Monday, May 14, 2018


Everyone knows Montoya will not wipe his own ass without someone giving him money.

True to form McHale and Barton knowing nothing about the English language and how isolated words mean nothing jump on the bandwagon. Barton is pathetic.  You give him the legal opinion which says he is dead wrong and is always the case with Barton he digs in and refuses to consider reality.  McHale claims to be a word smith, but knows zilch about how words work.

Before I get to the opinion on the issue, what does the key Canon say.  "Canon 5(2) A judge or judicial candidate shall not authorize the public use of his or her name endorsing another candidate for any public office, except that either may indicate support for a political party. A judge or judicial candidate may attend political events and express his or her views on political matters in accord with this Canon and Canon 3B(10)."

Barton having the intellect and integrity of Donald Trump, claims a picture is a judge allowing his name to be used as an endorsement. First the standard is authorize not endorse.  But Barton is never lost in just making up shit. Can you be that stupid?  No, so we know he is playing dirty politics.

I'm done with Barton.  He is a major source of everything gone wrong in this town.  While dealing with the death of Nena, instead of showing some empathy for Javiera Vera who missed the debate because he was dealing with his mother's funeral, Barton chose to take a childish cheap shot at what Javier Vera's wife was wearing.  The Vera family chose not to use the death of Javier's mother to gain sympathy.  Barton being the pathetic bum that he is, attacks Duardo for disrespecting the passing of his wife, and her wish to donate her body to science, and the BV backed Barton and Nena's wish.  But Javier Vera is dealing with the funeral of his mother and Barton attacks his wife for what she is wearing.  Barton is totally devoid of a conscience.

Because Barton cannot find his balls even with the Hubble Telescope, he will not file a complaint to prove his point.  That is the core problem with people like Barton and the trolls.  "someone should do something about this." It is time Barton and the trolls be that somebody instead of being spineless cowards.

Will he apologize to anyone?  No.  When I caught him red handed using an altered email from Roman Perez, instead of apologizing to me for all his bogus attacks on me when I was right about the altered email, Barton said "hell no he would never apologize."  My response was to buy his grandson a subscription to National Geographic. That is the difference between the two of us.  He had no problems accepting the gift.  I do not play the Barton game.  He is beyond pathetic.


The key language in the rule is as a judge.  Barton, McHale, nor Montoya cannot give you one example of where Judge Sanchez said "hi I am judge Sanchez and I support Cordova.  They are using classic Montoya junk journalism.  They take a picture and then ad their own words without evidence.

Nathan Hecht while a Justice on the Texas Supreme Court repeatedly stated Harriet Miers was highly qualified to be a US Supreme Court Justice.  The court found this did not violate Canon 5(2)

"The commission's first charge alleges that Petitioner violated Canon 5(2) when he “authorized the public use of his name and title to endorse his close friend, Harriet Miers, a candidate for public office.”   The question presented is whether the commission proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Petitioner authorized the public use of his name endorsing another candidate, Miers, for public office.   We hold the commission did not."

The court continues, and this is where understanding how words work is key, lost on the fake word smith McHale, Barton who cares shit about the English language, and Montoya who will print anything for beer money.

"We recognize it is integral to the commission's position that the “authorization” provision of Canon 5(2) be read and interpreted to prohibit a judge from “endorsing” or “supporting” another candidate.   The commission's first charge contains no factual allegations Petitioner “authorized” the public use of his name endorsing Miers' nomination to the United States Supreme Court.   The commission's evidence focused exclusively on establishing Petitioner had supported Miers' nomination.   The commission urged this Court to hold that as Petitioner was a sitting Justice on the Texas Supreme Court and made public statements to the news media supporting Miers' nomination, Petitioner was guilty of endorsing another candidate, in violation of the “authorization” provision of Canon 5(2).

The court notes, the word endorse does not exist in the Canon as the pivotal controlling word, but Barton googles endorse and says, "see I am right."  Barton cannot even read a simple Canon of  ethics and see it says "authorize" and not "endorse." The court continues,

"In effect, the commission has reinserted the heretofore rejected “endorsement” prohibition into Canon 5(2), thereby recasting the meaning of the “authorization” provision.   In so doing, the commission has entirely ignored, if not dismissed, the importance of the pivotal term “authorized” in its pleadings, its evidence, and its arguments."

This is not a question of Barton, McHale and Montoya not knowing the law, it is a question of out right lying and saying the pivotal word is "endorse" which is not in the Canon, and ignoring the word "authorize" which is in the Canon.

The court continues.  "The issue before us is the construction of the “authorization” provision of Canon 5(2), including examining the meaning of “authorize.”

The court continues.   "A judge's act of giving a candidate express permission to include the judge's name on a publicly distributed list of persons endorsing the candidate would violate Canon 5(2).   See Public Admonition of Justice of the Peace Torres, No. 00-0689-JP (Comm'n Jud. Conduct Aug. 16, 2000).   Any other fact scenario must be analogous to this situation to constitute a violation of Canon 5(2).   That is, the facts must show the judge gave permission."

Where in the picture is Sanchez giving Cordova permission to use his name in his judicial capacity?   The picture is nothing more than a private person wearing a shirt with Cordova's name on it.  Is it smart?  Nope, but unethical? Nope

Remember all over the national news media Nathan Hecht was quoted as calling Harriet Miers as highly qualified for the Supreme Court.  But that does not mean he authorized the press or Harriet Miers to use his name.  

Words matter, unless your job is to confuse people and distract them from the truth.

Finally from the court: "However, having reviewed Petitioner's statements, we do not find any evidence that he authorized the media to use his name publicly endorsing Miers.29  Any argument that Petitioner impliedly authorized the public use of his name endorsing Miers would be futile and unavailing.30  We therefore conclude the commission failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Petitioner authorized the public use of his name endorsing Miers.


BobbyWC said...

how does your moronic rant and lies square with me taking a comment from the drunks page saying my writing can be obnoxious at times and me agreeing with the person. Does the concept of truth eve a consideration in your cowardly anony posts.

Bobby wc

Anonymous said...

Notice that Cordova can't even spell judgment correctly!