Tuesday, July 17, 2018
























THE DRUNK AND THE RACIST AT THEIR WORST

An editor's note.  If Cesar wants to challenge me on the meme, he better go back to the tape.  Only because of a hopelessly corrupt DA was he not indicted for threatening an elected official.  How many times did he cry about not getting his part of the pie?

An update on the research shows a bizarre part of TOMA.  The law generally allows certain elected or public officials to take to the Criminal Section of the AG's office a criminal complaint.  TOMA expressly bars this common practice.  So because we know the corrupt Saenz will do nothing on the criminal violations, unless a citizen brings a grand jury referral nothing will be done.

STILL LAUGHING

Only Cesar would be dumb enough to violate TOMA by hiring Oliviera to defend against a TOMA lawsuit, while violating TOMA.  As the BV noted yesterday, again after the fact Cesar is calling for a meeting to hire someone he already hired.  

I have no idea what the judge will do at the Temporary Injunction hearing. The TRO was easy to predict because it is standard procedure in these cases. A Temporary Injunction gets a lot more complex.  It will be a  tactical error of significant magnitude if Nurith's lawyers do not amend the lawsuit to include the Oliviera TOMA violation.  

A lot of this hinges on pattern and practice and intent.  The court will have to weigh intent heavily. A second TOMA violation complaint on Oliviera's hiring leaves no doubt as to pattern and practice and intent.  Depending on the best argument without this second violation included in the lawsuit,  I can see Wednesday going either way.

JUST BECAUSE OLIVIERA IS AN IDIOT DOES NOT MEAN THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY

Oliviera's argument about no injunctive relief needed is just bizarre because the statute expressly provides for same.  This is how I knew the TRO would issue as a matter of course.

"Section 551.142 of the Act provides as follows: (a) An interested person, including a member of the news media, may bring an action by mandamus or injunction to stop, prevent, or reverse a violation or threatened violation of this chapter by members of a governmental body."

I have only read the answer.  I have not been to the county offices where I would have to go to read  the minutes of the meeting, which could be instructive. Since Oliviera really did not quote any key argument from the minutes I suspect there is nothing there.  But I could be wrong.  If there is strong argument in the minutes supporting GBIC it could be harmful to Nurith Galonsky's claims.  But Rene did not seem quoting from the minutes to be important.

THE SUCKER PUNCH

Evidence has come up with something which destroys Cesar's credibility.  It also shows Oliviera is incredibly stupid.  No one believes their clients.  Any competent lawyer independently verifies the client's claims.  In law school Oliviera must have been at the bar the day they taught this.

No comments: