The Meet Your Judges Mixer was last night. Here are photos. Any good stories?
The race for Justice Court Department 1 is heating up to be an expensive one between Elana Graham, James Dean Leavitt, and Vinny Ginn. Graham is releasing an ad with dirt on Leavitt and Leavitt is dishing it back claiming he is more experienced. Ginn is lurking quietly in the background waiting to play spoiler. [RJ]
Capitalizing on the hockey excitement, Sean Connell and Andrew Muehlbauer are marketing their firm as Power Play Legal.
About 300 people eligible for parole are being held in Nevada prisons because there is no transition plan in place. [TNI]
8:54 is setting the bar pretty low, and perhaps for good reason as the choices are not all that great.
It's a pretty grim race if we say a candidate should be supported, not based on any sterling record he has, but instead based on the fact that he does not surround himself with people who are as unsavory as the folks an opponent chooses to associate with.
Agreed. I think we are being a little naïve if we constantly judge a candidate by the company they keep. That is more reasonable in everyday life, wherein it may sometimes be reasonable to judge a person by the dreadful friends they insist on spending a lot of time with,
But politics is not like real life, but is in some sort of Twilight Zone. If everyone identifies their favorite politicians(or at least politicians they are able to tolerate if they don't have any they actually like) their long list of donors or supporters, and even those who work on their campaign, often leave much to be desired.
Trump, Hillary, Obama and all the others all have many donors, supporters, and even those working directly on the campaigns, who have really checkered pasts, to say the least.
And I think this is even more problematic on the local level. Some of our finest judges(and yes, also some of our worst) had their campaigns run by the consultants condemned on this blog.
I'm in no sense defending any of those consultants. I'm just saying I doubt that any local judge, or local politician, has ever been elected who has a completely controversy-free slate of supporters and campaign workers. There are always unsavory people involved in all campaigns. So, often it comes down to a matter of degree. If someone's campaign is run by a universally loathed, reviled, morally bankrupt individual, that is fair game.
But most of these people who are dismissed by some as corrupt, are held in high esteem by others as simply being kick ass, aggressive campaign operatives. So, it often comes down to perception and one's perspective.
Politics is not the Boy Scouts and never will be. And politics will never mirror real life in many respects. It's a whole different monster.
If some view this as a rationalization or tolerance of corruption, it is not remotely intended as such. I just believe there are certain realities at work, and that it may be naïve to apply a too rigid moral standard by deciding a candidate must be worthless and corrupt because his/her slate of supporters, or even campaign operatives, include people of questionable character.
Also, often I see campaign consultants taking action that I do find corrupt and reprehensible. But at other times, the conduct does not seem that outrageous, but some news columnist, with an ax to grind, distorts and inflames the conduct.
Agree with much of what 10;48 says. Many good judges had their campaigns run by these people in question. So, it's much better to focus on the quality of the candidate, or the judge's performance on the bench if it is a re-election campaign, than it is to get too distracted by who is involved in the campaign, who people associated with in the past, etc.
And yes, look at Trump, Hillary, Obama and all the others. Trump has been largely attacked by who he has associated with, possibly slept with, etc.The attacks on Hillary, including allegedly unsavory dealings of the Clinton Foundation, is endless. And they trumpeted that Barrack (supposedly) started his political career in the living room of a terrorist whose specialty was blowing up occupied buildings. And Barrack still won comfortably.
The only people who cared about that were people who never intended to vote for Obama in the first place. It changed no minds and no votes. So, if you can't move the needle by insisting that Barrack hangs around with terrorists who blow up buildings and people,should we really make our decisions in local judicial races based on our opinion of someone's campaign manager?
You should consider what company somone keeps. It is important, especially in public office. I like GINN, Letizia sucks. Kill two birds with one stone.
I hear what 10:48 and 10:58 are saying, but the judiciary is different than other political or legislative bodies. Judges, much more than the legislature, are ethical gate keepers, if you will, so who runs their campaign, and the tactics employed, can have relevance.
Now it is true that if Barrack being with Earl Ayers changed no votes, who a local judicial candidate uses as a manager will also change no votes. But that presupposes people have already made up their mind, which in presidential races they do quite early.
But in a local judicial race, although no one will change their mind based on who the campaign manager is, as to a race they already decided on, if the voter remains undecided that type of information could potentially have an impact.
Judicial races are the most important races to vote for. I am not voting for one judge because of her endorsements. She has a bunch of jerks supporting her.
Interesting article about the Leavitt/Graham race. It's really a comparison about which one has the sleazier campaign manager. Thomas will dig back 20 years to find a b.s. traffic matter to attack Leavitt; and Letizia's candidate has the stones to say that a candidate should have at least 20 years of experience to be able to run for a judgeship — after Leticia's own daughter Harmonica — a 5 year lawyer — beat on Judge Janeice Marshall. Play nice, boys and girls.
Leavitt/Graham race. Here you have a Deputy District Attorney who has access to criminal records. How did her campaign manager find that misdemeanor traffic conviction from 20 years ago in another jurisdiction? Sound suspicious?? Did someone access data bases not available to the public or available from public sources. Have you ever investigated anyone and can't find stuff. It is very hard sometimes to find records. It should be a non issue but they will make hay out of Leavitt's conviction and arrest.
7:29, exactly what regarding 3:27's assertion is correct? Please explain.
3:27, the link you provided only went to the general list of judicial candidates. I expected it to be support for your statement that "judicial" resources (I assume that means taxpayer-funded EJDC resources) are being used for campaigns. But anyway, please provide a little backup for your assertions that judicial resources are being used for campaigning. Until that happens, I'm going to agree with blog is hijacked guy. Blog does seem a bit hijacked these days.
You're right. She should reimburse the court for all of the paper and toner that has been used for all faxes received. I'm guessing she'll be cutting that check for $0.00 shortly.
My fax line runs $60-S70 a month for the extra line, excluding cartridges and paper. Stealing is stealing. It bothers me that Cadish thinks it is a joke.
Guest
Anonymous
May 18, 2018 4:56 pm
New location for meet your judges was great — nice to move it closer to center of town and courthouses
Next year's Annual Meeting is in Vail. Awesome! When was the last time we had the Annual Meeting in Nevada? 2013? And when was the last time we had the Annual Meeting somewhere affordable? Guess it does not matter when you know your trip will be paid for by the State Bar.
Now there is an idea the bar membership can get on board with… The bar can set the convention anywhere they want, but there is no reimbursement for attending (pay your own way). Watch how fast it returns to Nevada and is shortened to a 1/2 day meeting under that rule.
Guest
Anonymous
May 18, 2018 5:24 pm
Here are the bar meetings for the last few years:
2019 – Vail, Colorado (Tentative)
2018 – Chicago
2017 – Austin
2016 – Hawaii
2015 – Seattle, Wa
2014 – Newport Beach, Ca
2013 – Lake Tahoe
2012 – Coronado, CA
2011 – Kauai
2010 – Monterey , CA
2009 – Lake Tahoe
I honestly don't have a problem with places like San Diego or Newport Beach, or basically anywhere else that you can get to in an hour on Southwest. Nobody wants to go to a convention a the Gold Coast or whatever, but on some of this other stuff how about using just little common sense?
I'm curious if anyone has experience and/or knowledge as to whether clever names for law firms like "Power Play Legal" work or help bidness. Since I don't know, I won't address that, but I will say that both Connell and Muehlbauer are both excellent and honest lawyers. I hope they make a killing with the name.
Ginn for the win. He has more experience than Graham, and he is not affiliated with Letizia or Dave Thomas.
Amen sister/brother. But you know it won't happen. S/he with the most money wins.
8:54 is setting the bar pretty low, and perhaps for good reason as the choices are not all that great.
It's a pretty grim race if we say a candidate should be supported, not based on any sterling record he has, but instead based on the fact that he does not surround himself with people who are as unsavory as the folks an opponent chooses to associate with.
I like Ginn. He has my vote.
Agreed. I think we are being a little naïve if we constantly judge a candidate by the company they keep. That is more reasonable in everyday life, wherein it may sometimes be reasonable to judge a person by the dreadful friends they insist on spending a lot of time with,
But politics is not like real life, but is in some sort of Twilight Zone. If everyone identifies their favorite politicians(or at least politicians they are able to tolerate if they don't have any they actually like) their long list of donors or supporters, and even those who work on their campaign, often leave much to be desired.
Trump, Hillary, Obama and all the others all have many donors, supporters, and even those working directly on the campaigns, who have really checkered pasts, to say the least.
And I think this is even more problematic on the local level. Some of our finest judges(and yes, also some of our worst) had their campaigns run by the consultants condemned on this blog.
I'm in no sense defending any of those consultants. I'm just saying I doubt that any local judge, or local politician, has ever been elected who has a completely controversy-free slate of supporters and campaign workers. There are always unsavory people involved in all campaigns. So, often it comes down to a matter of degree. If someone's campaign is run by a universally loathed, reviled, morally bankrupt individual, that is fair game.
But most of these people who are dismissed by some as corrupt, are held in high esteem by others as simply being kick ass, aggressive campaign operatives. So, it often comes down to perception and one's perspective.
Politics is not the Boy Scouts and never will be. And politics will never mirror real life in many respects. It's a whole different monster.
If some view this as a rationalization or tolerance of corruption, it is not remotely intended as such. I just believe there are certain realities at work, and that it may be naïve to apply a too rigid moral standard by deciding a candidate must be worthless and corrupt because his/her slate of supporters, or even campaign operatives, include people of questionable character.
Also, often I see campaign consultants taking action that I do find corrupt and reprehensible. But at other times, the conduct does not seem that outrageous, but some news columnist, with an ax to grind, distorts and inflames the conduct.
Agree with much of what 10;48 says. Many good judges had their campaigns run by these people in question. So, it's much better to focus on the quality of the candidate, or the judge's performance on the bench if it is a re-election campaign, than it is to get too distracted by who is involved in the campaign, who people associated with in the past, etc.
And yes, look at Trump, Hillary, Obama and all the others. Trump has been largely attacked by who he has associated with, possibly slept with, etc.The attacks on Hillary, including allegedly unsavory dealings of the Clinton Foundation, is endless. And they trumpeted that Barrack (supposedly) started his political career in the living room of a terrorist whose specialty was blowing up occupied buildings. And Barrack still won comfortably.
The only people who cared about that were people who never intended to vote for Obama in the first place. It changed no minds and no votes. So, if you can't move the needle by insisting that Barrack hangs around with terrorists who blow up buildings and people,should we really make our decisions in local judicial races based on our opinion of someone's campaign manager?
You should consider what company somone keeps. It is important, especially in public office. I like GINN, Letizia sucks. Kill two birds with one stone.
I hear what 10:48 and 10:58 are saying, but the judiciary is different than other political or legislative bodies. Judges, much more than the legislature, are ethical gate keepers, if you will, so who runs their campaign, and the tactics employed, can have relevance.
Now it is true that if Barrack being with Earl Ayers changed no votes, who a local judicial candidate uses as a manager will also change no votes. But that presupposes people have already made up their mind, which in presidential races they do quite early.
But in a local judicial race, although no one will change their mind based on who the campaign manager is, as to a race they already decided on, if the voter remains undecided that type of information could potentially have an impact.
Judicial races are the most important races to vote for. I am not voting for one judge because of her endorsements. She has a bunch of jerks supporting her.
Judge Elissa Cadish is using judicial resources for her campaign.
https://www.nvsos.gov/sos/elections/2018-election/2018-filed-candidates-judicial-1656
The bizarre obsession with destroying Cadish actually is making me inclined to vote for her.
That is an ethics violation.
Interesting article about the Leavitt/Graham race. It's really a comparison about which one has the sleazier campaign manager. Thomas will dig back 20 years to find a b.s. traffic matter to attack Leavitt; and Letizia's candidate has the stones to say that a candidate should have at least 20 years of experience to be able to run for a judgeship — after Leticia's own daughter Harmonica — a 5 year lawyer — beat on Judge Janeice Marshall. Play nice, boys and girls.
7:24 here — correction: Harmonica was a 7-year Nevada lawyer when she was swept into office . . .
Justice has a name….it is not Graham, Leavitt or Elissa Cadish.
3:27, your assertion is correct. A judge should not be using taxpayer property for a campsign. I will not be voting for Elissa Cadish.
Leavitt/Graham race. Here you have a Deputy District Attorney who has access to criminal records. How did her campaign manager find that misdemeanor traffic conviction from 20 years ago in another jurisdiction? Sound suspicious?? Did someone access data bases not available to the public or available from public sources. Have you ever investigated anyone and can't find stuff. It is very hard sometimes to find records. It should be a non issue but they will make hay out of Leavitt's conviction and arrest.
7:29, exactly what regarding 3:27's assertion is correct? Please explain.
3:27, the link you provided only went to the general list of judicial candidates. I expected it to be support for your statement that "judicial" resources (I assume that means taxpayer-funded EJDC resources) are being used for campaigns. But anyway, please provide a little backup for your assertions that judicial resources are being used for campaigning. Until that happens, I'm going to agree with blog is hijacked guy. Blog does seem a bit hijacked these days.
You are the blog is hijacked guy. The cite does show Elissa Cadish's campaign violation.
Where?
Look at her contact information on the link. You have to cross reference.
How can the blog be hijacked when you are the one bringing up Judge Elissa Cadish 3 days after the original post.
You're getting excited about her putting her work fax down?
Is it her fax? Or is it the court's fax?
http://www.clarkcountycourts.us/departments/judicial/civil-criminal-divison/department-vi/
Who is her campaign manager? They cannot afford their own fax machine.
https://www.nvsos.gov/sos/elections/2018-election/2018-filed-candidates-judicial-1656
You're right. She should reimburse the court for all of the paper and toner that has been used for all faxes received. I'm guessing she'll be cutting that check for $0.00 shortly.
Tom Letizia is Judge Elissa Cadish's campaign manager.
3:29, you seem awful defensive to not be Elissa Cadish.
Judge Cadish should not be using the Eighth Judicial Court's aka tax payer's property for her campaign, period. A campaign is not judicial business.
Straight hijacked.
Yeah, by Cadish supporters. She is above the rules.
My fax line runs $60-S70 a month for the extra line, excluding cartridges and paper. Stealing is stealing. It bothers me that Cadish thinks it is a joke.
New location for meet your judges was great — nice to move it closer to center of town and courthouses
Yeah, it was good this year.
Next year's Annual Meeting is in Vail. Awesome! When was the last time we had the Annual Meeting in Nevada? 2013? And when was the last time we had the Annual Meeting somewhere affordable? Guess it does not matter when you know your trip will be paid for by the State Bar.
Now there is an idea the bar membership can get on board with… The bar can set the convention anywhere they want, but there is no reimbursement for attending (pay your own way). Watch how fast it returns to Nevada and is shortened to a 1/2 day meeting under that rule.
Here are the bar meetings for the last few years:
2019 – Vail, Colorado (Tentative)
2018 – Chicago
2017 – Austin
2016 – Hawaii
2015 – Seattle, Wa
2014 – Newport Beach, Ca
2013 – Lake Tahoe
2012 – Coronado, CA
2011 – Kauai
2010 – Monterey , CA
2009 – Lake Tahoe
I honestly don't have a problem with places like San Diego or Newport Beach, or basically anywhere else that you can get to in an hour on Southwest. Nobody wants to go to a convention a the Gold Coast or whatever, but on some of this other stuff how about using just little common sense?
The Inn at Furnace Creek was a great convention. In Las Vegas, we have the hotels at Lake Las Vegas which would serve better than a strip hotel.
Re: "Guess it does not matter when you know your trip will be paid for by the State Bar."
Well, our mandatory member dues fund the state bar so we're the ones paying for any fully-paid or partially-subsidized annual meeting trips.
to be fair, I believe they try and charge enough for the meeting so that it doesn't really cost the bar anything.
Omg. Please stop. I'm dying laughing.
I'm curious if anyone has experience and/or knowledge as to whether clever names for law firms like "Power Play Legal" work or help bidness. Since I don't know, I won't address that, but I will say that both Connell and Muehlbauer are both excellent and honest lawyers. I hope they make a killing with the name.
Ever heard of halfprice lawyers?
The husband and wife attorney team who ran the business subsequently got divorced, and they each opened a new firm called Quarter Price lawyers.
Dad? What the heck are you doing on this blog?
John Smith, http://www.AttorneyAF.com Don't lie, you are going to look it up
Speaking of Half Price Lawyers, any news on Adam Stokes? Is he still in Texas in the hospital?