already know the answer. Your
continuing evasion of reality is humorous at best.
Wow.
Now, you
may contend that her *purpose* was obstructive, but afaics that's
not sufficient to convict her. Moreover, there's a broad
continuum of ways you might similarly contend were meant to impede
the agents. E.g., she might have dithered while answering
questions, or dropped her gavel...
It was 100% illegal.
Uh, there's a *law* that says she can't send someone out that door?
Please show sentience by citing it...> So you're saying her arrest was illegal?
No, *I'm* saying that using the side door, per se, is obviously legal.
*You're" saying it isn't ...somehow.
What weird version of reality are you living in?
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a >>>>>>>> ruling?
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her >>>>>>>>>>> disobedience would be inadvertent.
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actions always speak louder than words. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law.
...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner.
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically.
Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant.
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant. >>>>>>>>
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes >>>>> up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it.
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal
behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any >>>>> discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of >>>>> premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actions always speak louder than words. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law.
...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner.
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically.
Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant.
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes >>>>>> up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any >>>>>> discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of >>>>>> premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
You wrote that for yourself dude.
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actions always speak louder than words. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law.
...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner.
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically.
Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes
up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any >>>>>>> discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of >>>>>>> premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the
bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
You wrote that for yourself dude.
I can't make sense of that.
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner.
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically.
Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes
up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any >>>>>>>> discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of >>>>>>>> premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
You wrote that for yourself dude.
I can't make sense of that.
Of course you can't. You don't want to.
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court.
Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some. >>>>>>>>>>>
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes
up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any
discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of >>>>>>>>> premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions.
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You wrote that for yourself dude.
I can't make sense of that.
Of course you can't. You don't want to.
No, Kreskin. If I didn't "want to", I'd have ignored it...
On Thu, 8 May 2025 12:02:30 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court.
Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order.
We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes
up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any
discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of
premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
On 5/9/2025 7:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2025 12:02:30 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to >>>>>>>>>>>> disregard law.
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court.
Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order. >>>>>>>>>>
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes
up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any
discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of
premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the >>>>>>>>>> matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
Still waiting to hear what I was "wrong" about.
Remember, short and exact...
On Fri, 9 May 2025 11:40:00 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/9/2025 7:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Thu, 8 May 2025 12:02:30 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Tue, 6 May 2025 11:43:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Mon, 5 May 2025 11:22:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2025 11:21:11 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Sat, 3 May 2025 11:37:09 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.
On Fri, 2 May 2025 12:04:55 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion to
On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:30:49 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:37:37 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 30, 2025 at 8:37:27 AM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:But if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, her
On 4/29/2025 11:53 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 8:28:00 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:Well, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both
On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 7:38:55 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.
On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 29, 2025 at 1:32:51 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:
On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 12:46:04 -0400, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
wrote:...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
On 4/28/2025 7:28 AM, NoBody wrote:
Actions always speak louder than words.
And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative
warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place,
like
a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but
that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest
against
the
consent of the owner. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court
judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more
likely,
she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are
none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court.
Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said.
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to
escape
law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she
directs me
to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order. >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes
up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any
discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of
premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
Still waiting to hear what I was "wrong" about.
Remember, short and exact...
Can't answer a short and exact question I see. It goes directly to
what you are wrong about.
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/9/2025 7:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/8/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/6/2025 7:43 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/5/2025 7:33 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/4/2025 11:13 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/3/2025 9:45 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/2/2025 7:20 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 5/1/2025 7:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/30/2025 2:21 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
"moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
BTR1701 wrote:
"moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2025 11:20 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2025 10:10 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "moviePig" nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/29/2025 7:35 AM, NoBody wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoBody wrote:
What she thought may be relevant to any penalty.We do??? Do cite that claim for us won't you.She had no authority to do so and inserted her personal opinion toBut if she believed the warrant invalid then, civil or uncivil, herWell, ethical civil disobedience comes with a price. MLK and Gandhi both*If* she thought you were illegally pursued, it'd be her *duty*.Actions always speak louder than words. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>And both afford ample opportunity for (mis)interpretation.
Nothing in her actions can be interpreted as anything other than
violating the law.
...except for failing to honor a bogus warrant.
Except, as it turns out, it wasn't bogus. It was an administrative warrant,
which is perfectly sufficient for arresting someone in a public place, like a
courthouse. The judge was insisting on a judicial warrant, but that's only
necessary if making entry on private property to effect the arrest against the
consent of the owner.
So it turns out the judge was wrong, either because she's a state court judge
and doesn't have knowledge and expertise on federal law, or, more likely, she
was just fucking around and delaying things to give the illegal time to
escape.
Ironically, that increases the chance she made an honest mistake.
An honest mistake wouldn't involve sticking her beak into things that are none
of her business in the first place. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What you said is that an *accused* criminal should be locked up.Yes. 'Accused' is different from 'convicted', you see...So, this whole action was all about taking down a known "activist"...
No, it is about arresting a judge who broke the law by letting an
accused criminal loose from her court. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Which has NOTHING to do with what I said. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, he didn't. He said an accused criminal should not be helped to escape law
enforcement by a judge who is sworn to uphold the law.
As he was merely accused, any "shoulds" are all in one's biases. I.e.,
he's entitled to the same "help" as an innocent you would be.
I wouldn't be entitled to a judge running cover for me while she directs me to
a back door to evade the cops, either. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, it wouldn't.
Sure it would, if not legally then ethically. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
recognized that and did their time for breaking the law in pursuit of their
higher cause. This judge should be prepared to do the same. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
disobedience would be inadvertent.
She doesn't get to rule on the validity of the warrant. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Duh....
She didn't issue a ruling. She ignored a supposedly invalid warrant.
So...how did make the termination it was invalid if she didn't issue a
ruling?
She consulted her knowledge of the law. We all think we have some.
disregard law.
We all have the "authority" to disregard an illegal order. >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> You just made a case for her removal from the bench. She makes
up her
own law.
You make up your own conclusions.
Yes I do and I don't break a law just because I disagree with it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's amazing what you will say to attempt to justify her illegal >>>>>>>>>>>>> behavior.
What I will say is that she may have thought the warrant invalid. Any
discussion proceeds from that point, and not from your presumption of
premeditation and guilt.
What she thought was irrelevant since she had no jurisdiction in the
matter. She was properly arrested and should be removed from the >>>>>>>>>>> bench.
Amazing you're still attempting to defend her illegal actions. >>>>>>>>>>
Laughter. You just can't admit when you're wrong.
Got it.
And you can keep it.
The knowledge that you can't admit you're wrong?
Wrong about what? Keep it short and exact...
Go back to the beginning of the thread before you started wandering
around and excusing a judge breaking the law.
No, especially as it's that easy, *you* back up your claim. And
remember to Keep it short and exact.
You're so cute when you stomp your feet.
Laughter.
Let's try a simple question: do you believe any judge has a LEGAL
right to ignore a warrant and help an illegal to escape custody?
Still waiting to hear what I was "wrong" about.
Remember, short and exact...
Can't answer a short and exact question I see. It goes directly to
what you are wrong about.