Antonin Scalia

One of the Supreme Court judges at the time owed his job to the father of one of the litigants in Bush v. Gore. That judge was Clarence Thomas. How is it possible that he could enter into the deliberations without a prior personal bias? He was appointed by George H.W. Bush, the father of litigant George W. Bush. That would never pass the “smell test” in the event he were to be sued successfully by Anita Hill if the presiding judge in that case had been appointed by a family member of Ms. Hill. How then was it OK for Mr. Thomas to weigh in on a case where one of the litigants was the son of the man who appointed him to the Court? It wasn’t OK and if there were another impartial higher court, the outcome would have been overturned probably by a unanimous decision.

Enter Antonin Scalia, the champion not of impartial law but of Mr. Antonin Scalia. Scalia, it turns out had a different family-related conflict of interest. In this instance, his son, Eugene, a budding lawyer, had been promised a job with the new administration if Mr. Bush were to be elected. It was a well-known “secret”. Mr. Justice Scalia was well aware of the pending appointment at the time of Bush v. Gore and he not surprisingly voted with the Court’s majority that overturned the Florida recount while it was being conducted. He also knew at the time that there is a federal statute that “requires a judge to recuse himself from any case in which their spouse or CHILD has an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding”. (Mr. Thomas may also have the same problem given the activities of his wife.) The outcome of the recount had implications for his son’s legal future. Sure enough, Eugene Scalia was nominated by President George W. Bush to be Solicitor of Labor in the Department of Labor, a position that could influence a range of issues relating to worker safety and other working conditions. Everyone including Congress knew that Eugene Scalia didn’t give a fig about worker safety or the laws that protected workers from harm. The confirmation hearings were confrontational as they should have been. His chances looked grim.

Eugene Scalia was finally appointed by George W. Bush using the recess appointment route that allowed him to circumvent Congress. During his term as a recess-appointed official, Mr. Scalia argued a case involving one of his former paying clients, Pacific Marine Association. It is not surprising that his former client won the case in its conflict with ILWU (the longshoreman’s union). Apparently, the affinity for conflicts of interest is congenital in the Scalia clan.

According to Source Watch, after Eugene Scalia’s recess appointment expired, President Bush fulfilled his pre-Bush v. Gore promise and appointed him as the Acting Solicitor of Labor which was yet another strategy to avoid the Congressional approval process.

Bush v. Gore was not a 7-2 decision — and indeed, Scalia could tell this is true by counting all four of the dissenting opinions in that case. Although it is true that the four dissenters divided on how the Florida recount should proceed — two believed there should be a statewide recount of all Florida voters while two others believed a narrower recount would be acceptable — not one of the Court’s four moderates agreed with Scalia that the winner of the 2000 presidential election should effectively be chosen by five most conservative members of the Supreme Court of the United States.

An edited version of Bill Pryor's photo at the badpuppy.com gay "super store" Web site.

Donald Trump

The photos appeared in 1997 on badpuppy.com, which was in its online infancy, having debuted in mid 1995. Based in Cocoa, Florida, the site has morphed into one of the largest gay porn sites on the Web.

Images obtained by Legal Schnauzer show Pryor posing completely nude, staring into the camera and sporting a noticeable erection. We see no indication that the photos were taken surreptitiously, without Pryor's knowledge. Sources say Pryor was college age when the photos were taken.

Pryor rose to national prominence in Republican circles on the basis of a staunchly conservative record, including consistent opposition to gay rights. He also has supported school prayer and the death penalty, while opposing abortion rights, making him a highly unpopular figure among liberal and progressive interest groups.

A married father of two, Pryor lives in Vestavia Hills and his federal-court duty station is in Alabama, with an office on the ninth floor of the Hugo Black Federal Courthouse in downtown Birmingham. Pryor revealed during his confirmation hearings that he and his wife, Kristan W. Pryor, rescheduled a family vacation to Disney World when they discovered the Orlando, Florida, theme park had scheduled "Gay Days" festivities at the same time as their planned visit.

Alabama law-enforcement officials became aware of the photos at badpuppy.com in 1997, not long before Governor Fob James appointed Pryor attorney general. An investigation ensued, and multiple officials familiar with that process have told Legal Schnauzer that the photos are, in fact, of the Bill Pryor who now sits on the U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Sources say the photos were taken while Pryor was a student at Northeast Louisiana University (now University of Louisiana Monroe) from 1980 to 1984.

Legal Schnauzer contacted Judge Pryor last Friday via e-mail, seeking an interview about the photographs and their possible implications for his role on the federal bench. Pryor responded as follows:

"I have nothing to say to you except that these accusations are totally false. 

Do not contact me again. 

Bill Pryor"

I replied by stating that these are not "accusations," they are photographs of an individual that multiple sources have identified as him. I further stated that I had every right, as a citizen and a journalist, to seek comment from a public official with a lifetime appointment, regarding matters of national importance. For good measure, I attached copies of the photographs. Pryor responded as follows:

"This is the last time I will respond to you. Those photos are not of me. 

Do not contact me again. 

Bill Pryor"

Bill Pryor at a badpuppy.com photo gallery.

Bill: 

This is a followup on my reporting at Legal Schnauzer.

Do you have a condition known as strabismus, which is a crossing or misalignment of the eyes? Have you ever been treated for strabismus?

Would you release copies of your medical records as it relates to any and all eye care?

Thank you,

Roger Shuler

Antonin Scalia (From motherjones.com)

Scalia is inadvertently right about one thing: It's not a "hard question" whether this case should have been resolved by the Florida Supreme Court or by the United States Supreme Court. Since the case was an issue of state law that did not present anything remotely resembling a substantial federal constitutional question, it should have been decided by the former.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia unintentionally revealed the hypocrisy of the Right’s rhetoric about “originalist” interpretations of the U.S. Constitution with his comments about how the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of “equal protection under the law” doesn’t mean equal rights for women.

“In 1868, when the 39th Congress was debating and ultimately proposing the 14th Amendment, I don't think anybody would have thought that equal protection applied to sex discrimination, or certainly not to sexual orientation,” Scalia said in a recent interview with the legal magazine California Lawyer.

“So does that mean that we've gone off in error by applying the 14th Amendment to both? Yes, yes. Sorry, to tell you that.”

However, if the “original intent” of the amendment’s drafters was so determinative – that the 14th Amendment supposedly was only meant to apply to black men at the end of slavery – it might be safe to assume that the drafters weren’t thinking about protecting a white man like George W. Bush from possibly losing an election in Florida in 2000.

Yet, the 14th Amendment was precisely what Scalia and four other partisan Republicans on the Supreme Court cited to justify shutting down the Florida recount and handing the White House to Bush, despite the fact that he lost the national popular vote and apparently would have come out on the short end of the Florida recount if all legally cast ballots were counted.

To justify their ruling, the five Republican justices cited the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection” clause in claiming that Florida’s electoral precincts had failed to apply common standards for counting votes. Then, rather than giving the state time to rectify the situation, the justices set a deadline of two hours, effectively assuring Bush’s “victory.”

In other words, Scalia and other right-wing justices operate with a situational ethic when it comes to “originalism” and “strict construction.” If their partisan and ideological interests require the abandoning of those precepts, the principles are dumped overboard.

That is what most of us would call hypocrisy or dishonesty. But Scalia, like many on the Right, operates with a curious sense of false righteousness, at least when his “principles” match up with his ideology and partisan interests.

Al Gore (From theatlantic.com)

Cibolo Creek Ranch

Who pays for a Supreme Court justice to make this kind of trip?

Not Scalia, it turns out. Poindexter told The Washington Post that Scalia was not charged for his stay, something he described as a policy for all guests at the ranch.

“I did not pay for the Justice’s trip to Cibolo Creek Ranch,” Poindexter wrote in a brief email Tuesday. “He was an invited guest, along with a friend, just like 35 others.”

Poindexter added: “The Justice was treated no differently by me, as no one was charged for activities, room and board, beverages, etc. That is a 22-year policy.’’

Houston headquarters of J.P. Poindexter and Co.

Justice Antonin Scalia was taking a free vacation at the exclusive Cibolo Creek Ranch in West Texas when he was found dead inside a guest room Saturday. The trip, the Washington Post reports, was a gift from the ranch’s owner, who just last year obtained a favorable result from the Supreme Court.

The 30,000-acre hunting ranch, located around 30 miles from the Mexican border in the West Texas town of Shafter, is also the home of owner John B. Poindexter, who owns the Houston-based manufacturing firm J.B. Poindexter and Co.

The two men already had a tenuous connection outside of the ranch. Last year, an age discrimination suit filed against the Mic Group, a subsidiary of J.B. Poindexter and Co., reached the Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case.

Poindexter, who would not identify Scalia’s friend, is a Texas native and decorated Vietnam veteran who owns Houston-based J.B. Poindexter and Co., a manufacturing firm.

The company has seven subsidiaries, with combined annual revenue of nearly $1 billion, according to information on its website. Among the items it manufacturers are delivery vans for UPS and FedEx and machine components for limousines and hearses. The company has 5,000 employees, the site said.

One of Poindexter’s companies was involved in a case that made it to the high court. Last year, the Supreme Court declined to hear a case involving an age discrimination lawsuit filed against one of these companies, court records show.

The nature of Poindexter’s relationship with Scalia remained unclear Tuesday, one of several lingering questions about his visit. It was not known whether Scalia had paid for his own ticket to fly to the ranch or if someone else picked up the tab, just as it was not immediately clear if Scalia had visited before.

It is also still not known who else was at the Texas ranch for the weekend, and unless that is revealed, there could be concerns about who could have tried to raise an issue around Scalia, said Stephen Gillers, who teaches legal and judicial ethics at the New York University School of Law. He compared it to unease that arises when judges and officials from major companies are invited to seminars or educational events that bring them together for periods of time.

Former Missouri Rep. Don Gosen (From news-sentinel.com)

The day of his fall, former state Rep. Don Gosen sat in his empty insurance office in the Wildwood Town Center and had a good cry. . . .

Starting in 2014, Gosen says, he had an affair. He betrayed his wife and three daughters. He betrayed his faith. Now he’s paying the price. Gosen blames only himself for his bad behavior. On Thursday, Gosen said that on the advice of his attorney, he wouldn’t publicly outline the events that led to his resignation.

Two sources with knowledge of Gosen’s actions, including one whom the former state representative confided to before he resigned, say the downfall started with an event outside the Capitol in 2014.

Gosen met the woman, who is from southeastern Missouri, and they hit it off. She is not a Capitol employee and hasn’t ever worked there. At some point, the sources say, the relationship became sexual. Gosen, following the path made famous by former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner and to a lesser extent former Missouri Speaker of the House John Diehl, sent the woman at least one text that included a photo of a sexual nature. The Post-Dispatch has obtained one of these texts. The couple also made a video of some sort, the sources confirmed.

Gosen lied to the woman, sources say, about many things, including his ultimate intentions, and that led to a bad breakup. It’s unclear when that breakup took place.

It’s the sexts and video — or at least the rumor of their existence — that led to his rapid fall from grace. Those rumors made their way to Speaker of the House Todd Richardson on Monday. He called Gosen into his office and asked for his resignation.

Gosen said he had already made that decision, after telling his wife and daughters what had happened.

Additional details of Gosen's wandering libido can be found in a newsletter published today from former reporter/cop/ John Hoffmann. Citing several anonymous sources, Hoffmann claims that Gosen has juggled "multiple girlfriends" since he joined the legislature in 2010, and that one of those girlfriends was an unnamed "elected state representative."

The story begins to unfold, that Gosen, 53, who lives in Ballwin on Clayton Road west of Kehrs Mill Road has multiple girlfriends. He is married and has been married for some time. He has been a State Farm Insurance agent for a long time with an office on Taylor Road in Wildwood. He was elected to the 101st District of Missouri House of Representatives in 2010. He apparently quickly joined the Jefferson City Legislature fraternity party club.

We were also told by two independent sources that there was a video of Gosen having sex inside the capital.

Antonin Scalia (From crooksandliars.com)

“I’m not saying you shouldn’t have the right to an abortion,” said Scalia, who has previously spoken out against Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case that established a woman’s right to an abortion. “But don’t tell me the American people demand that you have it and wrote it in the Constitution, because that’s not true.

A "pretext" or "pretextual" stop is a stop in which the officer detains the citizen for a minor crime (i.e. traffic offense) because the officer actually suspects the person of involvement in another, more significant crime (i.e. drug possession).

Whren, which involved an officer who stopped a vehicle, on the surface, for a traffic violation--but the real reason for the stop was suspicion of illegal drug activity. In fact, a search subsequent to the traffic stop turned up crack cocaine, and SCOTUS found the pretext stop was legal because it's real purpose was to seek information about a suspected crime, the illegal distribution of drugs.

We think these cases foreclose any argument that the constitutional reasonableness of traffic stops depends on the actual motivations of the individual officers involved. We of course agree with petitioners that the Constitution prohibits selective enforcement of the law based on considerations such as race. But the constitutional basis for objecting to intentionally discriminatory application of laws is the Equal Protection Clause, not the Fourth Amendment. Subjective intentions play no role in ordinary, probable-cause Fourth Amendment analysis.

Donald Trump (From businessinsider.com)

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Bill Pryor, at badpuppy.com

U.S. Judge Bill Pryor (From nbcnews.com

Members of the International Order of St. Hubertus (From theblaze.com)

Poindexter has previously said Scalia traveled to the ranch with a friend but declined to name the companion. Dominguez's report identifies him as Allen Foster.

The report provides no details on Foster's background, but C. Allen Foster is a Washington, D.C., lawyer who has previously represented clients in cases before the Supreme Court. When contacted Wednesday at his law firm, a secretary said he was traveling out of the country and unavailable until his return on Thursday. He did not respond to an email seeking comment.

C. Allen Foster

According to his firm's website, Foster has served as special litigation counsel to the Republican Party.

Planes owned by Wallace “Happy” Rogers III and the company of A.J. Lewis III left from San Antonio and arrived at the ranch just after noon Feb. 12. The planes departed the ranch about 30 minutes apart Feb. 14, according to flight records provided to The Post by FlightAware.

Rogers owns the Buckhorn Saloon and Museum in San Antonio. He has donated $65,000 to Republican candidates since 2008. Lewis is the owner of a restaurant supplier company, also based in San Antonio. He has given $3,500 to GOP candidates since 2007.

Rogers and Lewis have both served as prior officers in the Texas chapter of the International Order of St. Hubertus, according to Texas business records. Rogers spoke to a Post reporter briefly on the phone and confirmed that he was at the ranch the weekend of Scalia’s death. He declined to comment further.

Lewis did not respond to several attempts for comment.

Robert McDonnell

For some Supreme Court watchers, the death of Justice Antonin Scalia equated to bad news for the future of former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell, whose final appeal now rests with the high court. With only eight justices on the court, the thinking went, a conservative-liberal bloc deadlock of 4 to 4 would affirm McDonnell’s 2014 conviction and send him to prison while leaving the definition of “public corruption” fairly broad.

But that’s far from the only possibility, a number of court experts said this week. Most of the other options mean either a delay or even vindication for McDonnell (R), who has always argued that his actions after accepting loans, vacations and gifts from a Richmond businessman did not constitute “official acts” subject to criminal prosecution.

Two U.S. state governors have recently been convicted of taking bribes: Alabama’s Don Siegelman and Virginia’s Bob McDonnell. Siegelman has been in prison for over four years though he was targeted by politically motivated prosecutors and was never accused of any personal gain. McDonnell was bribed with a Rolex watch, plane tickets, dinners, trips, loans, catering, golf bags, and i-phones, and, according to his successful prosecutors took official actions in his capacity as governor to benefit the person bribing him within minutes of receiving various loot. The U.S. Supreme Court has kept McDonnell and his wife (also convicted) out of prison as it considers his case. A bipartisan collection of 113 current and former state Attorneys General urged the Supreme Court to correct the injustice to Siegelman, and it declined to consider it.

The U.S. Supreme Court was uninterested in a bribery case like Siegelman’s that involved no bribery. What’s frightening is its interest in a case like McDonnell’s. His lawyers will argue that while he and his wife clearly benefited, he didn’t know everything his wife had promised in return for the bribes, nor did he agree to it, nor did he deliver on it. There is clearly the potential that the new standard in U.S. politics going forward will be that you can give luxury toys and personal bribes directly to an office holder, as long as he or she fails to deliver the public policy you asked for, or as long as he or she doesn’t try very hard to deliver it.

Such a standard would open the door to direct bribery of politicians in a new way not achieved by Citizens United and related rulings that facilitate bribery through campaigns and PACs and foundations. As long as the two parties are discreet, who will be able to prove that the favor your politician did your corporation was actually in response to the Mercedes you gave him?

Issue: Whether “official action” under the controlling fraud statutes is limited to exercising actual governmental power, threatening to exercise such power, or pressuring others to exercise such power, and whether the jury must be so instructed; or, if not so limited, whether the Hobbs Act and honest-services fraud statute are unconstitutional.

Mr. McDonnell, a Republican, was prosecuted on charges that he had used his office to help a businessman, Jonnie R. Williams Sr., who had showered the governor and his wife with luxury products, loans and vacations. The gifts themselves were legal, and the question in the case was whether they were part of a corrupt bargain in which Mr. McDonnell reciprocated by using the power of his office to help Mr. Williams.

Mr. McDonnell arranged meetings for and attended events with his benefactor. But Mr. Williams, whose company made a diet supplement, met with no real success in obtaining support for his product from the state. A jury found that Mr. McDonnell’s actions amounted to corruption, and a federal appeals court upheld the conviction. . . .

In urging the Supreme Court to hear his appeal, Mr. McDonnell’s lawyers said he had done no more than extend “routine political courtesies” to Mr. Williams. “This is the first time in our history that a public official has been convicted of corruption despite never agreeing to put a thumb on the scales of any government decision,” the brief said.

Don Siegelman

If you imagine the Supreme Court's interest is in correcting injustice, as opposed to expanding the legalization of bribery, have another look at the Don Siegelman case. Siegelman was by far the most successful Democratic politician in an overwhelmingly Republican government in Alabama. When he won reelection as governor in 2002, the election result was reversed after Republican officials in a single county waited until the Democratic officials had gone home, then recounted the votes and determined that there had been an error. Despite Democrats' objections of impropriety and pointing out that the voters whose votes were switched away from Siegelman didn't -- as one would have expected -- have their votes similarly "corrected" in other races, the Republican Attorney General of Alabama upheld the result and forbid any manual recount to verify it.

Republican lawyer Jill Simpson describes "a five-year secret campaign to ruin the governor," during which Karl Rove, President George W. Bush's senior political advisor, asked her to "try to catch Siegelman cheating on his wife." Rove associate Bill Canary, she says, told her that his wife Leura and friend Alice Martin, both federal prosecutors, would "take care of" Siegelman. When Siegelman began running to win his office back two years after losing it, the U.S. Justice Department took him to trial alleging a Medicaid scam, but the judge listened to the opening argument and then threw out the case as worthless.

The "Justice" Department kept trying, and finally got Siegelman on bribery. His offense? He was not alleged to have pocketed a dime or to have received any support through any foundation or committee. Rather, he re-appointed a man [Richard Scrushy] to a board who had been appointed to the same position by the previous three governors, a man who made contributions to a state lottery to pay for college scholarships for poor kids. Yes, Siegelman's idea to help poor people with a lottery seems to have missed the fact that lotteries are taxes on poor people. But does that make him guilty of bribery or justify prosecutors targeting him?

A U.S. House Committee investigated the Siegelman case and asked Karl Rove to testify. He declined. And the committee declined to hold him in contempt or to use inherent contempt. He was simply allowed to refuse. Now Siegelman's son, attorney Joseph Siegelman, has filed suit seeking documents from the U.S. government. I asked him what he hopes to find.

"Every stone that gets overturned ends up showing something negative," he said. As an example he pointed to the Justice Department's description of an email from a prosecutor of Siegelman to the campaign manager [Rob Riley] of his main Republican opponent, a description of an email that didn't become public until years after Siegelman's trial. "We don't know what else they have to hide," said Joseph Siegelman.

I asked Joseph Siegelman about the Supreme Court's decision to hear McDonnell's case and not his father's, and he exclaimed, "How can our system of justice be so skewed?"

Bill Pryor at badpuppy.com

Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump (From studentprintz.com)

Presumably, Christie thinks an endorsement will increase the likelihood of his securing a position in a Trump administration (and given Trump’s financial history, that is a likelier prospect than his receiving 30 pieces of silver). But he has agreed to be, for the next several months, willingly at the end of Trump’s leash, evidence of which was Trump and Christie’s brief exchange after Christie’s speech in Arkansas: “Get on the plane and go home,” Trump said, caught on a hot mic. “It’s over. Go home.” There are pimps and prostitutes with more equitable relationships.

Speaking of prostitutes: On Sunday, Alabama senator Jeff Sessions offered Trump his own endorsement. Sessions is, of course, the Republican party’s famous immigration hawk — a fierce, and fiercely intelligent, opponent of unchecked immigration, of amnesty, and of the various abuses of visa programs that large businesses use to undermine American labor. So, naturally, he endorsed the candidate who has proposed a de facto amnesty in which the federal government would first expend astronomical quantities of money and labor to round up 11 million illegal immigrants residing in the country, escort them to their home countries — and then let them back in (provided, of course, that they’re sufficiently “terrific”); he endorsed the candidate who has abused the H-2B visa system to import foreign workers to do “jobs Americans won’t do” — like model fashion; and he endorsed the candidate who has employed illegal immigrants on his building projects as recently as July of last year. Perhaps the senator thinks that Donald Trump, having touted his promises so publicly, will be made to go through with them. If so, he should consult with Trump’s business associates, employees, and two ex-wives about the reliability of Mr. Trump’s promises.

Bill Pryor, the federal judge (From nbcnews.com)

Judge Pryor:

I am a reporter from Birmingham, with more than 30 years of professional experience in the field and a bachelor's degree in journalism. I write the blog Legal Schnauzer, which focuses on justice issues in Alabama, the Deep South, and beyond. My reporting was cited in the U.S. House Judiciary Committee's hearing in fall 2007 on political prosecutions under the George W. Bush administration.

I would like to request an interview about Donald Trump's recent statement that, if elected president, he would consider nominating you to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump's statements seem to have particular significance in light of my reports in fall 2013 that photos of you appeared on a gay pornography site, badpuppy.com, in 1997. Multiple sources told me then that you posed for these full-frontal nude photographs while a student at Northeastern Louisiana University (now University of Louisiana Monroe) in the 1980s. I further understand they originally appeared in a four-color magazine, and surfaced again at the Bad Puppy Web site.

A few questions I would like to address in an interview:

* Would it be appropriate for you to consider a SCOTUS nomination, given the gay-porn photos in your background--and your public statements indicating you oppose gay rights. Multiple sources say you were confronted about the photographs in roughly 1997, long before your nomination to the federal bench. Did you disclose information about these photos to the FBI and U.S. Senate when going through confirmation for your current position?

* What does the presence of such photographs say about your judgment and your suitability for a position on the federal bench?

* Were you asked about these photographs--or other potentially embarrassing and/or corrupting background information--during the confirmation process for your position on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals? If so, did you answer truthfully? If you failed to disclose this information, what does that say about your suitability for a role on the federal bench? Did you effectively lie to Congress and is that a crime?

* On a personal note, I was unlawfully arrested--kidnapped, actually, because no warrant ever has been presented--and sent to jail for five months not long after I began investigating your ties to gay pornography. My kidnapping was conducted under the guise of a defamation lawsuit brought by Rob Riley, and at about the same time, I also faced a lawsuit from Jessica Medeiros Garrison. I understand that both Rob Riley and Jessica Garrison are long-time political allies of yours. It should be noted that, by law, my reporting never has been found defamatory at trial in either the Riley or Garrison cases. Some related questions:

A. Did you order my unlawful arrest (kidnapping) and imprisonment?

B. Did you participate in any way in a scheme to have me (and my wife, Carol) kidnapped and imprisoned? If so, what kind of deviant person are you?

C. Would you turn over all of your communications--e-mails, text messages, phone records, etc.--from Sept. 2013 until the present? Would you allow me and/or law enforcement to review these records? Would you request that Rob Riley, Jessica Garrison, Luther Strange and Liberty Duke also turn over similar records? Would you turn over all of this information to the Trump campaign?

D. Do you have any knowledge about the likely unlawful foreclosure, in spring 2014, on the house my wife and I had owned for 25 years? This foreclosure started while I was in jail and could not help defend our property rights. The imprisonment and foreclosure appear to be connected. Were you involved in both?

If nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court, would you be the kind of justice who has journalists beaten and kidnapped from their own homes, and sent to jail, while their homes are essentially stolen via dubious foreclosures? Is that the kind of judge you are now? Does that reflect your view of the First Amendment?

Trump's comments represent a breaking story, so I ask that you respond to this e-mail by 5 p.m. on 2/17/15 (Wednesday).

Last summer’s hacking of a website dedicated to arranging romantic infidelity led to angst, embarrassment, accusations and potentially complicated litigation that is all coming here.

Lawsuits filed across the country against Avid Life Media LLC, owner of AshleyMadison.com, are being consolidated in U.S. District Court in St. Louis.

Two dozen lawyers representing Avid and current or former clients met this week with District Judge John Ross. More listened in by phone as Ross scheduled a series of motions and told the attorneys he soon will pick leaders among them to streamline handling of the case.

The original class action, filed by two Canadian law firms, sought to recover $578 million in damages against Avid Life Media. This lawsuit, along with four other class action suits, were centralized in St. Louis, MO, in December, 2015. The cases being consolidated stem from Alabama, Missouri, Illinois, California and Texas. There are still 13 related actions pending in eight different districts that were not included in the consolidation at this time.

One issue will be the continuing privacy of people who signed on to the site, whose slogan is: “Life is short. Have an affair.” It has boasted of millions of clients, in 50 countries and every U.S. ZIP code.

Ross said lawyers would have to file motions by Feb. 15 to allow plaintiffs to continue using pseudonyms to press their cases. The company can then respond. Lawyers have until March 22 to file a consolidated class action complaint.

Robert A. Atkins, one of the lawyers for Avid Life, said that he expects that some of the 50 or so plaintiffs might drop out of the lawsuit if they have to reveal their real names. Roughly 40 filed as John or Jane Doe or some variation.

And [Atkins] said a clause in the users’ agreement might put the lawsuit on hold while clients’ claims are handled in arbitration in a venue of the company’s choosing.

St. Louis attorney John Driscoll told Ross that plaintiffs’ lawyers may need some limited information from the company before they proceed, so they know which clients were covered under what versions of user agreements. He said that the arbitration requirement didn’t exist in the beginning, and he disputed whether it could be enforced against anyone.

Driscoll represents a woman from Maryland Heights who is among clients complaining that after quitting the service they paid extra to have their personal information removed but it was not done.

Last summer, hackers harvested data from the company, then released it online when the company refused to shut down the website. That stolen information included user names, emails, home addresses, messages and partial credit card information.

Besides complaints of breached personal information, some plaintiffs claim fraud, alleging — as some analysts have — that the hacked data showed tens of thousands of the site’s profiles of women seeking flings were merely computer-generated “fembots.” Those allegedly sent millions of messages to male customers in an attempt to garner more money.

The company has denied the claims about fembots, saying in August that the ratio of paying men to women active on the site was 1.2 to 1 in the first six months of 2015.

Gov. Robert Bentley and Rebekah Caldwell Mason (From HBTV.us)

Insiders privy to meetings between Secretary of Law Enforcement Spencer Collier and Gov. Robert Bentley claim, the Governor asked Collier to tell the State’s Attorney General’s Office that an investigation into Deputy Attorney General Matt Hart was on going, when it was not.

Bentley’s conversation with Collier was due to an investigation into allegations made by attorney and radio host, Baron Coleman, that he concluded that Hart had improperly share Grand Jury information with him. This resulted in an affidavit from Collier and Special Agent Jack Wilson, stating the Coleman allegations against Hart had no merit.

Bentley told al.com that he ordered Collier not to give the affidavit to the Attorney General’s Office. According to those with intimate knowledge of the situation, Bentley asked Collier to tell the Attorney General’s Office that the investigation into Coleman’s allegations against Hart was ongoing.

If these individuals’ claims are factual, there may be more to the story than an order from Bentley to his Chief of Law Enforcement Officer.

Those in the meeting when Bentley told Collier he should tell the Attorney General Office the investigation was ongoing were: Special Agent Jack Wilson, ALEA, Chief Attorney Jason Swann and the Governor’s attorney David Byrne.

Law Enforcement officers speaking on background said this falls under several state statues including providing false statements or witness tampering.

Those inside the administration have even said the recent firings of ALEA top officials and those close to Collier are related to “internal investigation into possible criminal wrongdoing by some employees and staff related to the misappropriation of State dollars and resources,” according to an article by Chuck Dean, an intimate of Bentley’s chief advisor, Rebekah Caldwell Mason.

Columnist John Archibald recently wrote, “Her very word sends shivers through state employees. Because they believe she is the de facto governor, that her word has become Alabama law.”

Close associates of the Governor have expressed grave concern about their relationship, fearing Mason is encouraging Bentley to engage in a public cover-up that includes the firing of: JT Jenkins, ALEA’s second-in-command; Jay Howell; Camilla Gibson; and Collier’s personnel assistant, Merritt Hayes.

Jim Arnott, sheriff of Greene County, Missouri

A police officer who was fatally shot on her first day on the job was remembered Tuesday as someone who helped in soup kitchens, at suicide prevention programs and at mortuary services for Marines killed overseas.

Thousands of people came to the Hylton Memorial Chapel here to honor the officer, Ashley Guindon, 28. Officer Guindon died Saturday when she and two other Prince William County police officers were investigating a domestic disturbance at a home in Woodbridge, about 20 miles south of Washington.

As the officers approached the front door of the house, a gunman opened fire, hitting all three, the police said. Officer Guindon later died at a hospital; the other two officers were treated for their wounds. The suspect, Ronald W. Hamilton, 32, who the police said also fatally shot his wife before they arrived, was arrested on murder charges.

Ashley Guindon (From smh.com)

Greene County Sheriff Jim Arnott said he would like to see civilians be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campuses and elsewhere.

"The more people that have a weapon, that have taken the time to learn how to use it and learn what their rights are and where their liability lands when they do use, the better off we are as a society," Arnott said.

Asked if the training required to carry a concealed weapon was enough to allow a person to respond in an active shooter situation, Arnott said no but that gun owners should seek out continued training.

"Firearms training should be ongoing, but I'm for people carrying concealed weapons. I think it's a deterrent, and I'm for people being able to protect themselves and their family," he said.

Nick Saban

Newman said the notion that allowing students to carry concealed weapons on campuses would make them safer in the event of a mass shooting is a "false argument." She said the eight hours of firearms training required for concealed carry permits is nowhere near enough training to prepare someone to respond to an active shooter situation.

"It's laughable. It's completely laughable," Newman said.

Attorney Edgar C. Gentle III

Mr. Gentle has comprehensive experience in serving as Special Master and Claims Administrator in Mass Tort Litigation, and providing claims administration and financial and business advice to Courts, Settling Parties, and Mass Tort Settlements. He has helped create and administer over $2 Billion in Settlements during the past 20 years.

From 1992 to 2015, Mr. Gentle has served as Special Master and Escrow Agent for the MDL 926 Global Breast Implant Settlement, paying over $1.1 billion dollars in claims. From 2001 until 2003, he was Interim Financial Adviser for the Settlement Facility – Dow Corning Trust (the Dow Corning Breast Implant Settlement) overseeing the investment of over $1 billion and providing tax and accounting support for the Settlement.

Commencing in December 2003, Mr. Gentle was appointed as the Settlement Administrator in the $300 million Anniston, Alabama Tolbert PCB Settlement with Monsanto and Solutia in connection with the administration of a Global Settlement before the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Alabama applicable to approximately 18,000 claimants with respect to PCB contamination of property and PCB personal injury claims. In administering the $300 million settlement, Mr. Gentle has designed the claimant payment program for property damage and personal injury, collected criteria for payments for each of the 18,000 Claimants, ranked the claimants for payment amounts, and remitted payments to each of the claimants. He now helps manage a medical clinic for the claimants in Anniston.

Beverly Carlisle and I were married but are now divorced. In the divorce her share of the property was deeded to me.

Stewart Springer, with his wife and daughter (From stewartspringer.com)

The numbers demonstrate that very few lawyers are willing to try cases, and when they do, they are not effective. Contrary to the statistics, Stewart Springer has twenty six years of experience effectively trying cases. Springer has proven to be highly successful inside and outside the courtroom. Outside the courtroom Springer has settled cases in the millions and has represented all types of people including those from his working class background to doctors, lawyers and even judges. Springer has been successful in the courtroom with juries.

Having hauled in a personal injury verdict for a former state senator of $500,000, obtaining a ‘not guilty’ verdict on three felony counts for a Birmingham police officer, and obtaining a verdict in favor of a lawyer and law firm accused of sexual harassment, battery and assault. Springer will try cases and take insurance companies to the courthouse in response to low settlement offers or gamesmanship, even risking a total loss as opposed to settling for less than the fair value.

Stewart Springer was born and raised in Birmingham, Alabama in the '60s so he knows Alabama and how people here live and think. He is married to a dental hygienist and sole owner of a small business. He often says the single best decision he ever made in life was marrying his wife Allison. He has three children Russell, Julia and Caroline.

Springer attended the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa in 1982 and obtained his degree in three and a half years graduating in 1985 with a B.S. degree in Public Relations with a minor in Political Science. While at the University of Alabama, Springer was elected to be a member of the Freshman Forum a very distinguished group of forty freshman students that advised the University. He was appointed to the City of Tuscaloosa Mayor’s Advisory Council serving Mayor Al Dupont a former war hero he greatly admired. Springer was elected by his fellow students to serve as the President of the School of Communication. He was a member of the founding chapter of a national social organization.

Springer graduated from the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa and Cumberland School of Law in Birmingham, Alabama. Stewart is most thankful to his parents Dot Springer and Clarence Springer for creating the opportunity for him to become a lawyer through their love, dedication, hard work, sweat and tears, and struggle to send him to an premier law school. Stewart has said “I am happy about becoming a lawyer but I am most proud of my parents for doing so much for me that allowed me such an opportunity. I will never forget what they have done for me when I represent people who need my help”

Antonin Scalia's wealthy hunting buddy, John B. Poindexter (From nytimes.com)

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4

Richard W. Bell's law office is at the Valleydale Courtyard near Birmingham.

(Third in a series)

A suburban Birmingham attorney, with 44 years of experience in several areas of law, is a paying customer of the Ashley Madison (AM) extramarital-affair Web site, records show.

Trey Horton 

8 months ago

Went in, Very old guy.... I told him about some tax things I would like to take care of. Paid him $500 - he said he was going to the IRS to pull my transcripts (that can be pulled online) the next day so when I met him next I asked to see them. Since he said he spent all day down there getting them and used the $500 I paid him.. . He could not produce them. Never saw them. I asked him what I needed to do, he offered no sort of plan, no sort of advice. Said let's offer them xyz and see what they say.... Give me a break. I can do that myself... Never went back. hate being lied to. Lost $500 beware...

Cindy Bell (From democracy.com)

Hard work. Trust. Honesty. Those are the values Cindy learned from her mother, who learned them from her father and mother. Those are the values Cindy will bring to Montgomery.

Today, Cindy and her husband, Richard, live those values. She is a mother of three children, Elliott, Erin, and Mandy, a grandmother of seven grandchildren, and the owner of an English bulldog named Winston. Cindy and her husband are active members in their church, where she sings every Sunday in the choir. Cindy’s family and community inspire her desire to serve Alabamians in the State Senate

Robert M.N. Palmer (From LinkedIn)

Robert M. N. Palmer has represented clients in complex litigation in over 60 jury trials as lead attorney in over 34 states. He has obtained verdicts and judgments for his clients in excess of $100,000,000, including a verdict in Missouri for $21,000,000. He is currently President of the Springfield Metropolitan Bar Association; past-President of the Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys; past-President of Attorneys Information Exchange Group; a Certified Civil Trial Advocate of the National Board of Trial Advocacy; certified as a Super Lawyer (Missouri and Kansas); ranked as one of America's Top Lawyers; AV rated by Martindale-Hubbell (over 15 years); member of the American Association of Justice, American Board of Trial Advocates and International Society of Barristers. He received the 2009 Orrin G. Hatch Distinguished Trial Lawyer Award from Brigham Young University. He lectures nationally to bar and professional trial associations on numerous topics including pretrial-discovery, evidence, use of experts and focus groups, and preemption. He has published numerous articles in national trial magazines.

Brent Bothwell Palmer (From Facebook)