Hang 10... or as they now say...hit the lip!

2nd Light Forums
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Senator Kamala vs. Trump's Attorney Barr
Topic Summary:
Created On: 05/01/2019 01:01 PM
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
<< 1 2 Previous Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 05/02/2019 10:01 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


HAPDigital

Posts: 7048
Joined Forum: 11/29/2004

Originally posted by: johnnyboy

http://www.americanbar.org/gro...nt_on_rule_3_7/



"Combining the roles of advocate and witness can prejudice the tribunal and the opposing party and can also involve a conflict of interest between the lawyer and client."



Don't pretend you didn't know this Tpap. This rule encompasses every area and every new lawyer learns it while every old lawyer gets reminded of it.


LOL he is not pretending. He does not know law, I guarantee it.
 05/02/2019 10:03 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Fish Killer

Posts: 42655
Joined Forum: 10/09/2005

Originally posted by: HAPDigital

Originally posted by: tpapablo



Originally posted by: RustyTruck



Wow, that's particularly foul, even for you. I'm no fan of Kamala "the cop" Harris, but sheesh.




All true. But, I know that truth telling is considered foul when it goes against a prog narrative.



He admitted he had never even reviewed the underlying evidence of the Mueller report, ... This is unacceptable.






Yeah, I can see how this would look for a prog perspective. The problem here is that when you have had no jobs above a busboy level, you wouldn't know how things work at these levels. So, I will inform you. When you get up in an organization, you have your subordinates gather evidence, complete reports and summaries and make recommendations and the like. For example, doubt that Zuckerberg reviews every single one of the millions of pages that goes into Facebook's quarterly financial report. Instead, he relies on the accuracy of the reports furnished by his CFO, who in turn relies on the work of people lower on the totem pole. Same with an attorney general. As there are thousands of investigations, prosecutions and other crap going on at any given time in the Justice Dept., he couldn't possibly review all of the underlying evidence. Moreover, in this case, that would have taken Barr months, if not years to do. And what would progs be doing during those months or years? That's right, they'd be screaming their fool heads off over Barr delaying the release of the findings. Even a busboy would know that, Pagerow. In any case, you have been educated and have no further excuse for ignorance on these things.




LOL you're an idiot. Making shit up as you go.


Actually thats EXACTLY how it works.

Idiot!



-------------------------
 05/02/2019 10:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


wtf

Posts: 3402
Joined Forum: 11/23/2005

Originally posted by: tpapablo
All true. But, I know that truth telling is considered foul when it goes against a trump/con narrative.

Fixed for accuracy


-------------------------
trump - putting the 'con' in conservative
 05/02/2019 11:14 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


HAPDigital

Posts: 7048
Joined Forum: 11/29/2004

Originally posted by: HAPDigital

Originally posted by: tpapablo



Originally posted by: RustyTruck



Wow, that's particularly foul, even for you. I'm no fan of Kamala "the cop" Harris, but sheesh.




All true. But, I know that truth telling is considered foul when it goes against a prog narrative.



He admitted he had never even reviewed the underlying evidence of the Mueller report, ... This is unacceptable.






Yeah, I can see how this would look for a prog perspective. The problem here is that when you have had no jobs above a busboy level, you wouldn't know how things work at these levels. So, I will inform you. When you get up in an organization, you have your subordinates gather evidence, complete reports and summaries and make recommendations and the like. For example, doubt that Zuckerberg reviews every single one of the millions of pages that goes into Facebook's quarterly financial report. Instead, he relies on the accuracy of the reports furnished by his CFO, who in turn relies on the work of people lower on the totem pole. Same with an attorney general. As there are thousands of investigations, prosecutions and other crap going on at any given time in the Justice Dept., he couldn't possibly review all of the underlying evidence. Moreover, in this case, that would have taken Barr months, if not years to do. And what would progs be doing during those months or years? That's right, they'd be screaming their fool heads off over Barr delaying the release of the findings. Even a busboy would know that, Pagerow. In any case, you have been educated and have no further excuse for ignorance on these things.




LOL you're an idiot. Making shit up as you go. I read the entire Mueller report (redacted) over a day or two, could have read it in a day. Top it off this is the most pressing topic in the USA as far as democracy goes. So cut the crap. It was his duty to be completely informed before making decisions.


 05/02/2019 11:18 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 29998
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: johnnyboy http://www.americanbar.org/gro...comment_on_rule_3_7/ "Combining the roles of advocate and witness can prejudice the tribunal and the opposing party and can also involve a conflict of interest between the lawyer and client." Don't pretend you didn't know this Tpap. This rule encompasses every area and every new lawyer learns it while every old lawyer gets reminded of it.
I am aware of that one. But that typically applies to trials. I was referring to Justice Dept. rules on conflicts.

-------------------------
I :heart; Putin

 05/02/2019 12:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Fish Killer

Posts: 42655
Joined Forum: 10/09/2005

Originally posted by: HAPDigital

Originally posted by: HAPDigital



Originally posted by: tpapablo







Originally posted by: RustyTruck







Wow, that's particularly foul, even for you. I'm no fan of Kamala "the cop" Harris, but sheesh.








All true. But, I know that truth telling is considered foul when it goes against a prog narrative.







He admitted he had never even reviewed the underlying evidence of the Mueller report, ... This is unacceptable.












Yeah, I can see how this would look for a prog perspective. The problem here is that when you have had no jobs above a busboy level, you wouldn't know how things work at these levels. So, I will inform you. When you get up in an organization, you have your subordinates gather evidence, complete reports and summaries and make recommendations and the like. For example, doubt that Zuckerberg reviews every single one of the millions of pages that goes into Facebook's quarterly financial report. Instead, he relies on the accuracy of the reports furnished by his CFO, who in turn relies on the work of people lower on the totem pole. Same with an attorney general. As there are thousands of investigations, prosecutions and other crap going on at any given time in the Justice Dept., he couldn't possibly review all of the underlying evidence. Moreover, in this case, that would have taken Barr months, if not years to do. And what would progs be doing during those months or years? That's right, they'd be screaming their fool heads off over Barr delaying the release of the findings. Even a busboy would know that, Pagerow. In any case, you have been educated and have no further excuse for ignorance on these things.








LOL you're an idiot. Making shit up as you go. I read the entire Mueller report (redacted) over a day or two, could have read it in a day. Top it off this is the most pressing topic in the USA as far as democracy goes. So cut the crap. It was his duty to be completely informed before making decisions.


Yo...twit...that's Mueller's report....not ALL of the details with names and private info with all of the details and ALL of the underlying evidence.

What Feinstein asked was did Barr read ALL of the details...not just the report!

-------------------------


Edited: 05/02/2019 at 12:27 PM by Fish Killer
 05/02/2019 03:33 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 13894
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

That's the ABA. It's the same for our state bar too. Apparently the only bar that doesn't recognize it is trump's Barr.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

Statistics
145922 users are registered to the 2nd Light Forums forum.
There are currently 7 users logged in to the forum.

FuseTalk Basic Edition - © 1999-2019 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

Hey Matt B ... How the hell o are you ??? :)