Another attempt by the leader........ - PilcheskyDeceit True Freedom of Speech

Members Login

Post Info

TOPIC: Another attempt by the leader........

doomers

Member

Status: Offline

Posts: 309

Date: Fri Sep 14 3:19 PM, 2007

Another attempt by the leader........

Permalink

I say this will be loss number 33!!!!!! yawn yawn yawn yawn

Joe Pilchesky Posts: 1469 Date: Sep 13 11:30 PM, 2007 Views: 477	Quote \| Reply Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Our judge was Judge Quigley. He wanted to get right to it. No foreplay. I repeated everything I said to Munley and Minora, fact by undisputed fact, which was that McDowell will be auditing himself if elected, and that 02, 03, 04 and 07 are not yet audited, and that it's an undisputed fact that he'll be auditing $152,000,000.00 worth of his own books and accounts. I showed the judge in the transcript where McDowell admitted to being the county tax collector, that he was just audited by the county controller and that McDowell understood that he'd be auditing himself if elected. I explained that Munley's and Minora's theory that McDowell could hire an independent auditor doesn't float because 1) the money is not in the budget for it; 2) the commissioners would have to approve it and they may not; and 3) if allowed to do that, other county row officers across the state will want to be allowed to do that to circumvent state eligibility requirements. Atty. Dave Rinaldi only argued that it was the city controllers job to audit McDowell, which I made short work of on rebuttal since the trancript includes John Mellow's testimony, as well as his auditor's testimony that an audit was just done by the controller, and that the County Code mandates it. My wife hammered away at the language in the County Home Rule Charter that directs that "no person in any public office can run for the office of controller until they're out of office for one year". Rinaldi argued that the Charter only applies to county public officials, which is what Minora and Munley said. I presented by argument first, then my wife, then Rinaldi. When we were all done, he asked Rinaldi if it was an undisputed fact on the record that McDowell collects the county taxes and its about 38 million a year. He responded that was correct. By that question, I feel he was leaning in our favor. The judge also said to Rinaldi, "that's a substantial amount of money he collects for the county." John Mellow asked to speak, but was denied. Charlie Spano was also there. The judge said he'd have a decision by Tuesday. I did get the opportunity to tell him that we'd taken the Cordaro matter to the Supreme Court successfully, with the message being that we'll appeal if we lose. McDowell was there and left hastily with a very dejected look on his face. As if someone just told him he was off the ballot, kind of a look. Maybe he is. If not, the Supreme Court will hear it.
DOs Mule Posts: 25 Date: Sep 13 11:43 PM, 2007 Views: 472	Quote \| Reply Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Great Job, I hope you win, Jo and Joe, for all of us. __________________ Nope, my name is not nor never was, JUSTICE. Justice is missing in Scranton!!!
Lobby cyst Posts: 30 Date: Sep 14 12:19 AM, 2007 Views: 445	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today The word is, and has been, that Kenny was assured he's survive round one and round two only. I guess the Supreme Court judges are a little out of reach for the D's delivery boy. Might as well prep for the next round, Joe. You must be pretty beat by now. Hang in there. Like you've said a lot of times, you have to be able to run with them.
Roderick Rules Posts: 49 Date: Sep 14 12:30 AM, 2007 Views: 439	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today There's no way McDowell should be allowed to audit himself. It's unheard of. Pilchesky's arugment is on solid ground, but will politics prevail? It will be sad if Commonwealth sides with the local judges because public policy demands that the taxpayers are protected from anyone auditing themselves. I've never heard of Judge Quigley. I hope he wasn't sent in there on a political mission. Here's what happens if it goes to the Supreme Court and Pilchesky wins there. Most likely it'll be another case law precedent set. If that's the case, both Cordaro and McDowell will have made statewide case law in the same year for all the wrong reasons. Pilchesky will have done twice in one year what many lawyers don't do over their lifetime. Intriguing, to put it mildly.
Louie wants this now Posts: 26 Date: Sep 14 12:48 AM, 2007 Views: 427	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Once in a lifetime is enough. That's how they'll look at it. There's no way they'll give Mr. Pilchesky this win, now way. Not even if he deserves it. Not even if it's the right thing to do. Beating Cordaro, the DA, the State Police and having the U of S on the run over the Complex is quite enough for this year. McDowell will survive for no other reason than they can't put another W up for Mr. Pilchesky. Call it luck. Call it politics. Call it what you want. You'll never see the headline, "McDowell off the ballot". Instead, "Pilchesky loses again". That's just the way it goes.
themom Posts: 145 Date: Sep 14 12:52 AM, 2007 Views: 423	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Please don't let Quigley give you a warm and fuzzy feeling. I looked at some of his rulings and they leave me cold, very very cold. He does not appear to be the kind of guy who can make an independent decision. He either wants the parties to get together to 'work it out' or he looks for an 'IDENTICAL' case to make his ruling. Failing to get that 'identical' ruling, he falters. Don't be fooled by this guy, check his record! Sorry, I don't mean to pi## on your hopes, but I don't want to be lulled into believeing that right is right and right wins all the time, or even most of the time. Love the fight you are doing and you are right, but don't let being right make you think that the ruling will be fair. Unfortunately, life is far from fair!
Dance with defiance Posts: 11 Date: Sep 14 1:38 AM, 2007 Views: 410	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Qiugley stuck it to Chris Phillips in his SS Complex case. He can tell you the whole story. I don't know the details, but I know that a Judge Quigley screwed him somehow. Why can't these cases just be filed in the Supreme Court to save time and money?
JUDYandTHEstopANDgo Posts: 18 Date: Sep 14 7:42 AM, 2007 Views: 362	Quote \| Reply Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Quigley is not even a real CC judge. He is the JV team and he is compromised because of his brothers close ties to Louie. He also had a pervert of a relative working for DO some time ago. Quigley is a scumbag and belongs in jail. Hey STOPAND GO...where were you Tueday. Did the leader say stay home. :
dukie Posts: 57 Date: Sep 14 8:02 AM, 2007 Views: 341	Quote \| Reply Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Judy: The judge is related to the kid who worked in OECD but was arrested for soliciting protitutes? His desk was cleared that week-end and was never heard from again. Name, I believe, is Matt Q. __________________ The nation of Kazakhstan laughs at Scranton!!
Joe Pilchesky Posts: 1469 Date: Sep 14 8:08 AM, 2007 Views: 335	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today To be very honest with you, I'd prefer that he whacks me and sends this to the Supreme Court, anyway. He did indicate that he was favoring me through his questions to Dave Rinaldi, but I might be suffering from wishful thinking. Judge Quigley was the judge who dismissed the appeal of Chris Phillips' and Fran Vutnoski's injunction that Judge Walsh had denied. However, it wasn't dismissed after briefs were submitted and argument was heard, instead, it was dismissed because after the briefs were filed, Carl Greco complained that he only got one copy instead of the two required. That's usually remedied by simply serving another copy. You don't throw them out of court for that reason, but at Greco's request, Quigley did. I don't put anything past any of them. After watching Munley and Minora in action, and they are brutally ethicless cronies, I'm not surprise by anything. Looooooosssssssseeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrr
Carol C Posts: 43 Date: Sep 14 8:47 AM, 2007 Views: 292	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Mr. Pilchesky, sometimes it's just the fight that can turn things around, and not whether you win or lose. Just the fact that you took a fight to them has them reeling. Kenny knows he's in a fight to save himself from the destruction of his entire political future. Here's what he said when you and your wife walked off the elevator, "Those two can be anyone's worst nightmare." Such a nice compliment from a man who knows how to be a nightmare in his own right. Doesn't it suck to be a follower?????
Catholic girls do it better Posts: 6 Date: Sep 14 10:11 AM, 2007 Views: 204	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today The word is 'panic' in Kenny's world today. Yesterday was a tad too real for him. He's one step away from being in the Supreme Court with his arrogant antics. Hopefully, this Judge Quigley will do the right thing, the only thing to do, and remove him from our lives once and for all.
Ex Dem Posts: 32 Date: Sep 14 10:43 AM, 2007 Views: 178	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Quigley will have to render an opinion, not just a generic order. It'll be interesting to see if he agrees with two local judges who believe its moral and ethical for a public official to audit his own books. Judge Kelly agree with Minora/Munely on Cordaro and we saw what happened there. Will Quigley follow Kelly's lead?
Joe Pilchesky Posts: 1469 Date: Sep 14 2:08 PM, 2007 Views: 64	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today Judge Quigley has to justify affirming Munley and Minora, and put it in writing. He will have to state why it is OK for McDowell to audit himself. It will make for interesting reading. I'd prefer to read why he believes McDowell should not be allowed to audit himself and save all of us the trip to the Supreme Court. We'll know by Tuesday, at least that's what he said. That's a quick response, which may be an idicator in our favor.
Group22 Posts: 14 Date: Sep 14 2:35 PM, 2007 Views: 36	Quote \| Reply RE: Commonwealth Court vs. McDowell today No matter what happens, Joe. Thanks. Ya Joe the sheep looooooove you!!!

__________________

Joe P., truly an racist a s s.

Agamemnon

DD: Where logic & proportion have fallen sloppy dead.

Status: Offline

Posts: 3768

Date: Fri Sep 14 5:13 PM, 2007

RE: Another attempt by the leader........	Permalink

Pilchesky has to win about 32 cases in a row just to get above .500...enough said. __________________ Free Speech does't require a multi-paragrah disclaimer Mr. Pilchesky.

Page 1 of 1 sorted by

Quick Reply
Please log in to post quick replies.

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse