The Last Lighthouse wallpaper

Last Lighthouse wallpaper

H/T to the Sideshow for this article, Conflicts of interest in Bush v. Gore: Did some justices vote illegally?

If the media reports concerning Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices O’Connor, Scalia and Thomas are factually accurate, one would wonder whether statutory and constitutional recusal requirements were violated by one or more justices who formed the 5-to-4 majority in Bush v. Gore. This article explores the extent to which that might have happened. Part I examines the statutory and constitutional background of the judicial conflict-of-interest requirements governing federal judges. The heart of the article inquires into whether these requirements might have been violated by Justice Thomas (Part II), Chief Justice Rehnquist (Part III), Justice Scalia (Part IV), or Justice O’Connor (Part V). Part VI examines the extent to which conclusions reached earlier in the article might be affected by the quorum requirement in the Supreme Court, by the common law rule of necessity, by the principles of harmless error applicable to recusal issues, by waiver, or by timeliness requirements.

The Sideshow would like to see some justice, as it were for the Court’s actions in Bush v. Gore. Rehnquist and O’Connor are gone. Would it be nice to see Scalia and Thomas impeached for not recusing themselves for participation in the Bush v. Gore decision. Sure, but it will not happen. While there have been several justices that Congress has tried to impeach, only Samuel Chase in 1805 was successfully impeached and he was not removed from the court after his Senate trial. The House would have to start such proceedings and at this late date seems unlikely.  Justice Scalia had two sons with close ties to the Bush 2000 campaign, that is twice the reason needed to rescue oneself from the recount case.

Sarah’s Wisdom

The Moose Stops Here

Not that McCain was innocent in these exclusionary escapades. He strenuously sought the endorsement of the Rev. John Hagee, even though Hagee had blamed gays for Hurricane Katrina, referred to the Roman Catholic Church as “the great whore,” and theorized that Hitler came about because God’s “top priority for the Jewish people is to get them to come back to the land of Israel.”

[  ]…At the risk of being so reviled, let me point out that in the marathon of Palin interviews last week, the single most revealing exchange had nothing to do with her wardrobe or the “jerks” (as she called them) around McCain. It came instead when Wolf Blitzer of CNN asked for some substance by inviting her to suggest “one or two ideas” that Republicans might have to offer. “Well, a lot of Republican governors have really good ideas for our nation,” she responded, without specifying anything except that “it’s all about free enterprise and respecting equality.”

I rememeber reading so many posts by right-wing sites early in the election cycle – much it concern trolling where they tried to sell the casual passerby on Senator Clinton being the better choice for Democrats etc and so forth, and by the way Senator Obama, former Harvard law Review editor and professor of Constitutional law – was gasp, just an empty suit. These same sites and their pundits just love Palin, a poster child for The Empty Suit Institute of Great Insights.

Why has U.S. allowed Taliban ‘free rein’ in Pakistan? – the short answer is that the neocon’s national security expertise is just as bad as their management of the federal budget. Enter Barack Obama to clean up the mess left by the amateurs.

Epidemiologist Les Roberts knew his tally if Iraq’s civialian dead would generate debate

But other recent findings suggest that Roberts and Burnham were on the right track. In the summer of 2006, the World Health Organization conducted a large family health survey along with Iraq’s Ministry of Health, interviewing about five times as many people as Roberts and Burnham had, and in a more distributed fashion. In August, Mohamed Ali, a who statistician, reported his preliminary results to colleagues at a Denver statistics conference: Nearly 397,000 Iraqis had died because of the war as of July 2006.

That number falls at the low end of Roberts and Burnham’s confidence interval, which ranges from roughly 393,000 to 943,000. But while epidemiologists and statisticians are still pondering questions raised by differences between the two surveys, there’s no longer much doubt among them that Iraq’s civilian casualties number in the hundreds of thousands.

Roberts and Burnham used the same statistical methods for Kosovo and Iraq. The Bush administartion and their tail wagging supporters said the Iraq numbers were suspicious. Odd since Bush praised Roberts and Burnham stats for Kosovo. “The death of one man is a tragedy.  The death of millions is a statistic.” Stalin, comment to Churchill at Potsdam, 1945.