Sop was one step ahead and watching on C-SPAN when he caught the Times Picayune story: Thomas Porteous impeachment vote scheduled for today:
The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to vote today on whether to impeach New Orleans U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous.
On Jan. 27, the House Judiciary Committee unanimously approved four articles of impeachment against Porteous, accusing him of taking money, expensive meals and other gifts from lawyers and a bail bond company with business before him and making false statements in a personal bankruptcy filing.
Though much of the “improper conduct” occurred when he was a state judge, the Judiciary Committee decided he had an obligation to disclose his actions during his nomination and confirmation process in 1994…
Porteous, 63, continues to receive his $174,000 federal judicial salary, but has been barred from hearing cases until September 2010. If the Senate doesn’t vote to remove him from office or he doesn’t resign, Porteous would be able to resume hearing cases in September.
Anyone else wondering how much more will we learn about his “improper conduct” as a state judge as the story of corruption in Jefferson Parish unfolds?
I know I can be naive at times and I apologize if this missive appears so, BUT, after following Whitmergate’s trail of Testimonic Breadcrumbs through the Porteous proceedings I am struck by the disparate treatment of the attorneys who from their own mouths condemned themselves. And then to read eyewitness testimony from clerical staff of those same bastions of the legal community, which testimony clearly and unequivocally states causes of action against those attorneys I can only ask ” Mr. Plattsmier WHERE ARE YOU?”. As Chief Disciplinary Counsel for the Louisiana Supreme Court isn’t it his responsibility to read and determine if these attorneys need to be disciplined? A few names that jumped out at me: Mole, Cline, Chopin as not having been called on the Louisiana Disciplinary carpet. And while I will be the first to admit I am not an expert on such matters I wonder, after reading Amato’s and Creeley’s testimony, why the dirty deeds those three did do not deserve attention? And while we are on it, why is the Times Picurnose only reporting on Creeley? Did they not read the testimonic words of the three amigos? Ah the vagrancies of the law. Lady Justice and her scales are being assaulted daily.
Whats worse– Porteous or the Shushans, Berrigans, Englehardts, McNamaras, etc… who are so bias that they are unable to rule “fairly and impartially?
I know who I would take my chances in front of given the body of work in the open for all to see.
Ok, ok, Pelican, I got it… ok ? deBrief, calling from DC, has an exhilarated, haughty tone to his voice, as he exclaims, les francais, “Je ne leur ai rien dit.” Hmmmmmmmm, “Ne vous excusez pas”, I replied. Pelican, next time those troglodytes come poking around, do the Louisiana Bar “loup-garou” : “I have no recollection one way or the other”. Go have a drink. Au revoir. deBrief says “Non? pour paques, alors? Yes, of course, as always.
The impeachment of Mr. Tom Porteous, Judge, Eastern District of Louisiana, is a Pyrrhic victory of a rogue individual; the Government’s conduct may have been the Rubicon, and forever closed the door to ethics reform.
And what a rigmarole these proceedings have been; still with a Senate trial scheduled to jettison Mr. Porteous from the bench, a fait accompli !
As I have previously critiqued, the testimonies of Mr. Mole, Mr. Cline, and Mr. Chopin are a stigma upon the legal profession; that Mr. Plattsmier, Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the Louisiana State Bar can now ascribe to each of these individuals cited above, a degree of deviant ethical behavior to warrant initiation of disciplinary action is without doubt. And yes, there are the other lawyers, Mr. Levenson, of LILJEBERG fame and Mr. Chopin’s friend and sometimes associate, Mr. T. Patrick Baynham, counsel for Rowan Drilling , another hunting provider; again, I ask Mr. Plattsmier to exercise his obligation to investigate and prosecute ALL lawyers who have breached the cannons of ethics, period !
To compound the duplicity of the impeachment farce, is the unison of selective PROSECUTION and selective REPORTING. We are taught to believe that equal protection of the laws is one of the cornerstones of our constitutional rights. All right then, why hasn’t Mr.’s Mole, Cline, Chopin, Baynham and Levenson been brought before the Bar for disciplinary hearing by Mr. Plattsmier ?
We are bought up to believe in fair play and common decency. That the press is responsible to us to report the facts, ALL the facts. Then why is it that the Times-Picayune fails to mention or report on the outrageous testimony by Mr. Cline and Mr. Chopin ? The conduct by Mr. Plattsmier and the Times-Picayune in these matters is reprehensible. The assault upon the very basic tenets of society by SELECTIVE application of Government action and/or Media representation is both lugubrious and sordid. An ominous precipice…
MR. PLATTSMIER, READ THE TRANSCRIPTS THAT HAVE BEEN SENT TO YOU. MR. PLATTSMIER DO YOUR JOB. MR. PLATTSMIER , YOU OWE THE CITIZENS OF LOUISIANA AN ACCOUNTING FOR THE EGREGIOUS CONDUCT OF THESE LAWYERS.
In addition to being corrupt to the core, Porteous was a terrible judge. What a joke if the lawyers representing him further sully Louisiana’s horrible reputation for corruption by having a trial in the U.S. Senate that Porteous has a 0% chance of winning.
In addition to being corrupt and unqualified, Porteous is offensively arrogant. In April of 2008, he lectured on developments in Katrina litigation at the Jefferson Bar Accociation CLE by the Sea at Beau Rivage. Most of the facts of his impeachment were known at the time, but Porteous could have cared less as he apparently has no capacity for embarrasment. He gave a horrible lecture during which he was wrong on many legal issues.
In the first few years after he became a Fed. judge, Porteous used to taunt the FBI in speeches to small gatherings of lawyers by making fun of the FBI for letting him pass screening for a Fed. judgship. In any event, he took on the same tone at the end of the JBA lecture. The room was full of Jefferson Parish lawyers and politicos, so he was playing to an audience he knew well, and that knew him well. At the end of the lecture, he said he would like to quote his favorite movie line from Randy Quaid in Independene Day: “Hello boys, I’M BACK.” This must have been in reference to the fact that he was not going to be indicted for any of his criminal activity. Shame on the Fed. govt. for letting too much time go by so that prosecution for these crimes would have been time-barred. Hey Your Dishonor, good riddance to bad garbage.