He's a crooked judge with no judicial ethics. What more vetting does the right need? Let's get this guy a life appointment pronto.
Alito Broke First Confirmation Promise, Failed to Recuse Self in Vanguard Case; Ruled in Favor of Fund He Personally Owned Worth $390,000
Boston.com
Plaintiff alleges Alito conflict, Says judge should have recused self
By Sarah Schweitzer and Michael Kranish, Globe Staff | November 3, 2005
Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. ruled in a 2002 case in favor of the Vanguard mutual fund company at a time when he owned more than $390,000 in
Vanguard funds and later complained about an effort to remove him from the case, court records show -- despite an earlier promise to recuse himself
from cases involving the company.
He made specific promises while being confirmed, broke them, then complained about being caught. Yup, he's a real Republican.
The White House, asked about the seeming contradiction between Alito's two statements, said that Alito was put on the case due to an error by
a computer system that should have warned that he was taking a Vanguard-related case, because the investments were listed in the database.
Asked why Alito did not recuse himself after learning that it involved Vanguard, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino criticized those who are raising
questions about Alito's actions.
Right. It's not hypocrisy when you lie consistently. Right? And blame the people that point out your lies of course. After all, you're just the
victim right Tom Noe, Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, Judge Alito, etc. etc. etc.
In the 1990 questionnaire, Alito was asked how he would resolve potential conflicts of interest. He responded: I do not believe that conflicts
of interest relating to my financial interests are likely to arise. I would, however, disqualify myself from any cases involving the Vanguard
companies."
Except, however, he did not.
Has the term
Judicial Profiteer been coined yet? I call it!
[edit on 3-11-2005 by RANT]
