Awww, somebody's in trouble

[HisArpy]

California AG Rob Bonta has had an ethics complaint filed against him. Oops.

https://redstate.com/jenvanlaar/202...for-misstating-federal-education-law-n2162790

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

California AG Rob Bonta has had an ethics complaint filed against him. Oops.

https://redstate.com/jenvanlaar/202...for-misstating-federal-education-law-n2162790

Let’s see how the process plays out. Bonta deserves a chance to defend himself.

 

[Bray123]

https://www.biasly.com/sources/redstate-bias-rating/
Analyst ratings:
Bias, Very Conservative
47% Reliable

 

[phrodeau]

So it’s unethical to intimidate school boards? That’s new.

 

[Bray123]

So it’s unethical to intimidate school boards? That’s new.

In other news, it's OK to have armed gangs intimidate school boards.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/sheri...loucester-virginia?ref=home?ref=home?ref=home

 

[Rightguide]

Let’s see how the process plays out. Bonta deserves a chance to defend himself.

There is no defense for his unconstitutional state of mind and the tyrannical lawfare he's imposed on the people of California. I can't wait for Judge Benetiz to slap the smirk off his face in the coming weeks.

 

[ll74]

There is no defense for his unconstitutional state of mind and the tyrannical lawfare he's imposed on the people of California. I can't wait for Judge Benetiz to slap the smirk off his face in the coming weeks.

Obviously you're an objective and serious person

 

[Bray123]

There is no defense for his unconstitutional state of mind and the tyrannical lawfare he's imposed on the people of California. I can't wait for Judge Benetiz to slap the smirk off his face in the coming weeks.

Tyrannical and unconstitutional apparently means not allowing parents to compel schools to teach drivel.

The parents are allowed to teach the kids drivel themselves but that's not enough. They have to force other people's children to suffer it. But Newsom and Bonta are tyrants.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

There is no defense for his unconstitutional state of mind and the tyrannical lawfare he's imposed on the people of California. I can't wait for Judge Benetiz to slap the smirk off his face in the coming weeks.

Yet you suck trumps cock at every given chance. Your opinion on anything legal or ethical is forever horse shit, trumptard.

 

[HisArpy]

Let’s see how the process plays out. Bonta deserves a chance to defend himself.

Yes he does.

In real world terms, the State Bar will do nothing even if they find he did indeed act unethically by trying to intimidate the school board members.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Yes he does.

In real world terms, the State Bar will do nothing even if they find he did indeed act unethically by trying to intimidate the school board members.

If the Age of Trump has taught us one thing, it's that lawyers have carte blanche to lie and misrepresent themselves when not inside a court of law, under the guise of "advocacy".

 

[HisArpy]

There is no defense for his unconstitutional state of mind and the tyrannical lawfare he's imposed on the people of California. I can't wait for Judge Benetiz to slap the smirk off his face in the coming weeks.

He won't. Firstly because the decisions on his desk won't come out for several more months. I'm thinking sometime between this Nov and Feb 2024. Secondly, he's not going to give the state any trivial grounds for the inevitable appeal. Thirdly, he's part of the system which ignores egregious behavior on the part of the State and the DOJ attorneys.

Not that I agree, I think the State needs punished for what it's doing. The State is citing Jim Crow laws designed to disarm the Freedmen (former slaves) as valid historical analog support of their current gun control laws. Basically, slavery and racism justify the current anti-gun laws.

That kind of BS deserves punishment on the part of the State in general and the lawyers personally for making that argument. As a lawyer, you don't get to argue that laws which were deemed unconstitutional allow your client (the State) to make more unconstitutional laws. That's beyond stupid, yet here's the State DOJ lawyers making that exact argument.

 

[Rightguide]

He won't. Firstly because the decisions on his desk won't come out for several more months. I'm thinking sometime between this Nov and Feb 2024. Secondly, he's not going to give the state any trivial grounds for the inevitable appeal. Thirdly, he's part of the system which ignores egregious behavior on the part of the State and the DOJ attorneys.

Not that I agree, I think the State needs punished for what it's doing. The State is citing Jim Crow laws designed to disarm the Freedmen (former slaves) as valid historical analog support of their current gun control laws. Basically, slavery and racism justify the current anti-gun laws.

That kind of BS deserves punishment on the part of the State in general and the lawyers personally for making that argument. As a lawyer, you don't get to argue that laws which were deemed unconstitutional allow your client (the State) to make more unconstitutional laws. That's beyond stupid, yet here's the State DOJ lawyers making that exact argument.

Those decisions were supposed to be out in February of this year after being delayed. They are long overdue I wonder what is behind it. Judge Benetiz declared all of them unconstitutional the first time around, long before Bruen.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

California AG Rob Bonta has had an ethics complaint filed against him. Oops.

https://redstate.com/jenvanlaar/202...for-misstating-federal-education-law-n2162790

"He also cited a California Department of Education FAQ page which includes guidance for school boards on how to apply a state antidiscrimination law - but he doesn't note that what he's citing is simply guidance, not law. He characterizes it as "instruction," which is a bit more serious than guidance, and seems intentionally designed to lead the school board to believe that it's a directive, not a suggestion."

Love the spin, in Blue is Bonta's words, in red is the authors interpretation of both Bonta's words and how those words were received by the Board.

Good luck on your expectations HisArpy....lol

 

[Lazaran]

"He also cited a California Department of Education FAQ page which includes guidance for school boards on how to apply a state antidiscrimination law - but he doesn't note that what he's citing is simply guidance, not law. He characterizes it as "instruction," which is a bit more serious than guidance, and seems intentionally designed to lead the school board to believe that it's a directive, not a suggestion."

Love the spin, in Blue is Bonta's words, in red is the authors interpretation of both Bonta's words and how those words were received by the Board.

Good luck on your expectations HisArpy....lol

•
As BabyBoobs likes to say:

They. Got. Him. Now.

 

[HisArpy]

Those decisions were supposed to be out in February of this year after being delayed. They are long overdue I wonder what is behind it. Judge Benetiz declared all of them unconstitutional the first time around, long before Bruen.

My opinion is he's waiting on one of the other gun cases to drop first. Then there's Rahimi. It would be horrible to decide a case based on the law as laid down in Bruen and have Rahimi invalidate it because SCOTUS placed limits on the new THT test.

 

[stxjimmy]

There is no defense for his unconstitutional state of mind and the tyrannical lawfare he's imposed on the people of California. I can't wait for Judge Benetiz to slap the smirk off his face in the coming weeks.

Can’t wait to see how you view unconstitutionality when 14(3) is applied.

 

[HisArpy]

Can’t wait to see how you view unconstitutionality when 14(3) is applied.

Your TDS inspired Trumpaboutism has no relevancy to the ethics complaint filed against California AG Rob Bonta.

Nor is it relevant to the gun control cases currently being decided in the 9th circuit.



However, I'm sure it's comforting to you to proclaim that everything you've fucked up in your life, including the rest of your life, is all Trump's fault.

 

[stxjimmy]

Your TDS inspired Trumpaboutism has no relevancy to the ethics complaint filed against California AG Rob Bonta.

Nor is it relevant to the gun control cases currently being decided in the 9th circuit.



However, I'm sure it's comforting to you to proclaim that everything you've fucked up in your life, including the rest of your life, is all Trump's fault.

The point I made was about the use of the constitution, how you equate that to my life being fucked up is staggering and based upon nothing more than the bile you and the rest of your cult members propagate.

I keep reading about you being a lawyer, you’re up there with Eastman and Guiliani, intellectually bankrupt to a man.

 

[HisArpy]

The point I made was about the use of the constitution, how you equate that to my life being fucked up is staggering and based upon nothing more than the bile you and the rest of your cult members propagate.

I keep reading about you being a lawyer, you’re up there with Eastman and Guiliani, intellectually bankrupt to a man.

You're stuck on hating Trump and you bootstrap that into hating everything else that doesn't go along with your mental disparity.

 

[stxjimmy]

You're stuck on hating Trump and you bootstrap that into hating everything else that doesn't go along with your mental disparity.

No wrong again, I’d just rather not have an unfit lying grifter in the worlds most powerful job

“People in that crowd said it was the most beautiful day they ever experienced. There was love and unity. I have never seen such spirit and such passion and such love. And I’ve also never seen, simultaneously and from the same people, such hatred at what they’ve done to our country.”

 

[Rightguide]

The point I made was about the use of the constitution, how you equate that to my life being fucked up is staggering and based upon nothing more than the bile you and the rest of your cult members propagate.

I keep reading about you being a lawyer, you’re up there with Eastman and Guiliani, intellectually bankrupt to a man.

This proves you to be an idiot.

 

[stxjimmy]

You are the fool, defending a complete shit of a man and wanting him to be your leader.

 

[Rightguide]

Yoo are the fool, defending a complete shit of a man and wanting him to be your leader.

A complete shit of a man you can't prove broke any law.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

A complete shit of a man you can't prove broke any law.

How many posts have you made about Trump with the word "appeal" in it?

Yah you're fucking shaking in your boots wrongway,because deep down you know Trump's going to get caught up in one, if not all of those ninety one indictments hanging over his coiffed head.