9th Circuit chief justice: porn master
posted at 7:50 pm on June 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
The chief justice of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals apparently needs a refresher course on Internet technology. Alex Kozinski stored sexually explicit photos and videos on his personal web site, stating later that he thought no one could access the materials. Uh, sure:
One of the highest-ranking federal judges in the United States, who is currently presiding over an obscenity trial in Los Angeles, has maintained a publicly accessible website featuring sexually explicit photos and videos.
Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, acknowledged in an interview with The Times that he had posted the materials, which included a photo of naked women on all fours painted to look like cows and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal. Some of the material was inappropriate, he conceded, although he defended other sexually explicit content as “funny.”
Kozinski, 57, said that he thought the site was for his private storage and that he was not aware the images could be seen by the public, although he also said he had shared some material on the site with friends. After the interview Tuesday evening, he blocked public access to the site.
I suppose he could have been ignorant enough to think that material uploaded to a personal website couldn’t be accessed by the public, but unfortunately, he also admitted to sharing the site with his friends. That would tend to indicate that the material was purposefully left accessible to web surfers lucky or unlucky enough to stumble on his site.
The bigger question is whether Kozinski didn’t have better things to do with his time. He claims never to have used court computer systems to maintain the site, but even then, the kind of material calls into question Kozinski’s judgment. The images included farm animals, women painted as farm animals, transsexuals, and excretory functions. Kozinski told the LA Times that he didn’t intend to store those images and must have mistaken them for other, less bizarre pictures and videos.
Uh-huh.
And while we can point to the 9th Circuit as the most liberal appellate bench in the nation, Kozinski is a Reagan appointee and considered one of the court’s more conservative members.
Kozinski may want to recuse himself from this obscenity case. Clearly, the exposure of this part of Kozinski’s private life will cause some to question his objectivity in determining the the community standards involved in adjudicating obscenity. Given the descriptions of Kozinski’s gallery, I doubt he’s in much of a position to know those standards in any case.
Update: Over at Patterico, a bit of a debate is going on between Patterico and Justin Levine. Patterico calls the images “pornographic, perverted, and/or disturbing”; Justin says, rather pedestrian and innocuous. Most disturbing from a legal point of view were the voluminous number of copyrighted MP3s on Kozinski’s site, which indicate that the judge was sharing files illegally.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
WTF?
ParisParamus on June 11, 2008 at 7:52 PM
Sounds like he is a silly goose.
muyoso on June 11, 2008 at 7:53 PM
Disgusting. Shaking my head. sighing.
Hunt035 on June 11, 2008 at 7:56 PM
The entire 9th Circuit Court has been a joke for a long time.
Entelechy on June 11, 2008 at 7:56 PM
No thanks, Your Honor, I’d rather not approach the bench.
trubble on June 11, 2008 at 7:57 PM
BestWeirdest Headline Yet.amerpundit on June 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM
sad
offroadaz on June 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM
And citizens are being “judged” by jerks like this? The courts in this country are a dirty joke.
rplat on June 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM
You would think that a Supreme Court justice would be intelligent enough to change permissions on a web site. Apparently not.
Pent. on June 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM
Perfect.
When is California going to break apart from the mainland anyways?
WisCon on June 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM
Or sheep…or cow…
bikermailman on June 11, 2008 at 7:58 PM
It figures that something like this would happen to a judge on the 9th Circuit. When you have a history of making nutty decisions in your professional life, then it’s more than likely that you will make nutty decisions in your private life as well.
SoulGlo on June 11, 2008 at 7:59 PM
One prosecuter leaning to the other one,” So thats where that damn evidence went!!”
DRLIMO on June 11, 2008 at 8:01 PM
I’ve seen pictures like this. They are no different then those I have seen on the cover of Vanity Fair. Also, the defense atty had no objection. Not sure what the prosecution thinks. I don’t think I could sit on the jury. I heard they had to view 6 hours of “barnyard tapes.” I couldn’t take it.
Blake on June 11, 2008 at 8:01 PM
Change we can believe in. This is the kind of man BO wants on the bench. Keep the change.
/mooooo
Sefton on June 11, 2008 at 8:02 PM
PLEASE GIVE CALIFORNIA BACK TO THE MEXICANS!
ctmom on June 11, 2008 at 8:02 PM
The “9th Circus” strikes again.
forest on June 11, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Kosinzki is the sane one. Strong believer in the 2nd Amendment and as funny as hell.
Blake on June 11, 2008 at 8:03 PM
Here come da Judge.
Here come da Judge.
/what?
Sefton on June 11, 2008 at 8:04 PM
Well there ya go. The man was simply bored beyond belief since his rulings never matter! ;-0
Seriously, a guy who maintains a public website “which included a photo of naked women on all fours painted to look like cows and a video of a half-dressed man cavorting with a sexually aroused farm animal” has no business with a lifetime federal job.
highhopes on June 11, 2008 at 8:06 PM
But he at least thought his “gallery” was private. Are you saying anyone who has porn on their computer or viewed porn lacks the ability to judge the standards of the community? I mean, I’ve seen some wild stuff on bloggers site’s (wink) — though not bestiality which is definitely illegal.
Blake on June 11, 2008 at 8:07 PM
Laughing so hard, I’m crying. AWESOME!
robblefarian on June 11, 2008 at 8:08 PM
Well, Cali is the porn capitol of the U.S. Van Nuys is from where most of the “adult” movie come.
Not that I know anything about that.
madmonkphotog on June 11, 2008 at 8:10 PM
Meh, porn don’t bother me none to much. A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do. If you’re a man that don’t like women painted as farm animals, then…er…um…oh forget it.
robblefarian on June 11, 2008 at 8:11 PM
Oops! I thought this was allahpundit’s post. That explains a lot. Nothing personal, Ed. Just a lawyer thang.
Blake on June 11, 2008 at 8:11 PM
Ya think?
Quisp on June 11, 2008 at 8:12 PM
I think the real question is, what is the URL?
Jeff_McAwesome on June 11, 2008 at 8:15 PM
Correction:
And citizens are being “jerked” by judges like this? The courts in this country are a dirty joke.
Tim Burton on June 11, 2008 at 8:16 PM
The case is resolved. I have the solution in hand.
MaiDee on June 11, 2008 at 8:18 PM
Are you on freaking LSD? The son of a bitch should be impeached.
revolution on June 11, 2008 at 8:19 PM
I live in the 9th circuit and it is the most overturned circuit in the country. It’s so bad that the feds have threatened to break it up. You can see why. Cow? Who thinks up these things?
thatcher on June 11, 2008 at 8:19 PM
T. M. I.
(puts fingers in ears)
I can’t hear you! LALALALALALALALALA!!!!!
CurtZHP on June 11, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Oy!
The Ninth Circuit is the largest circuit, therefore, would have more cases overturned.
Kosinzki is an excellent judge. It’s clear that those of you criticizing him have never read any of his opinions.
He’s a funny guy.
Blake on June 11, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Obviously not, since it’s Chatsworth.
Blake on June 11, 2008 at 8:28 PM
GOATSE!
Reaps on June 11, 2008 at 8:30 PM
2 judges 1 cup?
doubleplusundead on June 11, 2008 at 8:44 PM
well as a webmaster, there are several underlying questions here…
-
were these actual pages or just the content stored?
were there “no index” tags for search engine robots?
have any search engines cached the files or pages?
what type of server was it? there are many personal storage severs.
-
if never accessed from work, and never referred to at work, I don’t see the relevance… it’s immaterial to the case at hand, and may even insinuate that he is specifically well informed in the area of obscenity. ignorance is quite likely as even the most well versed webmasters don’t know it all.
-
devil’s advocate
Kaptain Amerika on June 11, 2008 at 8:49 PM
MrC_5150 on June 11, 2008 at 8:59 PM
great. and our Arizona Employer Sanctions Law is in front of this court as we speak on appeal. Sherrif Joe raided a huge water park operator yesterday, arrested many illegals and seized the records of 1200+ employess. if they determine that the employer consired with the employees to dummy up immigration documents, or even failed to properly vet their employees, the Sanctions law can hold them liable for civil fines and suspension or revocation of thier biz license. and Old Joe is just looking for someone to make an example out of.
DrW on June 11, 2008 at 9:02 PM
Damn you!
Where do I send the bill for a replacement 24″ LCD monitor and a fresh can of Red Bull?
sulla on June 11, 2008 at 9:06 PM
(I guess you can’t be an AoS Moron and not at least know about 2G1C, even if you haven’t seen it – as I can gratefully say I haven’t.)
sulla on June 11, 2008 at 9:09 PM
Heh, true.
doubleplusundead on June 11, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Dude, the 9th Circuit is way up North. Check maps.google.com for distance between Van Nuys and the SF Bay area. You’re talking about the distance between Cape Hatteras and Martha’s Vineyard.
The Race Card on June 11, 2008 at 9:28 PM
There was a time when I used to look most of these libs as having some type of intergrity and intelligence. They were wrong on just about everything, but, still, it was hard to picture them as anything less than people of some kind of intergrity. I mean, a lot of them are lawyers, judges, teachers and so forth. People of high office with a certain amount of prestige and power.
Well, now that I’m an adult, I realize most of them are really just low life losers, who have somehow managed to fool enough people to get elected, appointed or hired. The true scum of the earth, that if it were another age or time, would most likely be restricted to asking for pennies on the sidewalk or making baskets in padded rooms.
JellyToast on June 11, 2008 at 9:29 PM
Interesting. Some people, mostly libertarians, had mentioned him as a possible SCOTUS pick for the Republicans. I think we can assume that the only way he gets on now is if the Dems appoint him.
flenser on June 11, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Hey, isn’t Alex Kozinski is one of OURS?
EJDolbow on June 11, 2008 at 9:40 PM
The Ninth Circuit covers 9 states, plus Guam and Saipan. The HQ is in SF, but Kozinski’s based in the Pasadena division, which is a different part of the L.A. area from Van Nuys.
I have no idea where Cape Hatteras and Martha’s Vineyard are, though, so I can’t say if that’s an accurate analogy for the distance. OK, I do know they’re somewhere back East, and MV is in Massachusetts. Or maybe Rhode Island. Shoot, I don’t know. I’m from California, I don’t have to know.
Alex_SF on June 11, 2008 at 9:42 PM
if you are asking if he is a conservative — he IS a Reagan appointee. Jelly Toast seems to have skipped over that fact in his/her reading. Figures.
Im still waiting for the ass thrashing that would occur if this judge were, in truth, a liberal. You all wouldnt be such jokesters then, I bet.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 9:51 PM
Kozinski was on the “Dating Game” and won?
Dating Game contestant turned Supreme Court scumbag
MrC_5150 on June 11, 2008 at 9:53 PM
“I can’t define pornography, but I know it when it passes the Archive test.”
sulla on June 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
in fact, jelly toast’s reply, which appears to be predicated on the understanding that this is a liberal judge bears out what I just suggested:
I wonder how much of that would have been typed if he/sh had actually read the post properly, and saw that he was a Reagan appointment.
You Conservatives really suck at being consistent.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 9:54 PM
This is the cherry on top of the **** sundae that is California law and courts.
Screw this state I’m moving to Georgia
Defector01 on June 11, 2008 at 10:01 PM
Wow! Governor Jennifer Granholm was also on that show. The people of Michigan have lost big time.
highhopes on June 11, 2008 at 10:03 PM
Savage has been all over this.
carbon_footprint on June 11, 2008 at 10:03 PM
Three hours worth. Great show tonight.
MrC_5150 on June 11, 2008 at 10:05 PM
yah its all California’s fault — certainly he (a fricking judge) cannot take any personal responsibility. right? I say blame Reagan, he should have known.
In reality, it’s probably not a big deal, but its sure a lot of fun to watch squirming Republicans again, and again, and again.
After all, arent you guys supposed to be morally superior?
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 10:06 PM
Okay, I’ll bite; but just once.
Did you read any of the critical comments above?
SteveMG on June 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
Federal judges can be impeached by Congress.
Sounds like this one ought to be.
MrLynn on June 11, 2008 at 10:18 PM
You people are idiots.
Alex Kozinski is considered by most to a be radical rightwing judge.
Muswell Hillbilly on June 11, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Umm, in fact, I’ve read every comment thus far. The majority of which are attempts, albeit poor, at humor. There’s also some useless banter about the geolocation of SF to the san Fernando valley.
Theres one critical comment from someone who thought this judge was a lib.
The rest, if you even want to call them critical, are a far cry from the lashings that a Dem would get. I can dig prooof out of the other comments on other posts on here, if you really need to prove that out. I doubt you want to go there though.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 10:27 PM
One critical comment? Sorry, that is simply, demonstrably not true.
If you read the comments as you said, you surely most have read more than “one” who said this was unacceptable behavior.
These are in the first 20 or so:
None of the commentators note above said it was a “lib” judge.
You’re looking for a story that isn’t there.
Good luck, though.
SteveMG on June 11, 2008 at 10:35 PM
Ohh, is that so? Than what was this a reference to?
maybe this person was replying to another post?
That must be it.
–
Your 4th quote, above, this one:
That strikes me as lacking any requirement for personal responsibility. In fact, it suggests that this might not have happened had HE NOT been a judge there.
Same thing, sorry.
–
You really want me to dig through the comments here, and show you what similar misteps by libs get, dont you??
Here you go: Mark Foley:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/06/newsom-admits-alcohol-problem-enters-treatment/
I love this comment over there:
Wheres the name calling now?
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 10:45 PM
Look, you came here sticking your tongue out trying to pick a fight. You’re not interested in a good faith discussion because you said there was “one” critical comment about the judge’s actions when I cited 6 or 7.
Second, none of the commentators I – me, I – noted said it was a lib.
Now you’re moving the goalposts and changing topics.
Sorry, I’m not playing.
SteveMG on June 11, 2008 at 10:50 PM
You miss the entire point of my commentary on YOUR comments: You, collectively speaking, are not consistent. You tongue lash Dems, and make apologies for Republicans. And by you, I dont mean the pundits, Im talking about YOU — as in the reader, the commenter. This judge is a crap head, regardless of political affiliation, and ought to be called one.
Im so tired of seeing justice meted out based on how someone votes. Get over it — your party has the same amount of shitheads mine does. And guess what, you’re not morally superior.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 10:52 PM
Dont tell me how I came here. I came here the same way you did. Ive quoted the same comment TWICE where clearly this person writes as if they think the judge is a Liberal. maybe you ought to get your eyes checked. Your reading skills seem a little weak.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 10:54 PM
I’m not really into thrashing asses, the judge might be though, check his stash. As for not goofing on the guy if he were a lib, you don’t know me very well, I goof on dumbasses regardless of party.
doubleplusundead on June 11, 2008 at 10:55 PM
sucks to have past comments thrown in your face. Gotta love those archived posts. You keep up the good fight steve-o — eventually you might have decent argument.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 10:56 PM
If you want to argue that the tribalism of politics leads to hyprocrisy or double standards, make that argument.
Frankly, that’s not much of a revelation (whether it’s politics or sports or religion or book clubs, humans attack the “other” and defend their “own”).
But you didn’t want to make that reasonable, if tired, argument. You wanted to get on your own high horse and sanctimoniously look down at others.
Suggestion: If you wish to lecture others on hyprocrisy and sanctimony, your’re going to have to raise your game, so to speak.
SteveMG on June 11, 2008 at 10:58 PM
Like I said – and I’ll say whatever I want to say unless the owners of the site say otherwise – you came here wagging your little penis looking to pick a fight.
You have no interest – zero – in having any reasonable discussion.
Zip your pants up and get lost.
SteveMG on June 11, 2008 at 11:02 PM
The issue with the 9th Circus Court of Appeals is not the sheer number of decisions overturned, it is the proportionate number of cases overturned. Their overturn rate is staggering compared to the other federal circuits.
seanrobins on June 11, 2008 at 11:02 PM
Listen, gang!
Who cares if he’s a lib or not?
Who cares if he was appointed by a Dem or a Republican?
He’s in the useless 9th Circus.
And he’s a demented pig, and should be off the bench. (Especially, if there is any indication he used court computers to access his web site)
seanrobins on June 11, 2008 at 11:05 PM
steve-o
Sorry to disappoint you, but I dont have a penis, Im a female.
Dont self project.
And like you, I’ll say whatever I want. Follow? You opted to reply, no-one forced you. You obviously understood my argument, so I guess I wasnt sanctimonious enough that it was lost on you.
For the record, this web site has limited periods of registration. You cannot just “come here looking for a fight” and register.
You take care now, buddy.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 11:06 PM
seanrobins,
a reasoned thought in a sea of political side-taking — wow.
your_worst_enemy on June 11, 2008 at 11:08 PM
Well, the latest explanation (ahem) is that his son uploaded the photos to his site.
However, if he was aware of this, that’s just as bad.
His career is over and he should resign.
SteveMG on June 11, 2008 at 11:09 PM
“Wagging you penis” is a metaphor. Figure of speech. Look it up.
And try to get some class along the way. Somewhere. Somehow. A little less sanctimony would be appreciated by all.
Gonna be difficult, I understand. But I have faith in you.
Good luck and Godspeed. You’ll need it.
SteveMG on June 11, 2008 at 11:11 PM
What chief judge Alex Kozinski did is impeachable. But I doubt if you’ll ever see it happen.
There are other, and deeper issues with this appellate. Clearly, the 9th circuit web site exposes them of ripping off the public. Cases ARE NOT being heard, but in fact, rulings are quick, fast, and RUBBER STAMPED. Corporate America couldn’t ever get away with what these thieves are getting away with.
byteshredder on June 12, 2008 at 12:02 AM
Kozinski is a damned good judge — I’ve read a number of his opinions — and normally comes to the bench from a libertarian perspective. It wouldn’t surprise me a bit for him to have some risque photographs about, and if he says they’re legal and funny….they’re very probably both legal and funny.
That the LAT is trotting this out as a scandal smells like a standard liberal hit piece by the preeminent SoCal fishwrapper.
The last SCOTUS appointment, I had Kozinski as my second favorite choice (after Janice Rogers Brown)(not that I’m unhappy with the result). I would expect that he has a long and distinguished career ahead of him, and may have more of a future as a justice than the LAT has as a going concern.
cthulhu on June 12, 2008 at 12:03 AM
Reminder: these judges are very efficient at on the job multi-tasking.
Shy Guy on June 12, 2008 at 12:10 AM
In my best Harvey Korman voice :
tree hugging sister on June 12, 2008 at 12:20 AM
Let me guess. Would Kozinski’s site be MooOn.org?
Dr. Charles G. Waugh on June 12, 2008 at 12:26 AM
Impeachment based on what? That he looks at photos of ladies’ naughty bits? Is that grounds for impeachment now? Ridiculous.
Blake on June 12, 2008 at 12:43 AM
I understood the comment as being cynical.
Shy Guy on June 12, 2008 at 1:40 AM
Says you. We recently got a ruling from the Ninth on a case that we briefed a year and a half previously. The trial was over two years before the Court of Appeals published its opinion. Say what you want about the Ninth, but “fast” is not the first criticism that comes to mind.
As for Judge K, here’s a site with a collection of some of his writings, including a few of his better-known opinions. He’s one of the smartest judges on the federal appellate bench — up there with Posner — a very hard worker, with a sense of humor and a libertarian/conservative slant. In other words, he’s not one of those leftist Carter appointees like Schroeder, Pregerson, and Reinhardt. It would really, really suck if something as silly as this damaged his career.
(And if our little troll is still hanging around like a fart in a phone booth, take note that when the Spitzer thing broke I said here that I was sorry his career was ending over that instead of something more substantive. There, run along now.)
Alex_SF on June 12, 2008 at 1:54 AM
One of the stories about Judge Kozinski is that he’s the guy who got porn and other content filters removed from the online connections of federal judges and their immediate employees. Because of this, a federal court clerk can actually read Hotair.com or Little Green Footballs or Michelle’s blog without being foiled by the bans on conservative blogs that show up from time to time in government offices. Thank you, Judge K.
The story, of course, was that Kozinski really, really wanted his porn. It suffices to say, also, that there are many other amusing and non-porn related stories about Kozinski.
Kozinkski is well known for his colorful opinions. His most famous opinion managed to fit in supposedly more than 200 movie references. Without the other judges on his panel noticing.
http://www.blogdenovo.org/archives/000951.html
He’d have been a possible Supreme Court candidate for either of the Bushes, if he weren’t such a famous oddball. And no, I can’t imagine impeaching the guy for porn. Judge Kent’s likely first on the chop for impeachment, anyway.
BlueZ on June 12, 2008 at 1:54 AM
The fact that Reagan appointed this guy is interesting, but it changes nothing. Resignation or impeachment!
Who wants a decision about his life made by this sack of bent wires? Only a video perv with smart lawyers, apparently. Judgy wanted to make jurors sit through hours of recorded sewage? That alone is sick.
Savage asserts that the case was shopped and I agree. This is no coincidence.
Reagan wanted to appoint the first woman Supreme Court Justice too. It was a mistake and she damaged the country and the Constitution with her quackery. In speeches I heard her talk about her feelings and her policies. Not much about the Constitution. It only goes to show that even the best presidents make mistakes.
Feedie on June 12, 2008 at 2:11 AM
Censored examples of what he had, still content warning.
I wouldn’t watch at work either.
- The Cat
MirCat on June 12, 2008 at 2:51 AM
Uhh, ghastly! Even worse than I thought.
Feedie on June 12, 2008 at 3:08 AM
Riiiiigght. A judge really, really needs to “share some material with friends” when a judge is presiding over a criminal case, especially when it involves charges of obscenity.
I got a mental image while reading this article of a certain judge who was doing ~weird things~ while in the courtroom, ~things~ that his long robe and big desk covered from the view of the public. When confronted (suggestive noises could be heard in the courtroom), the judge said he was using a certain utensil from a certain trial to better understand that utensil, that the issue needed his further exploration (he may have called it “research”).
Time to revise the Ninth Circuit, to state the obvious.
S on June 12, 2008 at 4:00 AM
There was a time when I used to look most of these libs as having some type of intergrity and intelligence. They were wrong on just about everything, but, still, it was hard to picture them as anything less than people of some kind of intergrity. I mean, a lot of them are lawyers, judges, teachers and so forth. People of high office with a certain amount of prestige and power.
Well, now that I’m an adult, I realize most of them are really just low life losers, who have somehow managed to fool enough people to get elected, appointed or hired. The true scum of the earth, that if it were another age or time, would most likely be restricted to asking for pennies on the sidewalk or making baskets in padded rooms.
maybe this person was replying to another post?
Oh big deal,, I made a mistake, so I thought he was a lib!?? It’s the freakin 9th circuit for cryin out loud! My point, about libs, is still good. Maybe it doesn’t apply to him, but it was still brilliant!
JellyToast on June 12, 2008 at 7:34 AM
Kozinski is a smart guy, pretty conservative/libertarian, and generally a good judge. But the most important part of being a judge is to have good judgment; having a “pornfolio” publicly available, with XXX content, that you admittedly share with friends is very poor judgment.
I doubt Kozinski will be thrown off the bench for this, but it’s both a shame and an example of the arrogance of the federal judiciary. As far as a SCOTUS appointment goes, he will join the ranks of Douglas Ginsburg in terms of great judges whose personal failings precluded their appointment.
Outlander on June 12, 2008 at 7:41 AM
The 9th Circus Court of Schlameals, to be exact.
Brat on June 12, 2008 at 8:50 AM
So that’s why judges wear robes!
argos on June 12, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Oh please. Most of those images have appeared on other blogs or been linked to by blogs HotAir links to regularly.
The LAT alleged he had 12 mps. Since, when does 12 equate voluminous?
Blake on June 12, 2008 at 9:43 AM
What a scoop – NOT!
corona on June 12, 2008 at 9:55 AM
Can someone tell me why this is anybody’s business but his?
RMC1618 on June 12, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Give it back? They have already taken it.
Johan Klaus on June 12, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Something about character and intelligence.
Johan Klaus on June 12, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Judgement.
Johan Klaus on June 12, 2008 at 10:22 AM
LOL!
greekinfidel on June 12, 2008 at 10:52 AM
Note to your_worst_enemy:
Just because someone is a “Reagan appointee” does not automatically mean he’s a conservative.
DPierre on June 12, 2008 at 10:58 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »