oh gosh, look at that.

[billy]

Bottom line is: If the guy"

That's your case........ "If the guy."

Have fun walking into a court with that kind of evidence.

You don't even know what a case is -- any more than you know what a judge's job is.
I've stated that if he had the same holdings on June 22 as in '08, he should have recused (and, fyi, so should any judge in that position); that his office directed people to that '08 report; and that his delay in releasing the '09 report is mystifying and very unsmart. I didn't base answers re: ethics and recusal on my "feelings" or personal worldview: I cited the boring-but-mandatory U.S. Code and the Code of Judicial Ethics. (Sorry if you don't like them.)

You've been spinning a "case" out of this by presuming what's in a yet-unseen '09 report (which I haven't presumed); presuming that he tried to protect his district and praising him for it, w/o realizing that this would violate judicial ethics; ranting about disclosure in other fed branches (and clearly not understanding why the United States views its judiciary as special); trying to blow off judicial-ethics laws; and emoting like mad while claiming that questioning this issue = some sort of partisan conspiracy.

It's very clearly a partisan attack and I haven't been "spinning" any case. I'm responding to people that are "spinning" a case out of outdated assumptive information hoping to have the judges ruling struck down. It may come out that he has holdings. If that's the case, I'm in your camp. I haven't seen evidence that shows that to be true as of yet and until that time, I give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

None of this would even be an issue if Obama wouldn't have blown up the rig.

[Observateur]

If Feldman held financial interests in any of companies involved in the lawsuit or the Deepwater Horizon rig, he would not have been allowed the take the case. The 5th District Court uses a sophisticated computer system to check whether judges have a conflict of interest in any legal proceeding.

Louisiana has a fifth state supreme court district.
It has the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
It has U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Western and Middle districts of Louisiana (and Feldman is on the Eastern District bench).
It has several U.S. bankruptcy courts.
It does not have a "5th District" federal court -- and U.S. district courts are designated by state name and region (Eastern, Western, Southern, Northern, Middle), not by some district number.

[billy]

If Feldman held financial interests in any of companies involved in the lawsuit or the Deepwater Horizon rig, he would not have been allowed the take the case. The 5th District Court uses a sophisticated computer system to check whether judges have a conflict of interest in any legal proceeding.

Louisiana has a fifth state supreme court district.
It has the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
It has U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Western and Middle districts of Louisiana (and Feldman is on the Eastern District bench).
It has several U.S. bankruptcy courts.
It does not have a "5th District" federal court -- and U.S. district courts are designated by state name and region (Eastern, Western, Southern, Northern, Middle), not by some district number.

Terrific. Plead your case to the author of the article. Who knows, maybe they don't even have judges down there and it's all been a ruse.

[Observateur]

It's very clearly a partisan attack and I haven't been "spinning" any case. I'm responding to people that are "spinning" a case out of outdated assumptive information hoping to have the judges ruling struck down. It may come out that he has holdings. If that's the case, I'm in your camp. I haven't seen evidence that shows that to be true as of yet and until that time, I give the guy the benefit of the doubt.

Spinning = inexplicably dragging nonjudicial officials into it, deciding that longstanding judiciary rules are useless or suspect, stating that the media has lockjaw (while ignoring Feldman's lockjaw re: an unavailable report, and the fact that he unwisely submitted the thing weeks late, after accepting and trying the case), and blathering on and on v. anyone who thinks otherwise.
And phrasewise, "outdated assumptive information" has got to be your low point of the day.

[Observateur]

Terrific. Plead your case to the author of the article. Who knows, maybe they don't even have judges down there and it's all been a ruse.

The author is a radio talk-show host.
There are plenty of judges -- but don't look for federal ones in any "5th District" court.

[billy]

observateur wrote And phrasewise, "outdated assumptive information" has got to be your low point of the day.

Well if that's my low point I'll certainly sleep well tonight, but I'll have to nominate..........

observateur wrote blathering steam-of-consciousness feelings

......as being one of yours.

But.........

observateur wrote The author is a radio talk-show host.
There are plenty of judges -- but don't look for federal ones in any "5th District" court.

....how exactly does that change the dynamic?

[the ghost of dave]

dude, stop playing dumb... it's not becoming of you.

[northridger]

Billy, you said "His decision was based in logic devoid of political bias".

How on earth do you know that?

Perhaps this will be of some help......

http://www.laed.uscourts.gov/GENERAL/No ... _doc67.pdf

You mean the decision which starts with:

"2The all-too-familiar tragic facts include the senseless deaths of eleven crew members, the horrible losses of their families and loved ones, many injured workers, a broken pipe on the sea floor that continues to spew endless gushes of crude oil into the Gulf, and oil muck that has spread across thousands of square miles and persists in damaging sensitive coastlines, wildlife, and the intertwined local economies. As a result, nearly one-third of the Gulf of Mexico has been closed to commercial and recreational fishing."

and quotes the chairman saying:

"I find at this time and under current conditions that offshore drilling of new deepwater wells poses an unacceptable threat of serious and irreparable harm to wildlife and the marine, coastal, and human environment as that is specified in 30 C.F.R. 250.172(b). I also have determined that the installation of additional safety or environmental protection equipment is necessary to prevent injury or loss of life and damage to property and the environment.30 C.F.R. 250.172(b).
Therefore, I am directing a six-month suspension of all pending, current, or approved offshore drilling operations of new deepwater wells in the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific regions."

The judge then proceeds to throw these statements and others out the window. He then effectively pretends he knows more about underwater drilling and the dangers and procedures therein than real experts do.