1.. Are you saying that Rehnquist should have recused himself because his
daughter would be fired if Bush didn't win? Or did he make his decision
because his daughter would get a big promotion? In other words, how would a
decision one way or another effect her career? Has she gotten promotions
because of the decision? Was she a sub-par employee who kept her job? Or was
she a good performer whose career would be unaffected by the decision?
2. Same thought process on Thomas. Did a decision one way or another change
his wife's career? Or was she a temporary staffer whose position ended the
same in either case?
3. Lastly Scalia, outside of her actual on the job performance after she got
the job, which really has no bearing on the discussion(unless she kept her job
with sub-par performance). Who hired her and how is HUD related to the
Florida vote? Who was president when she was being interviewed and who was
president when she was hired?
So yes, please go on, but please provide some rational as to why it was a
conflict.
Andy
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 9:27 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: RE: Bush gives the finger to the world again
Requist's daughter was an employee of the RNC. Thomas' wife was on the Bush
staff. Scalia's daughter recently resigned her HUD post after allegations
of financial impropriety and carrying an unlicensed firearm inside federal
buildings. She was appointed days after the Supreme Court decision.
Need I go on?
larry
At 08:08 PM 12/14/2003, you wrote:
>What is your basis for "enough conflict of interest"?
>
>----------
>[
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
