Judge Swears In New Citizens and Tells Them to Kneel During Anthem

So the Eaglesnest or whatever the fuck this blog infers that the judge "tells them to kneel."

The Spectator commentator (read the story ... he damned sure ain't a journalist), doesn't even go that far.

But the OP did.

And still, the story remains a "cult classic."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

next time this judge holds a swearing in this guy George Neumayr should record it. don't see anything unauthorized about that .. it's not a criminal trial after all.

some family probably do record it to preserve the moment .. so why can't this guy?

any bets that if this judge sees a reporter recording her she'll try to have them removed?

if he does record it, will you claim it's a .. fake video?

bahahahaaa Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

The article said people had to surrender their phones to enter the court and witnesses had to watch the swearing in on a video without sound. It's obvious someone has put measures in place to prevent "embarrassing leaks" about what is being said and done in the courtroom.

This story is NOT a he-said versus he-said. There are no competing versions of what happened.

One witness (the author) affirmed what he heard. There are no contradicting witnesses. All the evidence points to the story being true. An Obama appointed federal judge spins wildly off into the ozone while swearing in new American citizens! Originally Posted by lustylad

There are no versions of what happened at all. Just the ranting of a pissed off and understandably frustrated RWW blogger (winning's hard work when your players are always on the DL, isn't it) who admitted he was bored at the courthouse and admittedly couldn't hear what was being said.

There are no versions of what happened at all. Just the ranting of a pissed off and understandably frustrated RWW blogger (winning's tough) who admitted he was bored at the courthouse and admittedly couldn't hear what was being said. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Now you're brazenly lying through your teeth. As I quoted earlier in this thread, he specifically said he "could hear the judge bellowing at the newly sworn-in Americans". Give it up, yssup.

You need to back off the accusations.

Here's EXACTLY what your reporter said: "Her speech to the new citizens, to the extent that I could hear it, was appalling."

Awaiting another retraction.

You need to back off the accusations.

??? Flopping again, yssup?

I'll stop calling you out for lying if you'll stop lying.


Here's EXACTLY what your reporter said: "Her speech to the new citizens, to the extent that I could hear it, was appalling."

Yes, I quoted that earlier too. He admitted he may not have caught 100% of her speech. He did hear the gist of it. The reporter's honesty makes his statements about what he DID hear even more credible. It's a lie to twist his words by falsely claiming he "admittedly couldn't hear what was being said".


Awaiting another retraction.

Well then, go ahead - retract your lie. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

The article said people had to surrender their phones to enter the court and witnesses had to watch the swearing in on a video without sound. It's obvious someone has put measures in place to prevent "embarrassing leaks" about what is being said and done in the courtroom.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

And he said he was inside and then when he went outside he had to surrender his phone. How was that possible? He is making shit up. Plus whatever he heard is out of context if he did not hear it clearly as he admitted.
I find it odd that the same folks that defend Trump with only a shred of doubt, can so easily condemn a Judge with someones estimation of what she might have said. Actually I am not surprised. Seems to be the MO of a few.

And he said he was inside and then when he went outside he had to surrender his phone. How was that possible? He is making shit up. Plus whatever he heard is out of context if he did not hear it clearly as he admitted.
I find it odd that the same folks that defend Trump with only a shred of doubt, can so easily condemn a Judge with someones estimation of what she might have said. Actually I am not surprised. Seems to be the MO of a few. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Unlike the New York Times, this article cited a bona fide, tangible -- not "anonymous" -- source.

Who admitted he didn’t really hear it.

Who admitted he wrote about what he personally heard. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

FTFY

This isn’t an agree to disagree thing.

This isn’t an agree to disagree thing. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

well .. for once i agree with you. i simply disagree with your viewpoint.

sounds like someone needs to pull a Osaroma and sneak in a recording device.

and you are aware that there is nothing that judge can do to stop any reporter from interviewing these newly minted citizens immediately after and have them corroborate what was said by the judge.

right?

So why didn’t a reporter do it?

So why didn’t a reporter do it? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

they will as word gets out about this Judge's egregious conduct. better still, they'll get someone beeping sworn in to record it.

guess what the law on that in NY State is?

New York's wiretapping law is a "one-party consent" law. New York makes it a crime to record to record or eavesdrop on an in-person or telephone conversation unless one party to the conversation consents. N.Y. Penal Law §§ 250.00, 250.05

good enough for that cunt Osaroma, good enough for a newly minted citizen!

see how that works?

FTFY Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Yep you fixed it. Just like the guy in the story. He made it say what his followers wanted to hear while admitting he could not see who it was and could not tell exactly what she was saying, and did not hear the whole conversation.
He said some random relative said it was her. How would they even know. Plus from what I have heard around here those "knee grows" all sound alike. By the way the person identifying her was one of the "Mexicans" you can't trust LOL!