Possible probe coming of Supreme Court Justices Johnson talked too

[CatholicEdHead]

The GOP sure seems to be milking this for all it is worth. They went after Dean Johnson as much as they could under procedure rules. Now they are going after the former and current Supreme Court Justices. One of the lawyers who pushed to make the MN courts more partisan is pushing this effort. He is not identified as a Republican in the article but what else can you conclude over this.

This is yet another sign that this is about power over the institutions and nothing else. Karl Rove crap on the state level. This gets more brazen every day that goes on and gets farther and farther away from the GOP of Arne Carlson.

Edit: I guess this is coming out (pun intended)at the same time as a Kersten article about this. You can see the media manipulation. She is now hinting at censuring Dean Johnson, which probably will pick up steam next week.

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/342788.html

"Greg Wersal said a probe is needed to sort out "grave questions of ethical violations by members of the state's highest court." The rolling controversy stems from a secretly made recording of Senate Majority Leader Johnson telling pastors he had assurances from justices that the current state law would withstand legal challenges.
..........
Wersal asked the Board on Judicial Standards and the Lawyers Board of Professional Responsibility to look into Chief Justice Russell Anderson, Justice G. Barry Anderson, Justice Paul Anderson and former Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz.
........
"The public needs to know if judges on our highest court have engaged in unethical conduct by giving pledges, promises, assurances or mere hints as to how they would rule on an issue likely to come before the court," Wersal wrote in a letter to the two boards. He released the letter to reporters.
.............
It's not the first time Wersal has taken on Supreme Court or its members. He twice tried and failed to win a seat on the Supreme Court during elections. And he was the driving force in a federal lawsuit that successfully eased restrictions on judicial campaigning."

http://www.startribune.com/191/story/339272.html
"Let's get a couple of things straight. First, what's at issue here is not "spin," or "sanding off the truth," as Johnson put it. It's a simple question of fact: Did the Senate's top official discuss the marriage issue with a Supreme Court justice or not? If the answer is yes, a serious breach of ethics has occurred, undermining the integrity of both the legislative and judicial process in this state.

Second, forgiveness -- if it is warranted here -- should not take the form of a plea bargain. Forgiveness comes after the facts come out, and after the guilty party admits his misconduct and promises to amend his ways. Forgiveness is inconsistent with a claim by the accused that he has witnesses who will testify that the Supreme Court is lying.

I do not happen to believe that forgiveness is warranted here. Johnson first claimed to have a commitment from our highest court about a potential future ruling. Then he denied it. He named specific justices, potentially blackening their reputations. At best, he misrepresented their remarks and repeatedly changed his story. At worst, he fabricated everything he said.

If that doesn't warrant censure, I don't know what does."

[trotsky]

1. The same people who are SCREAMING about this

saw no "breach of ethics" whatsoever when Fat Tony Scalia went on his duck hunting adventure with Evil Dick, and that's even when there was a SERIOUS CASE in front of the court concerning Dick's secret energy meetings!

I'm beginning to think the word "hypocrite" just isn't enough to describe today's Republicans.

[katinmn]

2. I seriously trust no one who STILL alligns themselves with the Repugs

Too much has happened. Too many criminals and fascists in the party now. Too many followers with apparent brain damage. The Republican Party we once knew is dead.

These are the same people who will rewrite laws to make it legal for the president to put himself above the Constitution.

[dodger501]

3. Not to mention that thing in Switzerland

Where Scalia pretty much laid right out there on the table how he was going to rule on the Gitmo prisoners.
Wersal is that Weasel who tried to win a judgeship election by changing his name to his wife's Scandinavian name.

[CatholicEdHead]

4. Well, it has been offically filed, with another one at the same time

They hope one of the two complaints will pay off for them.

http://www.startribune.com/587/story/342788.html
"A legislator and a longtime critic of the judicial system filed separate ethics complaints Friday asking a board to determine whether several state Supreme Court justices held improper conversations about Minnesota marriage law with Senate Majority Leader Dean Johnson.
....
In his complaint, Rep. Tom Emmer, R-Delano, asked, "Who is telling the truth?"

Former judicial candidate Greg Wersal, a Golden Valley attorney, also filed a complaint calling for an inquiry by the Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards.
.....
"There is a formal process for handling matters like this and the justices will cooperate fully with that process," said Supreme Court spokesman John Kostouros. "We welcome the opportunity."