HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Journalistic impartiality... » Reply #22

Reply #22


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #15)

Tue Jun 18, 2013, 06:14 PM

22. Yes, I thought it was that same old case. What a stellar record Greenwald

has as an attorney if this minor disagreement on RULES in NY V rules in other states is all they can come up. I know lawyers who would die to have only this one minor disagreement with a judge on their record.

As a student for Court Stenography, I saw attorneys, good ones, run out of courtrooms by judges on a regular basis.

This is pathetic, really. A total deception which has been debunked each time s/he reposts it hoping for a different result.

The case was simple. Greenwald was in NY where taping of witnesses was legal. Those rules are different in different states which was aknowledged by the court to MAKE SURE THAT NO ONE would misinterpret what is a standard misunderstanding in court, as anything other than that. And to see someone right here on DU, despite being told over and over again that they are misrepresentating what happened, repeatedly attempt to do exactly what the court did not want, slime Greenwald.

Here is what the court said. They being in a different state decided to apply the rules of THAT state, so Greenwald lost his argument, despite being within the rules in NY:


As the magistrate judge noted, although ultimately unsuccessful, defendants' arguments were reasonable. Defense counsel could have reasonably believed that his conduct was permissible. Although we find that his conduct did violate the rules, our rejection of his position does not equate to an indictment as an unethical person.


Weak and despicable attempt to attack the messenger when unable to attack the message. And so very old now. Debunked, filed away by anyone who does not wish to continue to embarrass themselves.

So sick of it.

Thank you for the links Luminous Animal. We probably should keep them handy as this will be produced again.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 55 replies Author Time Post
mimi85 Jun 2013 OP
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #1
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #7
magellan Jun 2013 #9
malaise Jun 2013 #10
Whisp Jun 2013 #11
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #13
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #14
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #18
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #19
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #24
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #25
grasswire Jun 2013 #27
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #28
grasswire Jun 2013 #29
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #30
JaneyVee Jun 2013 #31
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #39
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #44
OilemFirchen Jun 2013 #38
mimi85 Jun 2013 #2
Catherina Jun 2013 #3
randome Jun 2013 #4
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #8
KoKo Jun 2013 #37
Monkie Jun 2013 #5
KoKo Jun 2013 #36
msanthrope Jun 2013 #6
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #12
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #15
LineLineLineLineReply Yes, I thought it was that same old case. What a stellar record Greenwald
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #22
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #26
msanthrope Jun 2013 #32
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #16
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #17
sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #23
msanthrope Jun 2013 #33
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #34
msanthrope Jun 2013 #35
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #42
msanthrope Jun 2013 #45
msanthrope Jun 2013 #40
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #43
msanthrope Jun 2013 #46
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #47
msanthrope Jun 2013 #48
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #49
msanthrope Jun 2013 #50
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #51
msanthrope Jun 2013 #52
Luminous Animal Jun 2013 #53
msanthrope Jun 2013 #54
Rex Jun 2013 #20
treestar Jun 2013 #21
Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #41
flamingdem Jul 2013 #55
Please login to view edit histories.