Re: The insolence of Office; Hoisting them on their own Petards

Ken Smith wrote:

> Jon Beaver wrote:

>> Ken Smith wrote:

[...]

>>> That is the issue, isn't it?  If a government official is acting within
>>> the scope of his authority and discretion, he isn't committing
>>> "misconduct," is he?

So then, say, a bar examiner requiring a bar candidate to submit to a
psychological examination as part of the evaluation process cannot be
committing "misconduct".

>> Bad analysis.

As usual for Ken.

>> It begs the question.  If immunity were only for acts that are not
>> "misconduct" what IS immunity?

Lip service, to Ken.

> No, I'm simply cutting through a lot of bullshit

How can you be "cutting through" something which you produce in tandem
dumptruck-sized loads?

> that wouldn't need to be stated when addressing competent attorneys.

You wouldn't recognise a competent attorney if one were to bite you on the
arse.  Isn't this rather a fatuous statement to be coming from one who
challenges the competence of the Colorado Supreme Court, Federal District
Court, and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals?
-- 
Theodore A. Kaldis
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]