Important or not important?

[Canceled2]

IMO this is desperate BS being leaked by the Obama admin!


Judge Who Nixed Drilling Ban Invests

Associated Press - June 23, 2010 9:14 AM ET

NEW ORLEANS (AP) - Financial disclosure reports show the Louisiana judge who struck down the Obama administration's six-month ban on deepwater oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico has reported extensive investments in the oil and gas industry.

He's also a new member of a secret national security court.

U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman is a 1983 appointee of President Ronald Reagan. He reported owning less than $15,000 in stock in 2008 in Transocean Ltd. -- the company that owned the sunken Deepwater Horizon drilling rig.

Feldman overturned the ban yesterday -- saying the government assumed that because one rig exploded, the others pose an imminent danger, too.

The White House promised an immediate appeal.

The Interior Department had imposed the moratorium in the wake of the BP disaster.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

if all that can be shown is he owns a little bit of stock, its not important, especially given that his ruling is sound.

 

[Bonestorm]

IMO this is desperate BS being leaked by the Obama admin!


Judge Who Nixed Drilling Ban Invests

Associated Press - June 23, 2010 9:14 AM ET

NEW ORLEANS (AP) - Financial disclosure reports show the Louisiana judge who struck down the Obama administration's six-month ban on deepwater oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico has reported extensive investments in the oil and gas industry.

He's also a new member of a secret national security court.

U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman is a 1983 appointee of President Ronald Reagan. He reported owning less than $15,000 in stock in 2008 in Transocean Ltd. -- the company that owned the sunken Deepwater Horizon drilling rig.

Feldman overturned the ban yesterday -- saying the government assumed that because one rig exploded, the others pose an imminent danger, too.

The White House promised an immediate appeal.

The Interior Department had imposed the moratorium in the wake of the BP disaster.

Judicial Watch is not part of the Obama Administration. And given the standard that applies to judge's recusing themselves for conflicts of interest, it is relevant.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

I guess the libs only believe in the judiciary when it suits them.

 

[Bonestorm]

I guess the libs only believe in the judiciary when it suits them.

I have always believed in the juidiciary (it isn't the tooth fairy) but I have never believed in the infaliability of judges.

 

[Canceled2]

Judicial Watch is not part of the Obama Administration. And given the standard that applies to judge's recusing themselves for conflicts of interest, it is relevant.

He's a federal Judge who will be called on to rule in any numbrer of cases that involve private and public entities. A judge who likely has a handsome investment portfolio spread over numerous stocks...15k hardly sounds like a substantial vested interest?

I think this was leaked in an attempt to smear him and make him appear biased...

 

[Sammy Jankis]

I have always believed in the juidiciary (it isn't the tooth fairy) but I have never believed in the infaliability of judges.

Its so sad when a president starts smearing judges though. His decision was sound. cancelling an entire industry has no rational basis. Obama knew he would lose on the merits and went personal.

His continuation of his Chicago Politics of personal destruction will be his undoing. He's ghetto all the way.

 

[Canceled2]

if all that can be shown is he owns a little bit of stock, its not important, especially given that his ruling is sound.

I agree, and yet is was leaked...

 

[Bonestorm]

Its so sad when a president starts smearing judges though. His decision was sound. cancelling an entire industry has no rational basis. Obama knew he would lose on the merits and went personal.

His continuation of his Chicago Politics of personal destruction will be his undoing. He's ghetto all the way.

No one is smearing anyone. No one leaked anything. You're just a reactionary know-nothing that immediately thinks the worst of the President because you dislike him.

Here's the financial disclosure report:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/jfd/Feldman_Martin_L_C/2008.pdf

See that url? It's from Judicial Watch. Do you know anything at all about that organization? Suffice it to say, Judicial Watch isn't exactly a friend of this administration. Go to the Judicial Watch homepage and check it out yourself.

Judicial Watch posts these financial disclosure reports on its website for pretty much all judges and the purpose of these financial disclosure reports is to determine whether a particular judge has a financial conflict of interest sufficient to warrant that judge from recusing him or herself from a particular case.

 

[DamnYankee]

Its so sad when a president starts smearing judges though. His decision was sound. cancelling an entire industry has no rational basis. Obama knew he would lose on the merits and went personal.

His continuation of his Chicago Politics of personal destruction will be his undoing. He's ghetto all the way.

This!

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

He's a federal Judge who will be called on to rule in any numbrer of cases that involve private and public entities. A judge who likely has a handsome investment portfolio spread over numerous stocks...15k hardly sounds like a substantial vested interest?

I think this was leaked in an attempt to smear him and make him appear biased...

It wasn't 'leaked'... it is REQUIRED that the judge report his holdings. He currently has NONE in the industry in question. The fact that he once held some stock in RIG is irrelevant to his decision.

 

[Bonestorm]

And, for those interested, here is the relevant language of the federal statute dealing with when it is appropriate for a judge to recuse him or herself from a case due to a financial conflict of interest:

He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:

(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding

Given his stock holdings, it is not out of the question that the judge had a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/455.html

 

[Canceled2]

No one is smearing anyone. No one leaked anything. You're just a reactionary know-nothing that immediately thinks the worst of the President because you dislike him.

Here's the financial disclosure report:



See that url? It's from Judicial Watch. Do you know anything at all about that organization? Suffice it to say, Judicial Watch isn't exactly a friend of this administration. Go to the Judicial Watch homepage and check it out yourself.

Judicial Watch posts these financial disclosure reports on its website for pretty much all judges and the purpose of these financial disclosure reports is to determine whether a particular judge has a financial conflict of interest sufficient to warrant that judge from recusing him or herself from a particular case.

Judicial Watch did not run the AP story! The fact that such a small investment exists is not a big deal unless a person or entity is trying to make it seem that way...that was my point!

 

[Sammy Jankis]

No one is smearing anyone. No one leaked anything. You're just a reactionary know-nothing that immediately thinks the worst of the President because you dislike him.

Here's the financial disclosure report:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/jfd/Feldman_Martin_L_C/2008.pdf

See that url? It's from Judicial Watch. Do you know anything at all about that organization? Suffice it to say, Judicial Watch isn't exactly a friend of this administration. Go to the Judicial Watch homepage and check it out yourself.

Judicial Watch posts these financial disclosure reports on its website for pretty much all judges and the purpose of these financial disclosure reports is to determine whether a particular judge has a financial conflict of interest sufficient to warrant that judge from recusing him or herself from a particular case.

All these people in government own stocks. They're all corrupt. I invite going all the way down this rabbit hole. But this limited reference to truth is only serving to undo a correct decision.

 

[Topspin]

Had he owned 15 million it would be something, his holdings are immaterial. You want to see holding that conflict look at congress.

 

[Damocles]

Judicial Watch is not part of the Obama Administration. And given the standard that applies to judge's recusing themselves for conflicts of interest, it is relevant.

You do know that the Administration can actually "leak" (it isn't a "leak" to simply *cough*cough* point something out) things to organizations such as Judicial Watch, eh? It would be relevant if it would actually cripple his portfolio. I seriously doubt this minimal amount of stock holds some sort of powerful drive for him...

 

[Bonestorm]

It wasn't 'leaked'... it is REQUIRED that the judge report his holdings. He currently has NONE in the industry in question. The fact that he once held some stock in RIG is irrelevant to his decision.

Dude, he owns stock in Transocean, Hercules Offshore, ATP Oil and Gas Corp. and Parker Drilling, among other energy holdings. Check the stock values of those companies the day after the moratorium was announced as compared to the day previous and you tell me what you find.

 

[Bonestorm]

You do know that the Administration can actually "leak" things to organizations such as Judicial Watch, eh? It would be relevant if it would actually cripple his portfolio. I seriously doubt this minimal amount of stock holds some sort of powerful drive for him...

There was no leak. This information is posted on Judicial Watch for every federal judge and is readily available to anyone that wants to take a look:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-financial-disclosure

 

[tinfoil]

Its so sad when a president starts smearing judges though. His decision was sound. cancelling an entire industry has no rational basis. Obama knew he would lose on the merits and went personal.

His continuation of his Chicago Politics of personal destruction will be his undoing. He's ghetto all the way.

Don't be fooled by the Barak that you got

He's still- He's still Barry from the block

 

[Damocles]

There was no leak. This information is posted on Judicial Watch for every federal judge and is readily available to anyone that wants to take a look:

http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-financial-disclosure

Hence the quote marks around the word "leak". And again, I seriously doubt this minimal amount of stock drove him to any specific ruling. I'm sure you got it in your talking points e-mail this morning, but 15,000 worth of stock isn't a "drive" for somebody with the salary of the Judge...