Hey Matt, I think Mr. Donziger should be vetted and cross-examined. One gets a different story from reading the court cases, including those of the Second Circuit which by and large affirmed the judgments and sanctions against him.
I first heard about Steven Donziger via Chris Hedges about a number of months ago. I couldn’t believe my ears. It’s good to see he’s making the rounds in a bunch of lefty media spaces and hopefully that helps elevate it and continues to open people’s eyes to the evils of vile oligarchy we live in
..for over 650 (days) without being... You made a mistake in the title, that's what humans do. Why then are you always so fucking critical of others who gaff? A small book could. be filled with the ones I've heard on UI. Between being 78 and the leader of the free world don't you think he's got a lot on his mind? You can be funny without being mean is what I'm suggesting.
I’m shocked at what a bad judge of character the world has. Reading people, is what I do for a living. And this is the second show in a row that Katie & Matt have put their credibility on the line for simply not asking reasonable or tough follow-up questions.
I’m shocked so many Lefty shows and their audiences’ can’t see right through this guy within 2 minutes of an interview. He lies through teeth and no one presses him on the inconsistencies. Then in the comments listeners praise this moron. It’s mind blowing.
What's with all the ads? Are you sending paid subscribers the teasers?
I just closed this because I am a paid subscriber yet I had to fend off five ads before seeing the episode begin and once the episode began, less than three minutes into it -- here come more ads.
I am not going to watch any more of the episode.
Your paid subscribers are being punished instead of being rewarded.
I don't want to have to fend off ads throughout trying to watch something for which I am a paid subscriber...
I understand that you are trying to build an audience, but why punish paid subscribers? Please stop sending teasers to paid subscribers -- or at least warn to distinguish between the teasers and those intended for the paid subscriber.
Why should paid subscribers have to watch two versions to get to see the entire episode? It wastes our time.
it seems the reverse of how it should be.
The paid subscribers should be the first to see the entire episode (without ads) -- then -- the freebies should go out.
Matt's off the deep end along with Donziner on this one:
"Respondent has been found guilty of egregious professional misconduct, namely, corruption of a court expert and ghostwriting his report, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and judicial coercion and bribery which he steadfastly refuses to acknowledge and shows no remorse for. In recommending an end to respondent’s interim suspension and his reinstatement, the Referee was too dismissive of the severity of the misconduct at issue (and he arguably exceeded his authority in permitting respondent to continually offer protestations of innocence notwithstanding this Court’s prior orders).
Not only did the Referee understate the magnitude of respondent’s egregious misdeeds, he also failed to recognize (nor even discuss) the relevant precedent in which the sanction of disbarment has been imposed for comparable misconduct (see e.g. Matter of Zappin, 160 AD3d 1 [1st Dept 2018], appeal dismissed, 32 NY3d 946 [2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 915 [2019]; Matter of Fagan, 58 AD3d 260 [1st Dept 2008], lv dismissed 12 AD3d 813 [2009]).
The AGC’s evidence in aggravation, particularly Judge Kaplan’s civil contempt findings (which the Referee failed to address in his report [see Matter of Savitt, 170 AD3d 24, 28 [1st Dept 2019], appeal dismissed 33 NY3d 1118 [2019] [Court opined that referee erroneously failed to recognize civil contempt finding and failure to purge as aggravation]), only add to the case for disbarment.
Accordingly, respondent’s motion to confirm the Referee’s report and recommendation should be denied. The Committee’s cross motion to disaffirm the Referee’s report and recommendation should be granted, and respondent disbarred from the practice of law retroactive to the date of his July 10, 2018 suspension, and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York."
It sounds like Chevron is taking lessons from Scientology (or vice versa).
Hey Matt, I think Mr. Donziger should be vetted and cross-examined. One gets a different story from reading the court cases, including those of the Second Circuit which by and large affirmed the judgments and sanctions against him.
I first heard about Steven Donziger via Chris Hedges about a number of months ago. I couldn’t believe my ears. It’s good to see he’s making the rounds in a bunch of lefty media spaces and hopefully that helps elevate it and continues to open people’s eyes to the evils of vile oligarchy we live in
Lotsa Chevron / CIA liars, trolls, hypocrites and shills urinating here this morning ...
Donziger is the Jeffrey Epstein of the Environmental movement. . .And probably has chatted it up with Mr. Gates along the way.
..for over 650 (days) without being... You made a mistake in the title, that's what humans do. Why then are you always so fucking critical of others who gaff? A small book could. be filled with the ones I've heard on UI. Between being 78 and the leader of the free world don't you think he's got a lot on his mind? You can be funny without being mean is what I'm suggesting.
I’m shocked at what a bad judge of character the world has. Reading people, is what I do for a living. And this is the second show in a row that Katie & Matt have put their credibility on the line for simply not asking reasonable or tough follow-up questions.
I’m shocked so many Lefty shows and their audiences’ can’t see right through this guy within 2 minutes of an interview. He lies through teeth and no one presses him on the inconsistencies. Then in the comments listeners praise this moron. It’s mind blowing.
Interesting discussion. Would love to read a deep dive into this case.
DON'T buy people pets (unless they ask for a surprise breed, size, colour, personality coin-toss pet). (True Story: She killed them.)
What's with all the ads? Are you sending paid subscribers the teasers?
I just closed this because I am a paid subscriber yet I had to fend off five ads before seeing the episode begin and once the episode began, less than three minutes into it -- here come more ads.
I am not going to watch any more of the episode.
Your paid subscribers are being punished instead of being rewarded.
I don't want to have to fend off ads throughout trying to watch something for which I am a paid subscriber...
I understand that you are trying to build an audience, but why punish paid subscribers? Please stop sending teasers to paid subscribers -- or at least warn to distinguish between the teasers and those intended for the paid subscriber.
Why should paid subscribers have to watch two versions to get to see the entire episode? It wastes our time.
it seems the reverse of how it should be.
The paid subscribers should be the first to see the entire episode (without ads) -- then -- the freebies should go out.
Matt's off the deep end along with Donziner on this one:
"Respondent has been found guilty of egregious professional misconduct, namely, corruption of a court expert and ghostwriting his report, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and judicial coercion and bribery which he steadfastly refuses to acknowledge and shows no remorse for. In recommending an end to respondent’s interim suspension and his reinstatement, the Referee was too dismissive of the severity of the misconduct at issue (and he arguably exceeded his authority in permitting respondent to continually offer protestations of innocence notwithstanding this Court’s prior orders).
Not only did the Referee understate the magnitude of respondent’s egregious misdeeds, he also failed to recognize (nor even discuss) the relevant precedent in which the sanction of disbarment has been imposed for comparable misconduct (see e.g. Matter of Zappin, 160 AD3d 1 [1st Dept 2018], appeal dismissed, 32 NY3d 946 [2018], lv denied 32 NY3d 915 [2019]; Matter of Fagan, 58 AD3d 260 [1st Dept 2008], lv dismissed 12 AD3d 813 [2009]).
The AGC’s evidence in aggravation, particularly Judge Kaplan’s civil contempt findings (which the Referee failed to address in his report [see Matter of Savitt, 170 AD3d 24, 28 [1st Dept 2019], appeal dismissed 33 NY3d 1118 [2019] [Court opined that referee erroneously failed to recognize civil contempt finding and failure to purge as aggravation]), only add to the case for disbarment.
Accordingly, respondent’s motion to confirm the Referee’s report and recommendation should be denied. The Committee’s cross motion to disaffirm the Referee’s report and recommendation should be granted, and respondent disbarred from the practice of law retroactive to the date of his July 10, 2018 suspension, and his name stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law in the State of New York."
https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/appellate-division-first-department/2020/2020-ny-slip-op-04523.html