"... which is why I hope you understand that it's clear and binding legal advice that prevents me from commenting," says Andrew Sullivan. Of course, his failure to speak shouldn't be construed to mean anything but that he's following the obvious legal advice.
That doesn't mean we can't talk about it, though.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४३ टिप्पण्या:
I hope you understand that it's clear and binding legal advice that prevents me from commenting"
In other words, even though the citation has been dismissed, he's still majorly sweating getting deported.
And I can't help but wonder what's so "binding" about legal advice.
Maybe he has a permit.
Last I checked, nothing is binding about advice.
I guess the rule of law for all is not really a big deal anymore, huh Andy?
And the President admits to READING this ass clown?
By "binding," I think he means "uncomfortably tight and confining."
I think Andy would like tight and binding, Meade.
Glad others cued in on the "binding" line. Legal advice is NOT binding. I have clients who won't shut up no matter what I tell them.
Is this the first time in recent memory that Sullivan kept his mouth shut?
The charge has been dismissed. What is he worried about?
The charge has been dismissed. What is he worried about?
He was still charged so it could become a factor in his immigration hearing.
Spending any amount of time talking about your arrest for a drug offense probably doesn't make a good impression for immigration officials.
What is he worried about?
Who can understand the mind of Queen Mary Jane Milky Loads, Sultana of Sodom?
andy can't stop thinking about binding and torture.
Duh, the legal advice is for him to bind his mouth. Therefore, it is binding legal advice.
Tongue in cheek, of course.
Would that the person whose mere advice is binding had taken it upon himself to advise Sullivan to forthwith on all matters shut the fuck up.
Andy said: "My view is that no one is above the law, and that when a society based on law prosecutes the powerless and excuses the powerful, it is corroding its own soul." well it sounded good when he said it.
OK, so he gets deported. Big Whoop! He can still blog on the other side of The Pond, right? They do have the internet over there, right? Surely Al Gore saw to that.
How can he be deported? He doesn't even live in the United States of America -just Providence.
Althouse is obviously taking glee in Sullivan's troubles with respect to our silly marijuana laws. I guess this is because Sullivan called Althouse pro-torture. But was Sullivan not accurate about that? Althouse seemed to be praising Cheney's illegal torturing as recently as...earlier today.....
He doesn't have "troubles" with respect to marijuana, other than perhaps the minor embarassment caused by his clearly benefitting from the application of a double standard with respect to very minor celebrities. Even in this I wouldn't worry too much about him; the last twelve months have proven him immune to embarassment.
"The charge has been dismissed. What is he worried about?"
If the administration is embarrassed by being caught red handed dispensing a favor to a pet journalist, Andrew goes under the bus. Goes under so fast he'll be back in England before he can even splutter out a column about the event.
Anxious Andy doesn't want to work from Old Blighty. Especially since his HIV treatment will be run on NHS schedules.
from Sullivan's link:
Three other defendants charged with the same offense had to appear before Collings the same day as Sullivan, the judge noted. But Sullivan’s case was the only one prosecutors did not pursue, out of concern that the $125 fine carried by the relatively minor offense could derail his US immigration application.
Welcome to the United States, doper.
I think this is the right time to mention that Obama said that the raids on CA dispensaries for med marijuana would stop with his admin --- and they did for a few months, but no more. They have resumed.
Oh poor Sully. Such a prissy miss.
While I think Andrew is a disgusting individual (for his political hypocrisy), I think the principle of disproportionate impact may be in play here.
It strikes me as foolish that we employ federal police for petty misdemeanors.
It strikes me as foolish that we employ federal police for petty misdemeanors.
Purely a function of the fact that the offense occurred on Federal land. I got a parking ticket once at Grand Teton National Park, and the ticket instructed that I should contact the Federal court in Jackson, Wyoming if I wanted to appeal the ticket.
Could the US Atty change his/her mind and decide to prosecute the case?
IOW, do they have leverage on Sullivan now?
My guess is that Sullivan agreed not to publicize as part of his special deal with the prosecutor.
Sullivan clearly has no principles - moral, personal, or political - other than "what's best for Andrew." Anyone who believes that Andrew Sullivan would not personally torture a room full of handicapped twelve year old girls if gave his career a slight advance has not been paying attention.
It strikes me as foolish that we employ federal police for petty misdemeanors.
You want to know how misdemeanors on federal land are usually handled. A friend of mine was stopped by US Park Police for speeding on a 4-lane divided parkway that that runs through a national park. Because he was charged alternatively with both speeding and with reckless driving (defined, in this case, as 20+ miles over the speed limit), my friend went to the federal district court and brought an attorney. The court has a preliminary hearing in such matters. So my friend came back several weeks later for the trial. At the trial, the park policewoman didn't show up. The AUSA vigorously moved for a continuance, when dismissal should have been the result. The judge granted it over the objection of my friend's attorney, thus denying my friend his 6th Amendment rights (IMHO). Several weeks later, my friend returned for the trial. At the last minute, he pleaded to the speeding (not the reckless) charge and received a $600 fine, his state's DMV assessed him 6 points, and he of course was stuck with the attorney's bill.
Now that's how federal misdemeanor trials run in my, er, I mean, my friend's experience.
Damn MOOSE NAZIs!
Well, I do have sympathy for him if he's deported and his husband, for whatever reason, can't join him back in England.
That's a tough situation.
Yes, brought on by his reckless behavior admittedly. And even though the law is stupid.
Still...
To be sure, if he leaves with his partner, I'll be waving good bye as the flight lifts off (figurative wave).
http://www.angelfire.com/ky/kentuckyliz/insbkgrd.html
The INS (ICE) Purity Test.
It didn't sound like a narcotics trafficking charge, so he won't have a problem with question 12e, but even being arrested means he has to report it on question 15.
So I suppose we should start pressuring him to answer this question honestly to the immigration officers.
Yes, I'm naturalized. I'm an American by CHOICE!
If Sarah Palin or any of her family members had been busted for a marijuana charge, we know how Andrew Sullivan would have reacted. And if the charge had been dismissed with this kind of justification? The heavens would have been rent with his outrage.
I am a naturalized citizen who went through the long and painful immigration process. From what I have read, Andrew Sullivan has a green card already, which means that the only meaningful "unspecified immigration benefit" that he is seeking is likely naturalization - his admission into US citizenship.
I wonder if he will truthfully answer question 10. D. 16. on the N-400 form, which asks:
Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained by any law enforcement officer ... for any reason?
Considering the amount of slander and lies that Andrew has leveled at his political opponents and even neutral persons, I somehow doubt it. The title of part D. is Good Moral Character. How many people think that Andrew Sullivan has Good Moral Character?
When the subject is advice, there's no reason to use the word "binding". He's trying to give the impression he has no choice, but he does. He's hiding and doesn't have the balls to admit it.
@Jason (the commenter): Exactly what I meant by "uncomfortably tight and confining."
Can he get US citizenship when he's HIV+? At one time, he couldn't have entered the country (legally).
enclate - enclaves for "dating", like Ptown.
U.S. Magistrate Robert Collins dismissed a violation notice against the British citizen on Friday after prosecutors said they wanted to keep his record clean because he has applied for an unspecified immigration status.
I could understand it if the United States had an interest in doing the wink-wink nudge-nudge on behalf of an engineer or computer professional, but doesn't this country have enough HIV positive journalists and bloggers already? Why not ship him back to the UK?
Chuckle
This is exactly the same fodder for contempt and derision that Sully has used in the past to make fun of Sanford, Romney and others. Now that the tables are turned, we are asked to "understand".
Gotta love the talking but not the walking...
We could also start the "Day x of days waiting for Sully to clarify what actually happened..." meme that he so loved with the "Trig" birth records affair....
I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed the word "binding." In my experience, the only kind of advice that's binding is not really advice at all. For instance, when a bouncer might tell you "I'd advise you never to be seen at the Monkey Bar again" (not that this ever happened to me, ahem).
I think the prosecutor or judge must have told Andy to keep his piehole shut for once, or else.
Althouse is obviously taking glee in Sullivan's troubles with respect to our silly marijuana laws.
...And?
Just checking, it's only OK to publicize somebody's failings if they're conservative?
And I mean real conservative, not wannabes like Excitable Andy.
You know, if Sullivan would just get married to an American citizen a lot of his visa problems would go away....
Kevin said...
"If Sarah Palin or any of her family members had been busted for a marijuana charge, we know how Andrew Sullivan would have reacted."
Sullivan frequently complains against anti-marijuana laws, and has implicitly acknowledged his own usage for years on his blog. His attacks on Palin are based on what he considers her hypocricy re family values. Say what you will, but he is no hypocrite in this respect.
Sullivan has also frequently written about the fact that he would have become a citizen years ago were he not legally prevented from doing so because he is infected with HIV.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा