Politicspolitics

Sun May 26, 2019, 03:50 AM

Federal judge who blocked Trump's border wall donated $20K to Obama



A federal judge who partially blocked President Trump’s plans to build a border wall along the United States-Mexico border previously donated almost $30,000 to former President Obama, other Democrats, and a political action committee.

U.S. District Court Judge Haywood Gilliam, an Obama appointee confirmed in 2014, donated $6,900 to Barack Obama’s debut campaign for president and $14,500 to his reelection campaign, according to federal election records. The same records also indicate he contributed $4,500 to the Democratic National Committee in 2012 and, between 2012 and 2015, sent $3,100 to the Covington Burling LLP PAC, which supports candidates from both parties. His contributions totaled $29,000.

Gilliam made the donations, first reported by the Epoch Times, prior to serving as a U.S. District judge. He had said during his confirmation hearing that he “would base my decisions solely on the facts of each case and the applicable precedent, without regard to any political ideology or motivation,” and that “any personal views would not interfere in any way with my ability to neutrally apply the law.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/federal-judge-who-blocked-trumps-border-wall-donated-20k-to-obama

Another reliable Party Aparatchik

22 replies, 683 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 22 replies Author Time Post
Reply Federal judge who blocked Trump's border wall donated $20K to Obama (Original post)
Gunslinger201 May 2019 OP
quad489 May 2019 #1
Frankenvoter May 2019 #2
bfox74 May 2019 #3
oflguy May 2019 #4
Muddling Through May 2019 #5
Gunslinger201 May 2019 #6
Muddling Through May 2019 #9
Horsefeathers May 2019 #7
sipow May 2019 #8
New Deal Democrat May 2019 #10
Gunslinger201 May 2019 #11
New Deal Democrat May 2019 #12
Nostrings May 2019 #13
New Deal Democrat May 2019 #14
KittyCatIdiots May 2019 #15
Nostrings May 2019 #16
New Deal Democrat May 2019 #17
Nostrings May 2019 #18
New Deal Democrat May 2019 #19
Nostrings May 2019 #20
New Deal Democrat May 2019 #21
Nostrings May 2019 #22

Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:05 AM

1. Gee, and here I thought lefties were against pay to play politics...............

"U.S. District Court Judge Haywood Gilliam, an Obama appointee confirmed in 2014, donated $6,900 to Barack Obama’s debut campaign for president and $14,500 to his reelection campaign, according to federal election records."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:08 AM

2. Drumroll please............

It's ALWAYS OK when THEY do it, whatever IT happens to be at the moment.

This in NO WAY shows political bias nor does it show a violation of any campaign laws and EVEN IF IT DID, "polls" say the Amerikan people won't stand for prosecution in this area, blah blah, and blah.

Rules are for republicans, democrats do what they want, when they want, it's the unwritten rule of modern Amerika.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Frankenvoter (Reply #2)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:16 AM

3. To an outsider, this statement would seem ridiculous.

Sadly, it's pretty much the truth, mostly because of the completely non-objective mass media.

I had a discussion with a friend from India last night and he had no idea what was going on at our southern border regarding the drug cartels, human trafficking, the shear number of illegal entries, the missing of immigration court dates, the false asylum claims, the fake "families" getting in, etc. In fact, he thought Trump was holding children in cages.

That's because the media here in Europe is almost as the bad as that in the US. RT comes close to giving fair coverage, but that's about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:25 AM

4. The swamp still needs draining

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2019, 07:27 AM

5. I only have so much shocked face to give.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Muddling Through (Reply #5)

Sun May 26, 2019, 07:56 AM

6. Republicans Nominate Judges who follow the Law

Democrats Nominate Judges who Vote with the Party

Democrats seem almost Proud of that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #6)

Sun May 26, 2019, 08:02 AM

9. Yup.

They act like they will be on top of the pile when the rule of law collapses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2019, 07:58 AM

7. Natch*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2019, 08:02 AM

8. He needs to be removed

Judges should not have biases, political or otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Original post)

Sun May 26, 2019, 09:49 AM

10. Winning!

What a bunch of whiners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to New Deal Democrat (Reply #10)

Sun May 26, 2019, 10:09 AM

11. As long as he votes with your party, yes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gunslinger201 (Reply #11)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:18 PM

12. He didn't vote.

He granted a preliminary injunction. It was an impartial decision and you have nothing to prove otherwise. But go ahead with your whinefest. No sense missing this chance to dream up a new conspiracy theory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to New Deal Democrat (Reply #12)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:32 PM

13. You have nothing to prove impartiality either though, do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #13)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:44 PM

14. I'm not the one whining about it.

It's up to you to make your case and you haven't done that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to New Deal Democrat (Reply #14)


Response to New Deal Democrat (Reply #14)

Sun May 26, 2019, 06:55 PM

16. I didn't make a claim either way, but you did.

"It was an impartial decision"

It's up to YOU to make your case and you haven't done that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #16)

Sun May 26, 2019, 07:41 PM

17. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, a judge's decision is considered impartial.

He is innocent until proven guilty of partiality, or at least that's a popular concept.

You really don't expect me to prove a negative, do you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to New Deal Democrat (Reply #17)

Sun May 26, 2019, 07:56 PM

18. "You really don't expect me to prove a negative, do you?"

Ask Brett Kavanaugh

Besides that, you didn't say you 'considered it' impartial, you claimed that it WAS impartial.

It's up to YOU to make your case and you haven't done that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #18)

Sun May 26, 2019, 08:06 PM

19. It is impartial.

Prove it otherwise. Or you could just try to deflect some more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to New Deal Democrat (Reply #19)

Sun May 26, 2019, 08:07 PM

20. Prove that it is, its YOUR claim.

Its not up to me to prove your claims, its up up you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #20)

Sun May 26, 2019, 08:10 PM

21. You've got nothing.

You might as well join the chorus and whine because the judge is a Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to New Deal Democrat (Reply #21)

Sun May 26, 2019, 08:12 PM

22. Its not up to me to prove your claims, its up up you.

"You might as well join the chorus and whine because the judge is a Democrat."

Of the two of us, only one of us has made a claim:YOU.

Its not up to me to prove your claims, its up up you.



If you can't support your claim, you should probably just admit it, and perhaps even retract it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspolitics