mark your calendar, today, Monroe city judge fred amman has been tapped by lincoln parish da bob levy's law firm, hudson, potts, and bernstein, to be judge marcus clark's replacement on the 4th district court.
even police juror "guy" smiley's wife, laurie burkett is withdrawing her candidacy. charley heck can't be far behind, jeff joyce too.
poor walt caldwell he gave big bucks to clark's campaign on the promise that he would be the heir to his seat. and this even after he vanished from the vote on the tax for the v-vehicle.
label caldwell loser!
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
national political corruption
Tuesday, Nov. 24, 2009
Senator's Affair Revealed in Text Message
By AP / KEVIN FREKING
(WASHINGTON) — A Nevada man whose wife had an affair with Sen. John Ensign said he discovered the relationship after intercepting a text message around Christmas in 2007.
"How wonderful it is. ... Scared, but excited," it read.
Doug Hampton recounted the text message during an interview taped for broadcast Monday night on ABC's "Nightline." The interview covered a lot of ground already made public since Ensign, R-Nev., admitted to the extramarital affair in June, but provided new details about how the affair was discovered as well as the senator's reaction when Hampton confronted him. (Top 10 Political Sex Scandals: Sen. John Ensign)
The acknowledgment of the affair has led to a huge fall from grace for a man that many viewed as a rising star within the GOP. He's now fighting to complete a second term in office that continues through 2012.
The Hamptons and Ensigns had been close family friends for years. Hampton told "Nightline" he confronted Ensign when both families were present during a Christmas Eve gathering. "John cries like a kid. Puts his head in his hands, cries like a little boy," Hampton said, adding that he heard remorse and panic in his old friend's voice but now believes it was disingenuous.
Hampton continued to work for Ensign as his co-chief of staff. He said that the two went on a trip to Iraq in February 2008. He said he was having troubles with his telephone and asked to borrow Ensign's to call his wife. He said Ensign scrolled to a listing for Aunt Judy instead of Cindy Hampton. "And then I realize, Wow, wow, something is seriously wrong," he said, that the affair was still going on. (Top 10 Political Sex Scandals: Kwame Kilpatrick.)
Hampton makes clear through the interview he isn't going away quietly and believes Ensign abused his power in pursuing the affair. Ensign's legal team has said it's confident that all laws and ethics rules were followed in the case, which includes Ensign helping Hampton gain employment with a lobbying firm as well as Ensign's parents providing the Hamptons with a payment of nearly $100,000 that they described as a gift. "I truly wish that I could publicly respond to each one of Doug Hampton's allegations," Ensign said. "They are full of half truths and untruths. I will cooperate with any investigation because I have not violated any law or Senate ethics rule. If Doug Hampton violated federal law and rules, I did not advise him to do so, I did not suggest that he do so, and I did not cooperate with his doing so."
cofer told faculty no furloughs at ulm if they taught for free, now what?
Priorities at ULMposted Tuesday, August 4th, 2009 @ 10:34 pm
The University of Louisiana-Monroe unveiled its plan on Monday to cope with a $4.5-million reduction in state funding for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, which began July 1.Like every publicly funded higher education institution in Louisiana, ULM faced a cut in state appropriations for the new fiscal year. The higher education community as a whole was dealt a more than $100 million budget cut. The cut was necessary in light of a more than $1 billion budget shortfall the Legislature encountered during its regular session. The 2009 regular legislative session adjourned in late June.According to ULM, the university will not renew contracts for 36 faculty and other staff members to deal with its reduction in state funding in the new fiscal year. More than 41 vacant faculty and staff positions will be eliminated. Also, staff members at ULM will take furloughs from one to four days depending upon their annual salary. Staffers who make less than $30,000 per year and ULM law enforcement personnel will not be affected by the furloughs. Faculty members won't be affected by furloughs either.According to Laura Harris, a spokesperson at ULM, no tenured or tenure-track faculty members were terminated to aid the university's efforts to balance its budget, which must be approved by the governing board at the University of Louisiana System later this month.If Harris is correct, ULM was wise not to terminate any tenured or tenure-track faculty members. Tenured and tenure-track faculty represent the backbone of any university.In the meantime, let us recall what ULM proposed earlier this year when we learned the higher ed community in Louisiana faced a more than $200 million budget cut for the new fiscal year. At the time, ULM President James Cofer proposed that the university should eliminate some 49 tenured and/or tenure-track faculty positions to deal with ULM's share of higher ed's budget cut. Thanks to some fast-and-loose budgeting employed by the Legislature, higher ed was dealt a roughly $100 million budget cut instead of a more than $200 million cut in the new fiscal year.Let us recall as well that when we learned the higher ed community would be asked to trim its expenditures in the new fiscal year, literally every university president in the state called on the Legislature to raise taxes to offset proposed budget cuts for higher ed. Thankfully the Legislature ignored higher ed's bellyaching.While we regret to witness any of Louisiana's institutions of higher education deal with a reduction in state funding, we would do well to remind ourselves of why universities exist in the first place. They exist to educate people.That said, we are a bit disturbed by ULM's decision to spare its athletic department—for the most part—in sharing in cuts the university leveled to balance its budget. After all, ULM is projected to use some $2.7 million in state funding to prop up its athletic department in the 2009-2010 fiscal year.ULM should rethink its position on athletics versus education.If the university sticks to its guns, so to speak, we'll have a clear understanding of what's important at ULM and what's not.
http://www.ouachitacitizen.com/news.php?id=4645
The University of Louisiana-Monroe unveiled its plan on Monday to cope with a $4.5-million reduction in state funding for the 2009-2010 fiscal year, which began July 1.Like every publicly funded higher education institution in Louisiana, ULM faced a cut in state appropriations for the new fiscal year. The higher education community as a whole was dealt a more than $100 million budget cut. The cut was necessary in light of a more than $1 billion budget shortfall the Legislature encountered during its regular session. The 2009 regular legislative session adjourned in late June.According to ULM, the university will not renew contracts for 36 faculty and other staff members to deal with its reduction in state funding in the new fiscal year. More than 41 vacant faculty and staff positions will be eliminated. Also, staff members at ULM will take furloughs from one to four days depending upon their annual salary. Staffers who make less than $30,000 per year and ULM law enforcement personnel will not be affected by the furloughs. Faculty members won't be affected by furloughs either.According to Laura Harris, a spokesperson at ULM, no tenured or tenure-track faculty members were terminated to aid the university's efforts to balance its budget, which must be approved by the governing board at the University of Louisiana System later this month.If Harris is correct, ULM was wise not to terminate any tenured or tenure-track faculty members. Tenured and tenure-track faculty represent the backbone of any university.In the meantime, let us recall what ULM proposed earlier this year when we learned the higher ed community in Louisiana faced a more than $200 million budget cut for the new fiscal year. At the time, ULM President James Cofer proposed that the university should eliminate some 49 tenured and/or tenure-track faculty positions to deal with ULM's share of higher ed's budget cut. Thanks to some fast-and-loose budgeting employed by the Legislature, higher ed was dealt a roughly $100 million budget cut instead of a more than $200 million cut in the new fiscal year.Let us recall as well that when we learned the higher ed community would be asked to trim its expenditures in the new fiscal year, literally every university president in the state called on the Legislature to raise taxes to offset proposed budget cuts for higher ed. Thankfully the Legislature ignored higher ed's bellyaching.While we regret to witness any of Louisiana's institutions of higher education deal with a reduction in state funding, we would do well to remind ourselves of why universities exist in the first place. They exist to educate people.That said, we are a bit disturbed by ULM's decision to spare its athletic department—for the most part—in sharing in cuts the university leveled to balance its budget. After all, ULM is projected to use some $2.7 million in state funding to prop up its athletic department in the 2009-2010 fiscal year.ULM should rethink its position on athletics versus education.If the university sticks to its guns, so to speak, we'll have a clear understanding of what's important at ULM and what's not.
http://www.ouachitacitizen.com/news.php?id=4645
louisiana political corruption
Impeachment hearings open today for Judge Thomas Porteous
By Jonathan Tilove
November 17, 2009, 7:05AM
A federal court refused Monday to issue a temporary restraining order to block the opening of congressional hearings today into the potential impeachment of U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous of Metairie.
Judge Thomas PorteousBut Judge Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said attorneys for Porteous may still file for a preliminary injunction later this year, though he counseled that their chances for success are a "very, very long shot."
Richard Westling, representing Porteous, said he will consult with his client and let the court know his decision Nov. 30.
Irvin Nathan, general counsel for the House of Representatives, argued against the temporary restraining order, saying that if Leon had granted it, it would have been the first time in history that a court had tried to block any kind of congressional hearing.
"There is not a case in our history in which a court sought to keep a congressional proceeding from proceeding," Nathan said. Leon agreed that granting the restraining order would have been "beyond extraordinary."
The hour-long hearing was held in the federal courthouse in Washington, a few blocks from the Capitol.
At issue is whether Congress, in considering impeachment, is violating Porteous' Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by using testimony he was required to give under a grant of immunity from criminal prosecution to forumlate strategy and prepare witnesses in making the case for impeachment.
Nathan argued that the Justice Department long ago decided not to prosecute Porteous and that impeachment is explicitly not a criminal proceeding. It is also, he said, a congressional responsibility wholly beyond the power of the court.
Westling countered that impeachment is, in effect, a "quasi-criminal'' proceeding that could lead to Porteous being removed from office and barred from holding future federal office. That would happen if the House impeaches Porteous and the Senate convicts him.
Leon told Westling there was "just no precedent" for his pleading that Porteous' Fifth Amendment rights were being compromised in the impeachment proceedings. Westling replied that impeachment cases are very rare, and that he does not think there has ever been an impeachment case where immunized testimony was being used to help construct the case against the defendant.
Even without a temporary restraining order, Leon said, Porteous faces no imminent danger of lasting harm. While the House Judiciary Committee task force will hold its first hearings today and Wednesday on the Porteous case, Leon said the full House probably will not vote until the spring on whether to impeach Porteous and send his case to the Senate for trial.
Eight potential witnesses have been granted immunity to testify before the impeachment task force.
Before his appointment to the bench, Leon was counsel to Congress in the investigation of three sitting presidents, including in the Iran-Contra and Whitewater cases. He was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush.
Porteous was nominated by President Clinton.
Among other things, he stands accused of making false statements in his personal bankruptcy filing, on his annual financial disclosure forms and on his applicaton for a bank loan, and not disclosing financial gifts from lawyers who appeared before his court.
While he continues to receive his salary as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, he is not allowed to hear cases.
. . . . . . .
Jonathan Tilove can be reached at jtilove@timespicayune.com or 202.383.7827.
© 2009 NOLA.com. All rights reserved.
By Jonathan Tilove
November 17, 2009, 7:05AM
A federal court refused Monday to issue a temporary restraining order to block the opening of congressional hearings today into the potential impeachment of U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous of Metairie.
Judge Thomas PorteousBut Judge Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said attorneys for Porteous may still file for a preliminary injunction later this year, though he counseled that their chances for success are a "very, very long shot."
Richard Westling, representing Porteous, said he will consult with his client and let the court know his decision Nov. 30.
Irvin Nathan, general counsel for the House of Representatives, argued against the temporary restraining order, saying that if Leon had granted it, it would have been the first time in history that a court had tried to block any kind of congressional hearing.
"There is not a case in our history in which a court sought to keep a congressional proceeding from proceeding," Nathan said. Leon agreed that granting the restraining order would have been "beyond extraordinary."
The hour-long hearing was held in the federal courthouse in Washington, a few blocks from the Capitol.
At issue is whether Congress, in considering impeachment, is violating Porteous' Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by using testimony he was required to give under a grant of immunity from criminal prosecution to forumlate strategy and prepare witnesses in making the case for impeachment.
Nathan argued that the Justice Department long ago decided not to prosecute Porteous and that impeachment is explicitly not a criminal proceeding. It is also, he said, a congressional responsibility wholly beyond the power of the court.
Westling countered that impeachment is, in effect, a "quasi-criminal'' proceeding that could lead to Porteous being removed from office and barred from holding future federal office. That would happen if the House impeaches Porteous and the Senate convicts him.
Leon told Westling there was "just no precedent" for his pleading that Porteous' Fifth Amendment rights were being compromised in the impeachment proceedings. Westling replied that impeachment cases are very rare, and that he does not think there has ever been an impeachment case where immunized testimony was being used to help construct the case against the defendant.
Even without a temporary restraining order, Leon said, Porteous faces no imminent danger of lasting harm. While the House Judiciary Committee task force will hold its first hearings today and Wednesday on the Porteous case, Leon said the full House probably will not vote until the spring on whether to impeach Porteous and send his case to the Senate for trial.
Eight potential witnesses have been granted immunity to testify before the impeachment task force.
Before his appointment to the bench, Leon was counsel to Congress in the investigation of three sitting presidents, including in the Iran-Contra and Whitewater cases. He was nominated to the bench by President George W. Bush.
Porteous was nominated by President Clinton.
Among other things, he stands accused of making false statements in his personal bankruptcy filing, on his annual financial disclosure forms and on his applicaton for a bank loan, and not disclosing financial gifts from lawyers who appeared before his court.
While he continues to receive his salary as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, he is not allowed to hear cases.
. . . . . . .
Jonathan Tilove can be reached at jtilove@timespicayune.com or 202.383.7827.
© 2009 NOLA.com. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)