"brutus" <brutus@thebrute.com> wrote

| "In 1990, when Alito was seeking US Senate approval for his
| nomination to be a circuit judge, he said in written answers to
| a questionnaire that he would disqualify himself from ''any cases
| involving the Vanguard companies.'

So Alito himself -- all on his own -- identified the conflict of
interest long before he heard this woman's case. So why didn't
he recurse himself from a KNOWN conflict?

| Among other things, Globe reporters Sarah Schweitzer and
| Michael Kranish revealed that court records show that Alito
| later complained about an effort to remove him from the case

So when the man became a federal judge he said he wasn't
qualified to hear any cases involving Vanguard, and then he
actually complains when someone wants him removed from
a case involving Vanguard!

Your opinion is pretty much worthless, so thanks for nothing.

It was *His* opinion back in 1990! Your man, your butt buddy
said he wasn't qualified to judge cases involving Vanguard, but
he did just that! And then the corrupt ***** had the nerve to
complain when he was asked to recurse himself, exactly like
he said he would!

The idiot isn't fit to flip burgers.

in article QuMaf.5622$Rl1.1249@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net, brutus at
brutus@thebrute.com wrote on 11/4/05 12:02 PM:

"JTEM" <gymraven@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:BuydnZksxNZl2vbeRVn-iQ@comcast.com...

"brutus" <brutus@thebrute.com> wrote

But apparently you didn't even read your own fucking cite...

I did. Here is the pertinant part:

"
ALITO, Circuit Judge , dissenting:
In Fuentes v. Perskie , 32 F.3d 759 (3d Cir. 1994), we laid out
the evidentiary requirements a plaintiff has to satisfy in order to
survive a motion for summary judgment in a "pretext" employment
discrimination case under Title VII. We held that where the
employer has proffered a legitimate reason for its employment
action, the plaintiff must submit evidence that either :

Two problems with this. The first & most obvious is that this decision
was made IGNORING facts that had been established (as demonstrated
in my previous quote). Secondly, he over stepped his bounds... in a big
way. He's deciding the case, when in fact that is left to a jury. He's
saying
that -- based on his ignoring of facts -- he's satisfied that there was
no
discrimination. But it's a jury who decides that, as the appeals court
stated when they over-turned his decision.

So your very own "Cite" establishes that this guy is a bad judge.

Interesting, but aother example of Alito's incompetence/corruption
just surfaced in the Boston globe:

http://tinyurl.com/9ubpu

The people they interview for the story are obvious biased (Alito
did rule against them), but the issue is clear. Alito REFUSED to
recurse himself even when the case presented a clear conflict of
interest, and even though he himself had previously identified that
conflict of interest!

| "In 1990, when Alito was seeking US Senate approval for his
| nomination to be a circuit judge, he said in written answers to
| a questionnaire that he would disqualify himself from ''any cases
| involving the Vanguard companies.'

So Alito himself -- all on his own -- identified the conflict of
interest long before he heard this woman's case. So why didn't
he recurse himself from a KNOWN conflict?

| Among other things, Globe reporters Sarah Schweitzer and
| Michael Kranish revealed that court records show that Alito
| later complained about an effort to remove him from the case

So when the man became a federal judge he said he wasn't
qualified to hear any cases involving Vanguard, and then he
actually complains when someone wants him removed from
a case involving Vanguard!

Your opinion is pretty much worthless, so thanks for nothing.

Something you do all the time, to the people to which you bow and
scrape.


Paul