Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Greenwald: CHENEY SHOULD BE IN PRISON, Not On 'Meet The Press' [View all]Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)117. Here you go (and the earliest association I can find between Greenwald and Hale)
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-02-08/news/0004010077_1_matt-hale-solicitation-world-church
The IL AG appealed to the IL Supreme Court. Greenwald defended Hale on Constitutional grounds in that venue, as well.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2001-03-22/news/0103220049_1_matt-hale-file-world-church
A Cook County Circuit Court judge today dismissed a lawsuit filed by Illinois Atty. Gen. Jim Ryan against white supremacist Matt Hale and his World Church of the Creator.
Ryan filed the suit in July, alleging that Hale's group is an unregistered charity. The civil suit contended that Hale's organization was subject to the state's Solicitation for Charity Act.
But today, Judge Julia M. Nowicki released a written ruling stating that the act is vague and unconstitutional, violating the defendants' 1st and 14th Amendment rights -- freedom of speech and due process, respectively.
.
Hale's attorney, Glenn Greenwald, said Hale is very happy with the decision, "but also very surprised that the judge was courageous enough to signify that all citizens, including Matt Hale, have the right to the same constitutional protections." Neither Hale nor his attorney, who practices in New York, was present at today's hearing at the Richard J. Daley Cente
Ryan filed the suit in July, alleging that Hale's group is an unregistered charity. The civil suit contended that Hale's organization was subject to the state's Solicitation for Charity Act.
But today, Judge Julia M. Nowicki released a written ruling stating that the act is vague and unconstitutional, violating the defendants' 1st and 14th Amendment rights -- freedom of speech and due process, respectively.
.
Hale's attorney, Glenn Greenwald, said Hale is very happy with the decision, "but also very surprised that the judge was courageous enough to signify that all citizens, including Matt Hale, have the right to the same constitutional protections." Neither Hale nor his attorney, who practices in New York, was present at today's hearing at the Richard J. Daley Cente
The IL AG appealed to the IL Supreme Court. Greenwald defended Hale on Constitutional grounds in that venue, as well.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2001-03-22/news/0103220049_1_matt-hale-file-world-church
SPRINGFIELD The Illinois attorney general's office and a white supremacist group clashed Wednesday before the Illinois Supreme Court on whether the group is a charity that must register with the state.
The World Church of the Creator, headed by Matt Hale of East Peoria, contended that the state's Solicitation for Charity Act was unconstitutionally vague--a position already upheld by a Cook County judge--and questioned whether Atty. Gen. Jim Ryan selectively enforced the law to quash the group's activities.
Hale's attorney, Glenn Greenwald of New York, argued that provisions in the law that call for patriotic, philanthropic and benevolent organizations to register as charities are ill defined. Greenwald contended that potential penalties for failing to abide by the law--such as a permanent ban on raising funds--are too severe if a group guesses wrong about how the law applies to it.
"Is it constitutional to have a law in which you don't know you have fallen afoul of it until you've been sued, and even then you have severe questions? I don't think so," Hale said after the hearing.
The World Church of the Creator, headed by Matt Hale of East Peoria, contended that the state's Solicitation for Charity Act was unconstitutionally vague--a position already upheld by a Cook County judge--and questioned whether Atty. Gen. Jim Ryan selectively enforced the law to quash the group's activities.
Hale's attorney, Glenn Greenwald of New York, argued that provisions in the law that call for patriotic, philanthropic and benevolent organizations to register as charities are ill defined. Greenwald contended that potential penalties for failing to abide by the law--such as a permanent ban on raising funds--are too severe if a group guesses wrong about how the law applies to it.
"Is it constitutional to have a law in which you don't know you have fallen afoul of it until you've been sued, and even then you have severe questions? I don't think so," Hale said after the hearing.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
189 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Since Glenn is such a fantastic lawyer, I think he should file a federal citizen's complaint
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#1
Not to mention the fact that Greenwald is now a Journalist, no longer practicing law,
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#8
But Glenn has legal experience with torture victims....when the Nazi group he was representing
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#10
So he's wrong about Cheney being a war criminal who belongs in the dock at the
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#5
No--GG is right. Cheney belongs in jail. I think GG could put him there, as his prior legal
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#13
Misanthrope, not msanthrope. I've always thought the misspelling hilarious (and revealing) nt
riderinthestorm
Dec 2014
#134
He was the civil attorney for the National Alliance and Matt Hale. He may call himself
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#69
In your view, Defense Attorneys commit crimes by defending unpopular clients?
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#80
oh lordy....look, if GG wants to voluntarily defend the money interests of Nazi's, and you want to
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#95
Check out my posts #115 and #117. Also, I think you will find this interesting.
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#120
Thank I will check out your posts. I did ask if the poster felt the same way
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#128
Here you go (and the earliest association I can find between Greenwald and Hale)
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#117
If your personal injury caseload isn't too heavy, you should give it a shot.
DisgustipatedinCA
Dec 2014
#16
I don't do PI. I do criminal defense. Unlike GG, I've never defended a torturer, and then claimed
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#18
Greenwald did not 'defend a torturer' which you have been told many times here. Why are you
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#22
So Greenwald was lying when he wrote about his pro bono work for The National Alliance?
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#25
Kindly tell us the civil liberty that was protected in the Nazi trademark case? nt
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#50
You do know there's a difference between an 'accused' in a criminal trial and a 'defendant' in a
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#60
Kindly explain to us when an accused in ANY case, Civil or Criminal, is not entitled to
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#62
Well, I can't make you read the Constitution, sabrina. But you tell me where it says in there that
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#64
And I can't make you explain why any accused has no right to a defense even though
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#76
John Adams was a criminal defense attorney, as am I. GG chose to defend the money interests of
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#79
Wait, so now you're saying that SOME clients are not entitled to a CIVIL DEFENSE?
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#81
As I noted below, you seem to be conflating civil and criminal procedure. That is unfortunate,
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#83
You know, you've been making that accusation for quite a while. It is time to back it up...
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#115
And no response to your well researched facts. Smear campaigns are no supposed to
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#142
She also had trouble addressing the facts presented in this Greenwald bashing thread a few days ago.
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#146
Hey...some of us have jobs and kids....if I take a break for a couple of hours
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#150
Todd Reardon is the appellate attorney. Greenwald was the original litigator, and in fact
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#148
You still haven't presented any evidence that Greenwald was the attorney on the copyright infringement lawsuit.
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#152
Look LA....I get that you are still upset with me over the last time you demanded
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#159
You never upset me. You amuse me. I hope all your opponents are stupid.
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#161
Okay....I thank you for proving to us all that GG helped Matt Hale's white supremacist
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#162
Thank you, it isn't the first time this particular smear has been introduced by
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#132
Some Greenwald haters are clearly not familiar with the Streisand Effect
Electric Monk
Dec 2014
#145
That is the most despicable thing about these false allegations, Marr. Greenwald has addressed
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#180
Yes, it appears the way the system works is that Republicans commit the crimes
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#167
No 'hater' here, but what are you looking for? Posts with 'Ditto' as the only cogent reply?
randome
Dec 2014
#6
Absolutely....he should be, if we lived in a just and right world. GG's had experience
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#11
So long as there are people who will try to defend the reasons why he is not in prison
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#15
No need to 'defend' anyone. Political reality takes that decision out of our hands.
randome
Dec 2014
#26
I call it the audacity of certainty. He is certain that he knows what the political reality is
rhett o rick
Dec 2014
#68
I am 'claiming' that Obama is not a monster. He is not out to destroy our way of life.
randome
Dec 2014
#113
We have laws in this country. If someone isn't up to allowing justice to take its
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#123
Absolutely not--Cheney should be in jail. It's just that some of recall the time GG
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#19
Really? We aren't talking about criminal defense, where a lawyer is called on by the Constitution
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#35
GG didn't defend any liberties. Otherwise, you would be able to state what he defended. nt
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#58
He chose to defend the money interest of Nazis. He gets to live with the criticism.
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#65
Again, you seem to have a problem naming the civil liberty GG defended in behalf of the Nazis in
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#67
I've answered all your questions--you won't answer one of mine? What civil liberty was GG defending
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#74
Are you saying GG was a court appointed lawyer? You seem to be conflating criminal and civil
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#82
So he did nothing wrong, in fact he had the courage to uphold the Constitutional Rights
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#84
Oh--I think it's very wrong to defend the money interests of Nazis. For example, I think
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#86
Iow, you do not believe in the work of the ACLU or any other Civil Liberties
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#135
I won't climb in the mud with you on this, sorry-- but since I'm back for a post, I might
Marr
Dec 2014
#88
Obviously self-hating and a Nazi lover. Probably abuses all those rescue dogs, too.
deurbano
Dec 2014
#151
It is despicable, isn't it? I know that Greenwald's Right Wing enemies, and he has
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#103
Cheney should be in jail and I support Obama. Sorry to disappoint your "crickets"
great white snark
Dec 2014
#23
How about "Anyone who defends murderers should not talk publicly about murderers." ?
randome
Dec 2014
#27
Wait! Did you really say that with a straight face? Let's see, you are a defense attorney
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#45
Conservatives hate us until they need to stay out of jail. Then they love us. nt
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#75
So, have you kept any undesirables out of jail? You are attacking a defense attorney
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#126
Um...Greenwald has never been a criminal defense attorney. He's a litigator. nt
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#149
I represent the liberty interests of the dregs of humanity. I 've never stooped to working on Wall
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#168
Are you saying that only the indigent bad guys (that would be those who have
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#127
Yes, and it's shameful imo, that any democrat would try to push this unconstitutional
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#143
So since you are an Obama supporter you support his policy toward torturers?
truebluegreen
Dec 2014
#125
Greenwald is of course correct, and his detractors will of course criticize him and not Cheney
Bluenorthwest
Dec 2014
#20
Of course GG is correct. He's also, at the same time, a hypocrite. He had no problem being the
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#29
You seem to have missed my point. People who have sat by while or taken part in political criticism
Bluenorthwest
Dec 2014
#122
Yes, I do remember that smear campaign revelation. I was following Greenwald on Salon back then.
deurbano
Dec 2014
#102
I think it is. But I think reality--and the limits of practicality--intrude. I think blaming
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#42
True--which is why the Executive Order on Torture was deafening. Which is why the Executive Order
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#48
And yet, "looking forward" does not uphold the law with regard to Cheney & Co.
polichick
Dec 2014
#53
We're either a "nation of laws" or we're not - if we're not, politicians should stfu...
polichick
Dec 2014
#72
Only for as long as there are enablers of the criminals, and/or messenger attackers.
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#101
Political reality will always trump the law. What a disgusting statement.
DisgustipatedinCA
Dec 2014
#155
I've been disappointed since inauguration day that Cheney wasn't handcuffed to his wheelchair and
tclambert
Dec 2014
#41
Jeez, I'd forgotten that. He showed up in a wheelchair so he wouldn't have to stand & show respect.
Demit
Dec 2014
#56
He needed the wheelchair. He still had the DC Press Corp shoved so far up his ass he couldn't walk.
msanthrope
Dec 2014
#92
The power lies with the Deep State and they like Cheney. Presidents do what they can
rhett o rick
Dec 2014
#73
You're wrong, anyone who said what Greenwald said would have elicited the same
sabrina 1
Dec 2014
#163
100% true. and he had no remorse whatsoever...doubled down...would do it again.
spanone
Dec 2014
#107
My prediction is Cheney will serve time in prison around the time that Putin or
cstanleytech
Dec 2014
#108
DC is deeply corrupted. They're not going to prosecute their own. Ain't gonna happen!
blkmusclmachine
Dec 2014
#114
yep, but you can likely find a GG hater who'll attack him and his prior cases
stupidicus
Dec 2014
#136
One day a mad urologist is going to see that cancer and remove him, just out of reflex. n/t
jtuck004
Dec 2014
#175
I would agree with Greenwald if he would stop treating every fucking subject
True Blue Door
Dec 2014
#181
Who is Eric Holder's boss. The DOJ is and executive branch department.
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#184
I have never once claimed that the President prosecutes people. Either discuss what I am actually
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#187
Hey, Woo. And thank you for for doing all that you do. You've racked up an impressive amount
Luminous Animal
Dec 2014
#188