LIMON CO (IFS) - Well Mr. President, this writer wants to thank you for taking the fall for the oil disaster. Heck, we all know who is the blame for this terrible "Drill Baby Drill" chaos and it's not you.

With the "Buck Stops Here" policy, we know that the oil corporations are in charge of this country and your hands are tied in knots, and you have no powers. We also know that the Bush Administration gave all of its power to these tyrants and they all should go to jail.

It is over the top, that since the Supreme Court has declared corporations as "people", then British Petroleum should be in prison; as they have violated many states three strikes laws.

Please place these crooks in prison.

LIMON CO(IFS) - This is totally a HATE CRIME by Superior Court Judge David Yaffe. If only the tables were turned around and Yaffe was placed in jail for a long time, his treatment would be very different. Los Angeles County and City judges are not the best people to work with. Along with their counter-parts in Ventura County, I'd pray that the Department of Justice would take them over and place all of them in prison. I always pray for the down fall of these two counties, when the day comes that the San Andreas Fault will wash them to the bottom of the ocean.

Ex-lawyer jailed 14 months, but not charged with a crime
By Abbie Boudreau, Emily Probst and Dana Rosenblatt,
CNN Special Investigations Unit


STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Former Beverly Hills lawyer has been in solitary confinement for 14 months
Richard Fine, 70, is not charged with a crime; he's being held in contempt
Supreme Court decides Monday it won't hear the case

Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- Once a dapper Beverly Hills attorney known for his bow tie, Richard Fine has been held in solitary confinement at Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail for 14 months, even though he's never been charged with a crime.

Fine, a 70-year- old taxpayer's advocate who once worked for the Department of Justice, is being held for contempt of court.

Superior Court Judge David Yaffe found Fine in contempt after he refused to turn over financial documents and answer questions when ordered to pay an opposing party's attorney's fees, according to court documents.

Fine says his contempt order masks the real reason why he's in jail. He claims he's a political prisoner.

"I ended up here because I did the one thing no other lawyer in California is willing to do. I took on the corruption of the courts," Fine said in a jailhouse interview with CNN.

More details on the Special Investigations Unit's blog

For the last decade, Fine has filed appeal after appeal against Los Angeles County's Superior Court judges. He says the judges each accept what he calls yearly "bribes" from the county worth $57,000. That's on top of a $178,789 annual salary, paid by the state. The county calls the extra payments "supplemental benefits" -- a way to attract and retain quality judges in a high-cost city.

While the practice of paying supplemental benefits is common in California, most high-cost cities elsewhere don't hand out these kinds of benefits. Judges in Miami, Chicago and Boston receive no extra county dollars.

Judges in Los Angeles County not only have the highest state salaries in the nation, they also get tens of thousands of dollars in county benefits. These payments, Fine says, mean judges are unlikely to rule against the county when it is involved in a lawsuit.

In the last two fiscal years, Los Angeles County won all but one of the nine trials that went before a judge, according to Steven Estabrook, the county's litigation cost manager.

"The reason I'm here is the retaliation of the judges," Fine says. "They figured they're going to throw me in jail and that way they feel that they can stop me."

Fine's decade-long crusade against the judges eventually led to his disbarment last year. Joe Carlucci was the lead prosecutor for the California State Bar. Carlucci says whenever Fine lost a case, he would appeal and argue the judges were corrupt.

"What he ultimately did was to delay proceedings, to level false accusations against judges," Carlucci says. "All of those lawsuits were found to have been frivolous and meritless."

Judge Yaffe and county officials refused to comment on Fine's case while it's still pending.

"Fine holds the key to his jail cell," Kevin McCormick, one of the court's attorneys, pointed out in a court filing. In other words, Fine will go free once he hands over the documents the court seeks and answers the judge's questions.

The technical term is "coercive confinement" -- jail-time until a person follows a judge's order.

"He's probably done more time than most burglars, robbers and dope dealers," says Sterling Norris of the public-interest group Judicial Watch.

Norris says Fine's confinement has gone on too long.

Norris won a case in 2008 that found county payments to judges unconstitutional. The California Legislature swiftly passed a bill that enabled counties to continue paying the extra benefits.

"I think it's a lack of judicial integrity to say enough is enough," Norris says. "We've got a man, 70-year-old attorney, in jail for over a year on coercive confinement and that is way beyond the pale. No matter what else he may have done, that is improper."

Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, calls the length of Fine's contempt confinement an "anomaly."

Fine's jail cell could be used for a more violent offender, Whitmore added. In fact, Los Angeles County's jails have in recent months released hundreds of inmates before their terms were up due to budget constraints.

Fine took his pencil-and-paper fight from solitary confinement to the U.S Supreme Court, which ruled Monday it would not hear the case. The court offered no explanation.

Meanwhile, Fine's family stands behind him -- even in the face of home foreclosure.

"My husband has always been the straightest arrow, hardworking, very successful attorney, and for this to happen to him is unbelievable," says Maryellen Fine, his wife of 27 years.

"I'll look back with tears with all the time I might have missed with the family," Fine says tearfully just before he is handcuffed and walked back to his cell.

"We don't know what is going to be next," says Fine's daughter, Victoria. "Every day is just one more day where I think maybe I'm going to get a phone call that says dad's coming home."


I guess Mr Fine really pissed Yaffe off; and there must be an element of truth to his accusations. This kind of vindictive and hateful treatment by those within by US legal system hierarchy is generally reserved for those without money, and whose complexions are darker than Mr Fines.

Posted: 09:57 PM ET
When I hear the term “contempt of court,” I right away imagine one of those courtroom dramas on TV, where some guy is yelling at a judge, the judge gets mad, and screams out from behind the bench, “I find you in contempt of court!” The belligerent person screams some kind of obscenity back, and is then handcuffed and hauled away by a bailiff. On TV, he’s let out of jail a day or two later when tempers have calmed down and egos have been set aside. But that’s TV. It’s a much different scenario for Richard Fine who has been held in contempt of court for 14 months now.

Fine is not a criminal – he’s a 70-year-old former Beverly Hills attorney, once known for his bow-tie.
I met him at the L.A. County Jail. He was wearing an orange jumpsuit and was handcuffed.

He considers himself a “political prisoner.” He’s been held in solitary confinement for more than one year (jail officials say that’s because other inmates could harm him), and he says he’s only been outside for about nine hours since he’s been locked up.

According to court documents, Fine is in jail because he refused to produce financial documents and answer questions when ordered to pay the other side’s attorney’s fees. That’s when Judge Yaffe put Fine in contempt of court, until Fine decided he wanted to give the court what it requested.

Well, so far, Fine is not in the mood to cooperate. Fine believes he is being held in contempt for a very different reason. He says Judge Yaffe, and other L.A. County Superior Court judges, have accepted what he calls “bribes” from the county. Fine argues the “bribes” create a conflict of interest for judges in cases where the county is a party to the lawsuit. He feels the judges should be disqualified from those cases.

L.A. County judges really do receive extra benefits from the county on top of their six-figure state salary. It’s a practice common in California that was retroactively made legal, after a 2008 case against L.A. County found the payments unconstitutional.

The county says the extra cash is a type of “supplemental benefit” that helps to attract and retain quality judges in a high-cost city. Fine doesn’t buy that argument, so for the past decade, he’s been going after judges and has tried to expose what he considers a “corrupt judicial system.”

But for the purpose of this blog, let’s put the details of his history aside for a moment, and just focus on why court officials say he’s in jail. It’s because he doesn’t want to hand over his financial records or answer questions. He is being held in what is called “coercive confinement.”

That means, unless he does what the judge wants him to do, he will remain in jail – in his case, indefinitely. It’s like the world’s longest timeout. Fine does not want to cooperate because he says he will lose his chance to appeal his case against Judge Yaffe, if he ever gets out of jail. But when does this stop being productive and start becoming a waste of everyone’s time?

Of course, we tried contacting Judge Yaffe. And of course, he said he did not want to talk to us about this case since it’s ongoing.

What will happen if Fine refuses to cooperate, and Judge Yaffe doesn’t put an end to this? Could this go on for another year, or maybe even more? At what point does “coercive confinement” become nothing more than an indefinite jail sentence.

Oh, and one more thing. In the last couple of months, L.A. County Jail released about 200 inmates before their terms were up because of budget shortages. A spokesman for the jail told me they sure could use Fine’s cell for real criminals.
Connect with CNN Special Investigations Unit on Facebook


Filed under: Abbie Boudreau • Special Investigations Unit

LIMON CO (IFS) - So the GOP's new leader is Dr. Rand Paul, and he doesn't like people with disabilities. He's against the 1965 civil rights act, that was passed for the future minorities, yet he's a doctor that practices medicine and many of his patiences are on Social Security, and they vote for this guy in the Tea Party Movement "taking back their country"! Can we say "mixed messages?" One comment from an ABC News member. . . "What Rand Paul calls "taking back America" is really stepping back to the days when angry men shot it out on main street at high noon and anyone who wasn't a bonified-white-person would have to walk in the street and eat only at selected restaurants. Also, in their drive to cut taxes, the Tea Party seems to forget that the police, firemen, military, teachers, and so on, are all paid by taxes. Cutting taxes means dumbing down our children and their children, watching your house burn down because no-one is around to drive the truck, streets full of criminals, and no way to protect ourselves from fifth world countries like North Korea."
--------------------------

Rand Paul Says He's Being 'Trashed Up and Down' by 'Democratic Talking Points'
Kentucky GOP Senate Nominee Responds to Critics After Civil Rights Act Comments

By JONATHAN KARL and DEVIN DWYER
WASHINGTON, May 21, 2010—

Rand Paul, the Tea Party's rising star from Kentucky who won the state's GOP Senate primary this week, says criticism of his views on the Civil Rights Act and other pieces of anti-discrimination legislation are "red herrings" and Democrats' attempt to "trash" his campaign.

"When does my honeymoon period start?" Paul asked George Stephanopoulos on "Good Morning America" today. "I've been trashed up and down. ... This is a lot about politics."

Paul's comments came amid a firestorm of criticism sparked earlier this week when he appeared to question the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which he said went too far in banning discrimination by private companies.

In an interview Wednesday with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, Paul was asked whether he believed private businesses should have the right to refuse service to African-Americans.

"Yes," Paul said. "I'm not in favor of any discrimination of any form. & But I think what's important about this debate is not written into any specific 'gotcha' on this, but asking the question: what about freedom of speech? Should we limit speech from people we find abhorrent? Should we limit racists from speaking?"

Paul's comments drew a rebuke from the White House Thursday, with press secretary Robert Gibbs telling reporters, "a discussion about whether or not you support those I don't think has a real, shouldn't have a place in our political dialogue in 2010."

Republicans also seemed to distance themselves from Paul's views. Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele made it clear the GOP supports the Civil Rights Act, whatever its Senate nominee in Kentucky says.

The controversy has revived suggestions by Tea Party critics that there are racists in the movement, an allegation Paul says is dead wrong.

He says he abhors racial discrimination but he doesn't believe the government has the right to tell a private business who they have to serve.

Paul clarified his views in a statement Thursday, saying whatever concerns he may have had about parts of the Civil Rights Act, he has not -- and has never -- called for repealing it.

"Even though this matter was settled when I was 2, and no serious people are seeking to revisit it except to score cheap political points, I unequivocally state that I will not support any efforts to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964," Paul, 47, said.

Paul Supports Civil Rights Act

"Let me be clear: I support the Civil Rights Act because I overwhelmingly agree with the intent of the legislation, which was to stop discrimination in the public sphere and halt the abhorrent practice of segregation and Jim Crow laws," he said.

Copyright © 2010 ABC News Internet Ventures

LIMON CO (IFS) - The governor has signed a new bill that bans enthic studies in K thru 12 grades from public high schools. Well, I believe Arizona has not gone far enough. Why you ask? For one thing, it brings all of the Nation's ills to the forefront and forces us to really examined them in great detail. This writer believes that there should be no celebrated months of Black, Brown, Yellow, Red, and any other can of history months. It should be all American history months every month all year long.

LIMON CO (IFS) - This description is from Wikipedia and it tells what this office holders duties are. One thing is for sure, General Kagan is the first woman solictor ever appointed to this position in the history of the United States. The United States Solicitor General is the person appointed to represent the Government of the United States before the Supreme Court of the United States. Currently, the Solicitor General is Elena Kagan, who was confirmed by the United States Senate on March 19, 2009.

The Solicitor General determines the legal position that the United States will take in the Supreme Court. In addition to supervising and conducting cases in which the government is a party, the Solicitor General's office also files amicus curiae briefs in cases in which the federal government has a significant interest in the legal issue. The Solicitor General's office argues on behalf of the government in virtually every case in which the United States is a party, and also argues in most of the cases in which the government has filed an amicus brief. In the federal courts of appeals, the Office of the Solicitor General reviews cases decided against the United States and determines whether the government will seek review in the Supreme Court. The Solicitor General's office also reviews cases decided against the United States in the federal district courts and approves every case in which the government files an appeal.

The Solicitor General is assisted by four deputies and seventeen attorney assistants. Three of the deputies are career attorneys in the Department of Justice. The remaining deputy is known as the "Principal Deputy," sometimes called the "political deputy" and, like the Solicitor General, typically leaves at the end of an administration. The Principal Deputy currently is Neal Katyal. The other deputies currently are Michael Dreeben, Edwin Kneedler, and Malcolm L. Stewart.

The Solicitor General or one of the deputies typically argues the most important cases in the Supreme Court. Each of the attorney assistants also typically argues cases each year.

The Solicitor General, who has offices in the Supreme Court Building as well as the Department of Justice Headquarters, has been called the "tenth justice"[1] as a result of the relationship of mutual respect that inevitably develops between the justices and the Solicitor General (and their respective staffs of clerks and deputies). As the most frequent advocate before the Court, the Office of the Solicitor General generally argues dozens of times each term. As a result, the Solicitor General tends to remain particularly comfortable during oral arguments that other advocates would find intimidating. Furthermore, when the Solicitor General's office endorses a petition for certiorari, review is frequently granted, which is remarkable given that only 75–125 of the over 7,500 petitions submitted each term are granted review by the Court.[2]

Other than the justices themselves, the Solicitor General is among the most influential and knowledgeable members of the legal community with regard to Supreme Court litigation. Four Solicitors General have later served on the Supreme Court: Robert H. Jackson, Stanley Forman Reed, Thurgood Marshall, and William Howard Taft (who was Chief Justice of the United States). Some who have had other positions in the office of the Solicitor General have also later been appointed to the Supreme Court. For example, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. was the Principal Deputy Solicitor General during the Reagan administration and Associate Justice Samuel Alito was an Assistant to the Solicitor General. Only one former Solicitor General has been nominated to the Supreme Court unsuccessfully, that being Robert Bork; however, no sitting Solicitor General has ever been denied such an appointment. Eight other Solicitors General have served on the United States Courts of Appeal.

Within the Justice Department, the Solicitor General exerts significant influence on all appeals brought by the department. Whenever the DOJ wins at the trial stage and the losing party appeals, the concerned division of the DOJ responds automatically and proceeds to defend the ruling in the appellate process. However, if the DOJ is the losing party at the trial stage, an appeal can only be brought with the permission of the Solicitor General. For example, should the tort division lose a jury trial in federal district court, that ruling cannot be appealed by the Appellate Office without the approval of the Solicitor General.

Several traditions have developed since the Office of Solicitor General was established in 1870. Most obviously to spectators at oral argument before the Court, the Solicitor General and his or her deputies traditionally appear in formal morning coats, although Elena Kagan, the first woman to hold the office, has elected to forego the practice. More significantly, the Solicitor General is permitted to "lodge" in the appellate record new evidence that would ordinarily not be considered by the justices. Another tradition, possibly unique to the United States, is the Solicitor General's right and practice of confession of judgment: the Solicitor General can simply drop a case if he or she considers the government's prior official position to be unjust, even if the government has already won in lower court.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

LIMON CO (IFS) - Beyond Prosecution, the oil company from Britain has final done what the British Army could not do in 1814 - they have destroyed the Gulf of Mexico and inflicted great economic damages on the Southern states and destroyed our environment all in the name of not having the proper equipment to seal a blown well. This writer must also gives great thanks to the George W. Bush Administration for opening the doors and helping in the destruction.

British Petroleum is without a doubt one of the most incompetent business units working in the United States. Why is there no "Three (3) strikes" with corporations? This leaking well has went from "not leaking" to "leaking very little" to "we don't know how much oil is leaking" to "we can't stop the leaking", can the US Government help us?"

One thing we do know - there's a lot of oil washing up on the beaches and it will be there for the next 50 years. I know this for a fact, because I was at school at the University of California at Santa Barbara when all that oil came ashore. Now it's over forty years later, and I still see oil on the beaches from those days.

Will BP still receive their "clean environmental awards"?