The land where time stood still

That land is actually the District of Columbia, or to be precise, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia which should be renamed as the Snoring Court.

The District of Columbia Superior Court: the land where time stood still

I have, many a time and oft', taken a puny swing at the non-justice system of the USA which is a disgrace to a country that claims the leadership of the free world.  If ever the US legal system should reach out for you, take refuge in North Korea is my advice!

Lest you doubt me, take the example of Mark Steyn, a media commentator who had the effrontery to suggest that Michael Mann, the inventor (and I do mean 'inventor') of the global warming 'hockey stick' was a scientific cheat and a fraud. 'Prof' Mann sued.  And Mark Steyn counter-sued in an effort to ensure that the case would be heard quickly.  Fat chance!  As he reminds us, it is now four years since the case began and still it has not come to court, in fact one of Steyn's witnesses has now died!

They say that justice delayed is justice denied but it seems to me that in Washington, the very heart of the Republic, there is no justice at all because it simply does not exist.

 

Comments

[Whitewall]

We haven't decided if we will be a nation governed by the rule of law or a nation governed by the rule of men. It depends on just who or what is on trial and the possible consequences. Here it is the fraud of "climate science".

Nations are best governed by the rule of law. If not, then it will a nation governed by the rule of men. Eventually the rule by men will become rule by the gun.

[Uncle Mort]

Mann was unwise to tangle with Mark Steyn. I hope he finally gets what he deserves but I suspect he never will.

[Hank]

David

I know being fair minded is not an editorial policy on this blog but consider the possibility that you only here of the bad examples.

Part of the delay is decisions made by Steyn or his counsel. On the other hand Mann's lawyers (if not Mann) know they have a losing case in trial and are using every trick in the book to delay trial. Whoever is funding Mann's case has hired him some first class and expensive talent. Steyn may be out classed here

==========================

Since this courts hears cases filed in DC which means most cases against the federal government there is an awful amount of political selection so as to get hacks of the correct coloring as a judge. Obama has been sores than even Clinton or Carter. The Republicans aren't as bad but still guilty as charged.

[Bob]

Hello, David. You haven't changed a bit. If you get information about science and the US legal system from 'The American Thinker' and similar loony outlets you'll know less than nothing, as you already don't know. The term "hockey stick" was coined by climatologist Jerry D. Mahlman.

[Michael Adams]

Washington DC is NOT the heart of the Republic. It is a boil on our a&&!

[David Duff]

Hello, Bob, and as I like a bit of vinegar on my chips, welcome back. Also it is good to know in an uncertain world that some things never change. For example, my post was not concerned with who coined the expression 'hockey stick' but you, as ever, missed the main point which is that large parts of the legal system in America are moribund. And I notice that you have nothing to say on a legal system in which the witnesses begin to die off before your judges can shift themselves off their fat arses and do what they're paid to do.

[Bob]

Good to disabuse you of your incomplete view of the US again, David. I suppose it's mere niggling to point out that you typed "Michael Mann, the inventor (and I do mean 'inventor') of the global warming 'hockey stick' was a scientific cheat and a fraud", which is wrong in multiple ways and also misses the main point.

At issue is what are called here SLAPP suits, which are a form of nuisance suits not limited to this case and controversial among legal scholars. The more famous one at the moment was financed by billionaire PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel on behalf of Hulk Hogan's suit against Gawker. The upshot is whether plaintiffs should have a legal right to use defamation suits to chill free speech. It might surprise you to know many liberals are not on Mann's side.

This case doesn't represent the entire US legal system, which is being slow-walked in some cases and proceeds apace in others. Are you as concerned about there only being 8 Supreme Court justices because of Republican obstructionism?

[JK]

"Republican obstructionism"?

You're a Borking lunatic Bob.

[Bob]

I am quite possibly a lunatic. Regardless, it is a fact that Republicans have refused to schedule a hearing for Judge Merrick Garland, who they have formerly suggested as a nominee, to replace Scalia. They have vowed to block any replacement for the late justice until a new president takes office and claim historical precedence, which is demonstrably false.

[JK]

Leaving aside the "so-called" Biden Rule stuff;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abe_Fortas

Demonstrably?

[Bob]

The Fortas case isn't exactly analogous. These are:

"One-third of all U.S. presidents appointed a Supreme Court justice in an election year"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/02/29/one-third-of-all-u-s-presidents-appointed-a-supreme-court-justice-in-an-election-year/

[JK]

Your, "isn't exactly" is sufficient for me Bob.

Go someplace else and, oh I dunno, play in the street or something. A busy street with a couple missing stop signs and an intersection.

Yeah that's it, a busy intersection in a cellphone dead-spot. Have some fun. I suggest a game of jacks. Or marbles ... oh hold on you've lost yours elsewhere.

Not my problem I think. 'Ta.

[Bob]

You're a very witty fellow, JK, but a sore loser.

[JK]

Only "one-third" Bob. Two-thirds isn't.

Demonstrably.