This week, New York Judge Mary Rosado issued an opinion in Council of City of N.Y. v. Adams. The court is blocking the city from allowing the federal government to maintain office space at Rikers Island. The reason is that Rosado agreed that Mayor Eric Adams had a conflict of interest and likely bargained away the access as part of a quid pro quo arrangement to get the Justice Department to drop criminal charges against him. The opinion is quite extraordinary and, in my view, fundamentally flawed. The opinion generated more heat than light on the proper handling of a conflict of interest.
The court recounts the testimony of Danielle R. Sassoon, Esq., Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, regarding a January 31, 2025, meeting with President Donald J. Trump’s Deputy Attorney General, Emil Bove, and the Mayor’s criminal defense counsel. She claimed that “Adams'[] attorneys repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with [immigration] enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed.”
After that meeting, on February 3, 2025, Mayor Adams’ criminal defense attorney, Alex Spiro, wrote to Bove that the prosecution of the Mayor will “become increasingly problematic as the Trump administration seeks to aggressively enforce immigration laws and remove undocumented immigrants …. [T]he federal government cannot possibly rely on Mayor Adams to be a fully effective partner in all situations in ongoing public-safety missions while he is under federal indictment ….”
Spiro further stressed that Mayor Adams’ “abilities to exercise his powers have also been complicated by his indictment” including his powers to “prevent[] the Office of the Corporation Counsel from litigating challenges to immigration enforcement, prevent[] appointed city employees from taking public stances against enforcement efforts, [and to] re-open[] the ICE office on Rikers Island ….”
One week later, on February 10, 2025, Bove directed federal prosecutors to dismiss with prejudice the pending criminal charges against Mayor Adams.
The plaintiffs allege that these negotiations traded away city policies or privileges in exchange for the dropping of the charges, a charge that Adams vehemently denies.
On February 13, 2025, after meeting with the Administration’s “Border Czar,” Thomas Homan, Mayor Adams announced that he would issue an executive order allowing federal immigration authorities to be present on Rikers Island. The next day, the Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss all pending criminal charges against Mayor Adams.
After the announcement, a number of deputy mayors resigned in protest. Adams then appointed Randy Mastro as First Deputy and delegated to him the authority to “[p]erform any function, power or duty of the Mayor in negotiating, executing and delivering any and all agreements, instruments and any other documents necessary or desirable to effectuate any of the matters” related to public safety.
On April 8, 2025, Mastro issued Executive Order No. 50, authorizing the Department of Corrections to enter a Memorandum of Understanding with federal law enforcement agencies allowing them to maintain office space on Department of Corrections property, specifically Rikers Island.
The timing of these actions raised objections from many, both inside and outside City Hall. That included United States District Judge Dale Ho, who agreed to dismiss the criminal charges with prejudice, but not after lashing out at the administration. Ho wrote that “[e]verything here smacks of a bargain: dismissal of the [i]ndictment in exchange for immigration policy concessions.” He further warned that the suggestion “that public officials may receive special dispensation if they are compliant with the incumbent administration’s policy priorities … is fundamentally incompatible with the basic promise of equal justice under law.”
I disagreed with Judge Ho’s use of the order to opine on an alleged quid pro quo that was not established in the record or even material to his decision. Ho agreed that he could not “force the Department of Justice to prosecute a defendant” and agreed to dismiss the matter with prejudice. That was the correct and only decision that he could make. However, he further strongly suggested the need for an investigation but lamented that he “did not have the authority to appoint an independent prosecutor.”
I do not question Judge Ho’s sincere objections or the good-faith basis of many in raising this allegation. However, I do not believe that judges or justices should use their positions to opine on political or ethical issues that are not clearly before them. The issue before Judge Ho was solely the dismissal of a criminal case and he had no record, or in my view license, to hold forth on his unsupported suspicions in the case.
The matter, however, was raised and litigated directly before Judge Rosado by the city council, which sought to nullify the Executive Order as being violative of city ethical rules. Specifically, the city council cited New York City Charter § 2604(b)(3), which provides in pertinent part that “[n]o public servant shall use or attempt to use his or her position as a public servant to obtain any … privilege or other private or personal advantage, direct or indirect, for the public servant or any person or firm associated with the public servant.”
Judge Rosado found a likelihood of prevailing on the merits, citing Baker v. Marley, 8 NY2d 365, 367 (1960), that an action must be declared null and void when the action “directly or immediately affects him individually.” She specifically found:
Plaintiff-Petitioner has shown a likelihood of success in demonstrating, at a minimum, the appearance of a quid pro quo whereby Mayor Adams publicly agreed to bring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) back to Rikers Island in exchange for dismissal of his criminal charges. This showing is grounded in (1) Mayor Adams’ public statements; (2) Mayor Adams’ criminal defense attorney’s written overtures to the Department of Justice; (3) the temporal proximity between these overtures and Mr. Bove’s directive to dismiss the criminal charges against Mayor Adams; (4) statements from former Acting United States Attorney Danielle R. Sassoon and Assistant United States Attorney Hagan Scotten; (5) Mr. Homan’s statement that he will “be in [Mayor Adams’] office, up his b ___, saying, ‘Where the hell is the agreement we came to?'” and (6) the written findings by United States District Judge Dale Ho.
Although Defendants-Respondents deny any quid pro quo in conclusory fashion, this is insufficient, and almost expected. As wisely stated by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the quid pro quo need not be stated in express terms “for otherwise the law’s effect could be frustrated by knowing winks and nods. The inducement from the official is [violative] if it is express or if it is implied from his words and actions ….” Based on the record, Plaintiff-Petitioner has made a sufficient showing of an implied, if not an express quid pro quo based on Mayor Adams, Mr. Spiro, Mr. Bove, and Mr. Homan’s words and actions.
In my view, the decision is wrong on a number of key elements.
Who decides?
First, Judge Rosado heard this case despite the fact that there is a process for such allegations to be raised and adjudicated before the Conflict of Interest Board. Rosado recognizes the obvious problem and admits that
“[t]o be clear, the Conflicts of Interest Board is the preferred and proper forum for many garden variety conflict of interest disputes, such as those involving improper gifts, failures to disclose financial interests, and other financial conflicts.
However, the Conflicts of Interest Board is not equipped with the powers and tools to grapple with the case, which involves the promulgation of an Executive Order at lightning speed, upending a decree of New York policy barring federal law enforcement authorities from maintaining a presence on Department of Corrections property.”
I found the court’s logic on this portion of the opinion to be conclusory and counterintuitive. There is nothing in the law or regulations that defines the Board as focused on “garden-variety” conflicts. It is the system created by the city council to address conflict allegations and, while Judge Rosado believes that she can do better than the board, that is hardly a convincing basis to circumvent the process for the adjudication of such claims. Rosado ignores that this is a specialized body expressly tasked with such conflicts. It is unclear how the court is “better equipped” with its own limited staff to address such matters, other than having the ability to issue judicial injunctions.
Deception or Delegation?
Putting aside this act of judicial overreach, there is also the problem that the order was ultimately issued not by Adams but by Mastro. There are very compelling public policy reasons for taking this action. The city is struggling with the massive demands of its undocumented immigrant population. Before he was ever charged, Adams was viewed as a moderate on such questions who was open to greater federal enforcement. Many states and cities cooperate with federal authorities in this way as a matter of public policy.
Judge Rosado admits that there is a valid question of whether the delegation constituted a type of recusal or cleansing of the decision. However, she maintained that Mastro is not independent because he was appointed by Adams and reports to him. Moreover, she cited New York City Charter § 2604(b)(3), which states that delegating oversight or management does not necessarily erase a conflict of interest. She notes that Adams said publicly that he did not recuse himself and found:
“The Defendants-Respondents’ hyperbolic argument that if Mayor Adams cannot delegate to First Deputy Mayor Mastro, then there is nobody he can delegate to, is without merit. First Deputy Mayor Mastro, although an accomplished and highly educated attorney, is not independent of Mayor Adams and therefore cannot be considered impartial and free from Mayor Adams’ conflicts. First Deputy Mayor Mastro reports directly to Mayor Adams, is appointed by Mayor Adams, and can be fired by Mayor Adams. He is Mayor Adams’ agent.”
It is not clear, however, who would be sufficiently free of Adams’ authority to allow for them to make the myriad of decisions vis-a-vis federal authority. In this matter, Mastro and the Mayor’s office are arguing that he made an independent judgment on the merits of the policy. More importantly, Judge Rosado ignores the implications of her order. She never explains how the city is to function if any order dealing with the federal government could be viewed as part of a quid pro quo. There are a host of joint operations and programs with the federal government. Where does one draw the line and who then makes these decisions ranging from housing to prisons to voting? Rosado seems to shrug and say that anyone reporting to the Mayor or subject to his authority is not sufficiently independent.
The Order
Judge Rosado ultimately finds against Adams, but includes rhetoric exulting the prior pro-immigration policies that further undermines the opinion:
The Court finds that Plaintiff-Petitioner has demonstrated imminent and irreparable harm for purposes of obtaining a preliminary injunction. The harm to intangible assets such as damage to reputation, loss of goodwill, and brand tarnishment are routinely found sufficient to grant injunctive relief. New York City, which thrives as a global hub due in large part to its reputation as being a welcoming home for immigrant communities from around the world, risks having this goodwill and invaluable reputation irreparably damaged as a result of an Executive Order borne out of Mayor Adams’ alleged conflict of interest. New York City, through legislation and decades of policy, has established a reputation as a “Sanctuary City.” This reputation, and the goodwill built from decades of policy decisions, and which have provided New Yorkers with numerous intangible cultural and economic benefits, risks being irrevocably tarnished. The harm to New York City’s reputation as a Sanctuary City, and the goodwill with numerous communities that flows from that reputation, is best preserved through a preliminary injunction prohibiting Defendants-Respondents from acting on Executive Order No. 50.
…
The Court is also cognizant of threat of irreparable harm in a more concrete sense—that is the threat to detained New York State and City residents and their dignity. There is ample evidence that there is already a serious, imminent and ongoing risk that immigrant New Yorkers, and even foreign tourists to New York City, are being wrongfully detained. There are documented reports of individuals being deported to stranger third-countries, and New York City residents are taken into custody for expressing political views contrary to the federal government’s agenda. Residents who are here seeking asylum are being deported to countries they claim to have previously faced persecution for their sexuality, politics, or religion. And this concrete harm flows to the Plaintiff-Petitioner…
I was frankly astonished by the direct discussion of the Mayor’s criminal charges in the conjunction with negotiations over enhanced federal enforcement. While I understand the defense counsel’s job to seek any lawful avenue for relief, I would have immediately cut off such discussions as inappropriate from the perspective of the Justice Department. If such discussions occurred, there is a legitimate concern over a quid pro quo. However, this is not how courts should address such allegations. I believe both Judge Ho (who ruled correctly) and Judge Rosado (who did not) exceeded the parameters for their opinions with extraneous commentary. That is particularly the case with Judge Rosado. More importantly, I believe that Judge Rosado is simply wrong in circumventing the designated board for addressing conflicts of interest and issuing this sweeping opinion.
This is not an easy matter for any board or court. These meetings and the timing of these decisions raise obvious concerns. However, courts are not allowed to engage in conjecture. It is not just plausible but likely that Adams would have extended the access to Rikers Island even without any change in his criminal case.
I do not see the limiting principle in this decision. Adams is still the mayor and may have independent and good-faith reasons for orders that are favorable for the federal government. Indeed, his order was the correct one on the merits. While Judge Rosado never explores the countervailing benefits while writing at length on the costs to a city of immigrants, they are obvious and cannot be ignored. In other words, Adams had every reason to support federal enforcement as a Mayor who ran on making New York a safer city.
This matter should have been left to the Conflicts of Interest Board, and the decision itself is ill-considered and incomplete.
Real blue-collar wage growth is occurring as illegals self-deport or get deported. These figures are from the Department of the Treasury.
https://x.com/SecScottBessent/status/1934992476105818400
#9. Strange, I wonder why every Democrat and RINO administration had negative numbers all the way back to Nixon?
-Oddball
You really believe Bessent? You actually believe what you read on “X”?
Do you have different numbers? These are official data from the government, not some fly-by-night blogger. I don’t always trust the government, and am willing to disbelieve it if shown more reliable data. Can you supply any? I expect not or you would’ve already.
No, wally, I believe you.
The number of people jobless less than 5 weeks increased by 264,000 to 2.5 million in May. But, let’s hear your MAGAtard explanation for why people are losing jobs… even though you brag wage growth is occurring.
You make a retarded claim like that and don’t even provide a link. Very low-IQ commenter. As if “less than 5 weeks” is the be all and end all.
So I did your work for you. I basically googled your retarded little quote, and came up with this from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
https://www.dol.gov/ui/data.pdf
Now, tell me what in those statistics is so extraordinary? Here’s how it starts: Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 139,000 in May, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 4.2 percent.
So, tell me . . . why are your panties all in a bunch?
“Less than 5 weeks” means turnover — people getting new jobs after leaving jobs — is decreasing. Blue collar wage growth doesn’t mean people are finding jobs, dummass. Check the stats. Manufacturing jobs declined, too.
I know what blue-collar wage growth means. It means workers are being paid better. That was one of Trump’s priorities and the reason why union rank and file are coming over to the GOP, and one of the foundations for the Trump coalition that elected him. Only an anti-American twit like you would look down your nose at that, dumbass.
Here:
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
“It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.
Lord Hewart, Lord Chief Justice of England in Rex v. Sussex Justices (1924).
Remember when you quoted this, Prof. Turley? No, Judge Ho should not have dismissed the charges against Mayor Adams.
MWID The judge had little choice.
Judges do not prosecute.
I know that seems not so, with so many left wing judges trying to be prosecutors too.
But all decisions regarding prosecution belong to DOJ.
It has become quite obvious that the appointment of judges from 8 years of Obama and another 4 of Joe has left us with hardcore leftist ideologues “judges” who care little for the Constitution or the rule of law. A country cannot survive this ambush. We are making the Soviets look like rookies.
But you’re okay with Trump being above the law.
Jonathan: What in the world are you talking about? There is plenty of “light” on the Adams corruption case and its aftermath. The criminal case against NY Mayor Adams was rock solid. DJT’s DOJ dismissed the case because Adams agreed to a quid pro quo–in exchange for dismissal Adams agreed to allow ICE to conduct immigration raids in NY in defiance of the city’s avowed “sanctuary” status. There was so much corruption in what happened that US Attorney Danielle Sassoon and three other prosecutors handling the case resigned in protest. This is pretty much set out in the facts you recite. Then, in an attempt to avoid a blatant conflict of interest, Adams appointed his Deputy, Randy Mastro, to sign off on an EO to allow ICE to use Rikers Island as a base of operations for immigration raids in NY. The arrangement was blatant and pretty transparent so that Adams could say he was not going along with his part of the quid pro quo with the DOJ.
The NY City Council found out about the scheme and sued. Judge Rosado correctly ruled in favor of the City because Adams’ appointment of Mastro was a sham. Mastro was appointed by Adams and reported to him. He was not acting as an independent agent when he executed the EO. So it is bizarre you could argue there were “independent and good-faith reasons” for the EO giving ICE access to Rykers Island.
This whole episode smells of collusion and corruption between Adams and DJT’s DOJ. How you could justify any of it is beyond me!
Right and the reason it makes so much sense is the trade was nothing for nothing cause you had Rikers at hello. Spot on anon!
“The criminal case against NY Mayor Adams was rock solid.”
It was ?
The allegation was that Adam’s gave special benefits to Turkey with respect to temporary building code approvals.
And that he subsequently received perks from Turkey.
Even if The was true – This is NYC, the Turks had a major event coming and they wanted the building open for it.
The waiver was temporary. This is where the UN is.
The Turks were going to get what they wanted. It was in the US interest. It was in NYC’s interest.
The “facts” facts of the case are far less egregious than McDonald which SCOTUS tossed long ago.
Contra your claim the Case against Adam’s was a dead bang loser.
It was politics pure and simple.
“DJT’s DOJ dismissed the case because Adams agreed to a quid pro quo–in exchange for dismissal Adams agreed to allow ICE to conduct immigration raids in NY in defiance of the city’s avowed “sanctuary” status.”
If true that would not change anything.
“There was so much corruption in what happened that US Attorney Danielle Sassoon and three other prosecutors handling the case resigned in protest. ”
If True this was not corruption – it was politics.
Trade a crappy case that Contra Sassoon was a dead bang loser, whose sole purpose was to defeat Adam’s politically – just like the Trump porosecutions.
for ICE being able to detain and deport hundreds possibly thousands of criminals – that is called a GOOD DEAL.
Prosecutors routinely throw away FAR better cases for FAR less.
Is it so hard for you to understand that prosecutors are allowed to make deals to get a greater benefit ?
If there is a crime at all – and pretty much there is not, it would only be on Adam’s part.
And even that is nebulous.
If Adam’s was a private actor this deal would be fine.
If Adam’s was not being investigated by SDNY – this deal would be fine.
Mayors can do things that are in their cities best interests.
The left’s Sanctuary city nonsense is delusional.
While local governments are not by law required to cooperate with ICE.
We are NOT talking about NYC providing sanctary for Mother Theresa.
WE are talking about so called sancturary cities taking actions that WILL result in murders, rapes and robberies
rather than cooperate with ICE.
The law may not require cooperation – but the social contract that is the foundation of governemnt does.
“This is pretty much set out in the facts you recite. Then, in an attempt to avoid a blatant conflict of interest, Adams appointed his Deputy, Randy Mastro, to sign off on an EO to allow ICE to use Rikers Island as a base of operations for immigration raids in NY. The arrangement was blatant and pretty transparent so that Adams could say he was not going along with his part of the quid pro quo with the DOJ.”
Again SO WHAT ?
In what sane world would the Mayor NOT want ICE to be able to deport criminals that it is holding ?
You are confusing “The law does not require” with its illegal.
Outside a few blue cities law enforcement accross the country WANTS to turn over criminals who are also illegal aliens to ICE.
It is a win win for law enforcement for the Feds and for the people.
It is even a likely win for the criminal illegal who goes back to their home rather than jail.
“The NY City Council found out about the scheme and sued.”
Why would they do something that stupid ?
Do they want criminals on their streets ?
“Judge Rosado correctly ruled in favor of the City because Adams’ appointment of Mastro was a sham.”
Both wrong and outside his jurisdiction.
You keep trying to conflate “I do not like it” with illegal.
Even if absolutely every claim you make is True – DOJ still has legitimate access to Rikers and the Judge is violating the “common good”\
“Mastro was appointed by Adams and reported to him.”
So ?
“He was not acting as an independent agent when he executed the EO.”
Just like the country has only one president,
NYC has only one mayor.
All executive power flows from the mayor.
There is no such thing as independence within the executive – NAY executive.
And you would be stupid to want that.
” So it is bizarre you could argue there were “independent and good-faith reasons” for the EO giving ICE access to Rykers Island.”
Not bizzare at all – By something like 95% Americans legitimately want criminal illegal aliens deported.
Your just looking for a new way to thwart the will of the people.
“This whole episode smells of collusion and corruption between Adams and DJT’s DOJ. How you could justify any of it is beyond me!”
Again I doubt that is true.
Adam’s was a strong advocate against democrat idiotic immigration policies long before Trump won the election.
Adam’s actions as mayor are consistent with his prior words and actions, and consistent with the best interests of NYC.
I agree with the good Professor Turley that both judges in this convoluted matter seized on the opportunity to use pending motions as platforms to express and expound upon their own elective/optional opinions.
–I do note, however, that Ho at least expressed a reason for doing so. This is because the DOJ had asked for dismissal without prejudice. And Ho explained why he decided to dismiss WITH prejudice:
“On February 14, 2025, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) filed a motion seeking to dismiss
without prejudice the Indictment against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, pursuant to Federal
Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a)…A critical feature of DOJ’s Motion is that it seeks
dismissal without prejudice—that is, DOJ seeks to abandon its prosecution of Mayor Adams at
this time, while reserving the right to reinitiate the case in the future. Rather, its request, if granted, would leave Mayor Adams under the specter of reindictment at essentially any time, and for essentially any reason…..
“The Court declines, in its limited discretion under Rule 48(a), to endorse that outcome. Instead, it dismisses this case with prejudice…”
“Notably, Mayor Adams has filed his own motion seeking dismissal with prejudice on other grounds, and DOJ has not opposed his motion, effectively waiving any objection to permanent dismissal of this case.”
Judge Ho then went on to expound on all the facts that, according to him, made the matter “smack of a [quid po quo] bargain.”
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69197936/177/united-states-v-adams/
(apologies for using up so much space here. I directly extracted text from the opinion, but its original text margins/spacing are apparently also extracted!?)
*. Link?
I provided it ^^^
Omg, I didn’t see it. It could have bitten me. 😏
easy to overlook! especially after lengthy text
I have the same problem lin when copying from external websites and pasting to this one. My earlier post today from the opinion by Judge James Ho of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, had to reformmated by me line by line. WordPress does not accept the formatting from whatever webpage (especially PDFs) you are copying. It only accepts the text you are copying sans formatting and reflects it as HTML code. you might want to keep that in mind in the future when copying/pasting text
nerd out!
👾🤓
NB: my shoulder post-surgery is doing great. It wasn’t my hip. Thanks for your well wishes though
Rotator cuff?
Hey, thanks, (you’re probably right because I did not attach here as HTML and good to hear of your progression back toward the work-out gym you often talk about. (Can you hear our parents during adolescence? “Stand up straight! Straighten up those shoulders! etc.”)
My aunt was a nurse and I still hear her scream at me in Spanish “párate derecho” (stand up straight).
Bless her, she passed away from COVID in a nursing home, but her scolding was forevermore ….kinda like mine 😉
*. DJT pardoned Mayor Adams. No prob
What actual law prevents an ICE office at Rikers or vice versa at SCOTUS level if argued correctly?
None. That is the whole problem here.
Even outside the DOJ the Federal governemnt entices/coerces local governemtns all the time.
Much of what the federal government does today – it does not really do.
It just pays the state to do. Why ? Because the federal govenrment does not have the constitutional power to do so.
so basically lawless Democrat judges rule for illegals, democrats and public unions…not the Constitution, rule of law or America!
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
“…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what they forbid.”
_______________________________________________________________________________
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
Good news for Americans.
As Deportations Rise, The U.S. Is On Track For The Lowest Murder Rate On Record
Dustoff,
As millions of illegals are deported or self-deport, wages are rising as American companies have to offer high wages to attract workers. Also of note, a ICE raid of a food company resulting in 70+ arrests, two days later, the company waiting room was full of legal, American, job applicants.
Now eliminate the unconstitutional financial assistance in public, NGO, and all other forms, and there will be free market competition for jobs, bringing wages and inflation down.
Exclusive: NGOs Got Billions from the EPA Despite Internal Concerns
“Government reviews flagged high salaries and conflicts of interest—but still handed $20 billion to eight nonprofits after the election.”
— By Madeleine Rowley
05.11.25 — U.S. Politics
https://www.thefp.com/p/exclusive-internal-documents-reveal
So you’re supporting international max trade in “free markets”?
An
You get argument from me
*. Really?
Dustoff
As usual Dustoff just makes sh!t up.
Where is the proof of your stupid statement about murder rates.
You never provide proof for anything you say.
Without proof you have nothing.
Try again, loser.
People with a record of credibiltiy do not owe you proof.
People with a record of error and lies such as yourself do.
Regardless, bfore you call someone else a liar and a fraud you should atleast google whether they might be telling the truth.
So that you do not look like a fool, a fraud and a liar.
https://jasher.substack.com/p/how-2025-could-feature-the-lowest
John Say
Really ?????
Seriously ?????
The opinion of some schmuck on Substack is proof ????
He doesn’t even say it is true.
He says MAYBE it COULD be true.
I guess when you get most of the information from the voices in your head, then some bozo on Substack is the Oracle of all that is true..
“Without proof you have nothing”
False – reality is what it is.
There has been no proof of elements of Relativity until recently.
That did not make it false.
Here are the rule of the Turley comment section: Trumptards get to say whatever outlandish thing they want without backing anything up. Democrats, independents and never-Trumpers never have anything valid to say. I know, it’s like retards are running the care facility.
Even if Adams did “bargain away” access, the question should be, was the access legitimately and legally denied otherwise? if Adams was withholding access for political reasons, and then bargained that access in return for favorable criminal treatment, that doesn’t make the access illegal. it just means that he illegally stood in the way of the federal government until the federal government caved into his demands. it seems to me that none of that is really germaine to the issue: should the federal government have access to prisoners in Rikers as a part of their official duties? My answer would be, absolutely yes
AI Overview
The Supremacy Clause, found in Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made in accordance with it, and treaties made under the authority of the United States are the supreme law of the land. This means that when state laws conflict with federal law, the federal law prevails. Essentially, it ensures that the federal government’s laws and the Constitution itself are the ultimate authority.
How is judge wackadoodle a judge at all. All of her cases need review for injustices and appealed? Imagine the future when she’s the norm. Long range plans like the scheduled protest calendar are apparent.
Roger
Professor Turley’s fellow Democrat lawyers, now empowered by black robes to subjugate Executive Branch authority, strike again.
Are there any Casey Jones in the New York Judiciary, they must see the station is full, or are they just passengers hoping for a savior? The runaway liberal doctrine is headed directly into irrelevance whence the Supreme Courts get a backbone. The danger of New York’s governing bodies being a singular party authority is on display and enforced with gusto.
The Federalist: #47 in part: “…. The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. Were the federal constitution, therefore, really chargeable with this accumulation of power, or with a mixture of power, having a dangerous tendency to such an accumulation, no further argument would be necessary to inspire a universal reprobation of the system.”
With the definition above, the party or parties of the New York Democrats fit precisely to be defined as Reprobates: ‘morally unprincipled, lost, and predestined to damnation’.
George W
Isn’t it true that Supreme Court justices engage in quid pro quo’s in deciding whether to support or oppose an opinion? I have heard it alleged. It certainly is true that bargains are made for supporting or opposing legislation in Congress. If a quid-pro-quo in politics makes legislation void, then we need to start clearing out the federal statute books.
Hopefully not, Edward. 🤞
The requirement for a crime of political corruption is more than a Quid Pro Quo
It is an explicit personal benefit in return for a an improper use of public power.
Contra the left – it can not be a political benefit – it must be personal, and it must be significant and it must be for an excercise of public power.
Nor are those the only requirements.
[So] Judge Mary Rosado is saying that:
N.Y.C. Mayor Eric Leroy Adams an American politician and former police officer who has served as the 110th mayor of New York City since 2022. Adams whom was formerly an officer in the New York City Transit Police and then the New York City Police Department for more than 20 years, retiring at the rank of captain.
Is Guilty of being Guilty and that’s a ‘conflict of interest’ in a ‘quid pro quo’ agreement.
That’s kinda what Big City Mayors do: Chicago, L.A., Detroit, … ………….
That said, It may not make it right but your gonna have to indite pretty much every Big City Mayor in the Country.
Break out the Autopen it’s time for a lot of Pardons.
*. Rosado gets an F. Ho gets a C? Give them a grade, PT. Rosado issued a political opinion based on her political views and beliefs.
This has been a problem in SCOTUS, as well. The courts fail to narrow and address just what’s before them. Is that right?
OT. It became evident congress thinks it’s the UN especially the hyphenated immigrants for whom the US is just an address. They’ve immigrated as representatives of their home nations. Again, a reminder of the census count.
I have only one nation. I am home.
IMO
^^^ and I speak English as my primary and secondary language. I don’t need assimilation. I am the culture.
*. The hyphenated group American-American is my descriptor because we like hyphenations. You know RBG and KBJ and AOC…KGB
*. As this multiculturalism continues perhaps the US will draw national lines at States as Europe is with various languages per so many square miles. Maybe the lingua franca (sp) will be Arabic.
This is where it leads, yawn. Overall a 3rd world so rein in feds and save your monyee. The fewer hands the less the graft.
Adieu mon cheris
SCOTUS is somewhat different.
SCOTUS does not take cases to right individual wrongs.
The cases SCOTUS decides to take are because it is giving guidance to the courts.
SCOTUS is the only court in the US tasked that way.
How nice. The shooter who worked for Tim Walz (appointed to his job by Timmy)
Guess what. The shooters wife also works for Tim.
Yeah nothing going on.
Dustoff
As usual, you just post stupid theories without a shred of proof
With no proof you have nothing.
Try again dimwit
Did I say theories. No per the paper work. The shooter was appointed in 2019 the his wife in 2020. Think what ever you want. Or just maybe Timmy appoints bad folks.
The shooter is a MAGAtard, MAGAtard.
By who? his friend?
If so, why haven’t they released the manifesto yet? I have noooticed that every time it’s a right-wing nut, the manifesto is avail online within 24 hours. However, Boelter, the freak that shot the Catholic school, the idiot that shot Trump’s ear, we only have 1 of those manifestos, and that after over a year and a half of deliberation and obfuscation.
If Trump really had a close relation with a certain island owner, do you not think they would have dropped that on the public instantly?
-Rabble
#9. Yep, the track record isn’t a good one. So far, authorities delaying the release of, or denying the release of, the many smoking gun manifesto’s as we’ve come to know by now, is typically because the plot line doesn’t fit the leftist narrative.
-To your point, it is curious that the media continues to state that there were majority of Democrats on the hit list, but do not mention anything about the remaining persons (about 1/3 of total at least). I am inclined to believe that this is because it would undermine the projected and media-publicized conclusion that is was politically motivated against Democrats, —when in fact, it was more motivated as against pro-abortion persons.
#9. Agreed lin, the culprit’s politics seem blurred at best, and perhaps on both sides of the spectrum along with his circumstance (a millionaire with obvious moonlight political connections, dabbling in food services, and international security contracts, is rooming with some pizza shop guy(s) many miles away from his mansion estate and the wife and kids), which raises a question or two. Then in the midst of the pizza guy’s 15 seconds of fame, he blubbers out abortion and the Church, and how wonderful a feller the culprit was; he wouldn’t hurt a fly… This after the wife is running around with 50 grand in her purse, passports, and a gun (or so it was reported), and detained by authorities, interrogated, and then released.
Seems there’s a lot of strange blokes in this cast of characters.
We will never learn the truth about the Democrat assasin, Vance Boelter, just like we never learned about the manifesto of the female, Audrey Hale, who identified as trans, and murdered several people in Nashville at a Christian school.
https://nypost.com/2023/03/27/nashville-school-shooter-audrey-hale-identified-as-transgender-and-had-detailed-manifesto-to-attack-christian-academy/
I really hope Kash Patel and Pam Bondi come clean about all of these suppressed manifestos but I’m not holding my breath
I read he was a part time minister doing missionary sermons in the Congo? He was also training to be a mortician?
Lin,
I agree with your logic and assessment.
However, until more information comes to light from the authorities investigation and verified facts are released, I am in wait and see mode.
We know very little – and much of what we know is conflicting.
Regardless, I would bet more on self agrandizing nut job than anything else.
Pure political violence is rare and nearly always from the left.
But nearly all mass killers are nuts and have manifestos that tend to be odd concoctions from accross the spectrum.
When you are seeing mixed messages, the reality is almost always NUTS
The governor reappointed Boelter to an advisory board in 2019, but one member says the board is bipartisan.
By Walker Orenstein
The Minnesota Star Tribune.
Either way. He picked this lose & his wife. …. You lose.
Dimwit..
Minnesota Star Tribune
HAHAHAHAHAHA
What a joke.
That’s not proof of anything.
That’s just the opinion of some MSM source.
That’s just their theory.
You have no proof, as usual, dimwit
You lose yet again.
LOSER
Try CNN if it helps
Aad guess what
“A “Jennifer Boelter” was listed on LegiStorm as an intern for then-Congressman Tim Walz in 2010,
You are just making sh!t up again.
Absolutely no proof whatsoever.
Without proof you have nothing.
Try again loser.
Ahhh so is the reporter lying?
By Walker Orenstein
The Minnesota Star Tribune.
Yes, it really is all made up.
Dustoff, the shooter’s wife, Jenny Boelter, was an intern for Tim Walz when he served in Congress.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/jenny-lynee-boelter-tim-walz-intern-minnesota-shooting-suspect-vance-boelters-wife-arrested-101750013104118.html
NB: much of the info being reported about the shooter, Vance Boelter, is being relayed by his “roommate” of one year. Given the roommate’s physical and mental state, he is as reliable as Gigi/Dennis et al. His wife holds all of the cards especially since it appears she was trying to flee with weapons, ammo, cash and passports
Vance Boelter’s wife detained for questioning after traffic stop near Onamia
Two sources tell 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS the vehicle contained a weapon, ammunition, cash and passports.
https://kstp.com/kstp-news/top-news/sources-vance-boelters-wife-detained-for-questioning-after-traffic-stop-near-onamia/
The gunman is a product of MSM.
There is an interesting wrinkle in this case: Many people noted the timing the corruption charges came shortly after Mayor Adams broke from the dem’s open borders policy. The federal government could argue that the malfeasance was the charges themselves brought by the Biden administration in order to coerce Mayor Adams to change his policies…
Good Anon,
Absolutely, there is NO denying the coercion-politics (malfeasance) had much to do with the Biden Administration’s CORRUPT agenda.
“Ho wrote that ‘[e]verything here smacks of a bargain: dismissal of the [i]ndictment in exchange for immigration policy concessions.’” The “judge’s” opinion is not surprising, as a prejudicial opportunity for political rhetoric. What is truly absurd is our new fangled, wild-west, form of justice, where anything goes, including judges going way off topic.
Concerning Ho’s complaint, the aspect of “bargains,” isn’t that the way the whole game gets played these days? Swing a deal so you don’t have to go to court….Do any leftists, here, even know about the illicit “bargains” J-6’ers had to make just to go back home after years of Habeas Corpus abuses and denials, and there were no inquiries or objections from the left, no demands for better practices and delimitations. POINT: prosecutorial bargaining as a tool to control and even violate is nothing new, so don’t get your shorts in a bundle over it now; you’ve endorsed it, in flying colors!
Extraneous Commentary: “This matter should have been left to the Conflicts of Interest Board, and the decision itself is ill-considered and incomplete.” Professor Turley is right again!
*. What grades would you give Ho and judge Wackadoodle if this were a test question hypothetical, Ms Bec?
C- for HO, and F- for Wackadoodle, tostado-Rosado.
Extra-Credit, A+ for Turley, but he’s in trouble for it because he really is upsetting a lot of people with his honesty.
😂 👍
#9. Remember Dr. Ernst Janning, played by Burt Lancaster in the 1961 movie “Judgement at Nuremberg?”
The German legal system, and their most educated and highest ranking judges succumbed to the NSDAP ideology early on in the takeover of the Weimar Republic, facilitating that Nation’s fall into the abyss.
You are now in the delirious stage of your raging TDS fever….
and IF there is ever this “nation’s fall into the abyss,” it will be the immoral, extrajudicial, cultural Marxism, of the left leading it.
“Cultural Marxism”?
Spoken like someone infected with TVS (Trump Vindication Syndrome).
The infection is your “ignorance” and denial.
Cultural Marxism IS DEI, pedagogy of the oppressed (dumbing-down in schools, disseminating sex-politics instead of reading-writing-math), not prosecuting crimes committed by “people of color” simply because they are “people of color,” opening borders for people of color because they are “people of color.” In other words, the brain-eating/soul’killing infection is purely leftist-marxist social engineering and ideology.
All of this has deeply-dangerous (nation-altering) CULTURAL impact.
People like you deny it’s existence because it’s so odious in its totality….
#9. Which was exactly my point. Apparently not made clear enough.
When the justice system becomes corrupted and issues biased rulings based purely upon rationalized political and ideological agenda’s, as we see taking place with our own Ernst Janning type of judges in this National malevolent legal war against our majority elected President and to the detriment of the entire Nation, using our own tax payer funds to conduct it mind you, and who have otherwise so obviously consumed the poisonous pablum of Marxist beliefs, then most assuredly such a Nation is headed for the abyss.
Yes, mam, delirious for 14 years, PTSD. These people actually have complex PTSD. It can lead to schizo as seen in Boelter, democrat by day, repub by night.
Trump was right again. He said that after Mayor Adams revealed that supporting illegal immigrants in the city would cost the city billions of tax payer dollars the left would soon have their knives out. With gangsters you must always pay a price if you turn against the family. Keeping the sheep in the pen is just the way it has to be. By any means necessary.
“The harm to New York City’s reputation as a Sanctuary City . . .” (Judge Rosado)
This is getting absurd.
Rosado started with a *political* end: to keep NYC a sanctuary city, i.e., a place that protects criminal immigrants from law enforcement.
Then she manipulated the law to satisfy that end.
That is not the objective method of a jurist. That is the dishonest method of a propagandist.
At what point does the Right get to say: Your decision is null and void, because you are not a judge. You are a political hack hiding under sheepskin.