Judge Baltasar Garzon, renowned for indicting late Chilean dictator Pinochet, may be facing the end of his career on the bench after Thursdays ruling by the Spanish Supreme Court barring him from the judiciary for 11 years.
Garzon violated the constitutional rights of defendants in a corruption case when he ordered their communications monitored during pre-trial detention, the Spanish Supreme Court said in a unanimous ruling. By recording the jailed defendants telephone calls, Garzon hampered their right to a defense "without any reason that could be minimally acceptable," concluded the high court.
Garzon argued during the trial that it was necessary to monitor the defendants communication to ensure they did not continue to operate their purported criminal enterprise while imprisoned.
Suspended in 2010, Garzon will now be stripped of his judgeship on Spains National Court, established to deal with terrorism as well as major drug and corruption cases.
The magistrate who indicted Pinochet and successfully prosecuted Al Qaeda and ETA terrorists still awaits a verdict in a case brought against him for allegedly violating a 1977 amnesty law by initiating investigations of the crimes of the Franco regime. Another trial, in which Garzon is charged with accepting improper payments for speeches, is ongoing.
#1
Like foreseen the MSM tells nothing even close to the truth.
Let's see what happened about that investigation over franquist crimes.
Thre was a demand of an investigation for "abductions" for republicans who had disappeared in the naionalist zone during the Civil War. Garzon just sat on the case for eighteen months. After that Garzon begins requiring information about other disappearings. Just a problem Garzon was not competent for it: he was an instruction, judge for terrorist acts and plots for overthrowing the government. After several months of doing nothing he seized the case alleging that the 1936 uprisng was plot against the government so he was competent for instructing a case against its authors. (note that this has nothing to do with finding the whereabouts of the corpses I mentionned) By the way there had been an amnesty covering the crimes of both sides and that several years earlier tha same Garzon had invoked that amnesty for refusing to prosecute Santiago Carrillo, head of the Spanish Communist Party and alleged author of the massacres of Paracuellos aka the Spanish Katyn. In the act whre he declared himself competent Garzon naed over thirty people but menionning iot was notorious they were dead. He
then required the certificate of death fo Franco. Never mind that in addition to his death being quite notorious Franco would have been 110 years old. A month later after having done zero, zilch, nada except fotr asking Franco's certificate he alleged that given that everyone in his list of people was dead the case was extinguished and he was closed it. Just publicity at tax payer's expense and against the law.
Garzon is a preening fame seeking dolt who would kill his own family for just one minute in front of a TV camera.
To compare him with a member of Russian nobility who had a bloody streak about his person, is to give Garzon a mantle of competence he simply doesn't have.
#5
You miss the point entirely, badanov.
Imprimus: Iron Felix did not enjoy that he did---he just saw it as his revolutionary duty.
The point is that both used their position to promote ideological agenda to the exclusion of everything else. And, I have to say, given the respective constraints under which the two operated---Garzon achieved a hell of a lot more than Dzerzhinsky would've managed in his position.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wasted no time in blocking Republicans' first attempt at offering legislation in the Senate to repeal the HHS requirement that would force employers to provide health insurance that includes contraceptives even if they are morally opposed to it.
Sen. Roy Blunt tried to offer a bipartisan amendment to the now-pending highway bill that would reverse the rule, but Reid objected, calling it a distraction from the proposed legislation, and that the rule had not yet been finalized in the Obama White House.
Reid said, "I appreciate that the Republicans take every opportunity to never miss an opportunity to mess up a good piece of legislation. The rule hasn't even been finalized yet. There is no final rule. Let's at least wait until there is a final rule. Everybody should calm down. Let's see what transpires."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell accompanied the amendment to the floor and blasted the "odious" outcome of the president's decision. McConnell said, "Republicans are trying to reaffirm that basic right [of freedom of religion]. The Democrats won't allow those of us who are sworn to uphold the Constitution to even offer an amendment that says we believe in our First Amendment right to freedom of religion.
"Frankly, I never thought I'd see the day. [I] never thought I'd see the day when the elected representatives of the people of this country would be blocked by a majority party in Congress to even express their support for it," McConnell added.
Reid hit back immediately, saying he also had never seen anything like the way Republicans were trying to bog down a good bill. Reid said, "I've never seen anything like this before either. Why don't we just calm down and see what the final rule is?"
Why is the rule being determined in the White House, eh? Thought Congress made the rules and Executive enforces them...oh yeah, waivers, the quite descriminate enforcement, or lack of enforcement, exemption, of the law.
But hey, like Paloski said, gotta pass it to find out all the neat-o stuff in it.
#8
Read the compromise, not much of one if I'm reading it right:
Groups do not by the contriceptions, the insurance companies actually purchase them, but they must still be distributed by the groups, right? Let me distill this if I'm getting it right:
Vegan restaurant, PETA posters on the wall, Whale Wars on repeat, the whole nine yards and the two point conversion, dig? Does that mean that I can go into that restaurant and by law use their kitchen at my convienance to make whale steak with dog skewer niblets and they by law must not only let me in, but let me eat there, cannot say anything bad about my food or me no matter how much I yumm and lick chops, then they must do my dishes. I mean they didn't have to pay for it or even transport it there just let me use the facilities..Is that right?
#11
fwiw, whether this administrative rule passes muster with the 1st amendment is dicey but possible.
however, there is also the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which provides stronger protection against administrative actions like the one that HHS promulgated. This is because the RFRA requires strict scrutiny so HHS would have had to determine that the administration was narrowly tailored and the regulation is the least restrictive means possible to achieve a compelling govt purpose.
Posted by: Lord Garth ||
02/10/2012 15:09 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Contraception and Abortion is *NOT* a compelling federal government purpose IMHO.
What I was getting at was that it should not be done at the Federal level. The problem I have is that at the federal level it's too far removed from the people it effects. Influences like Planned genocide Parenthood, Unions, and others have far more influence (and can focus their influence better) at the federal congressional level than in 50 different states. Same with Education, Labor, etc...
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
