Let me serve you up some truth while you toss the bullshit my way. First off Counselor Cullen have you responded to that nigger Ralph Holder yet about how and when you came into possession of the exculpatory medical report that proves he didn't attack his lady? Time is running. Next up, all four of you guys seem to think you can threaten me by raising the issue of sanctions before this court relating to the 1990's history?
A couple of things. If you raise Christian Minnis' case I will point out that POTUS is reviewing NCLB and other matters first raised by KingCast and clients when I was Christopher King, Esq., fresh out of the Ohio AG's Office as an AAG. Looks like I was on to something, ahem. And If you raise Bethany Lemaster's case I will point out the lunacy of Judge Cain's Decision holding ipso facto that Ms. Lemaster could not be the victim of sexual discrimination as a bank teller because her boss was a woman. Ms. Lemaster was being forced to complete manual labor tasks with heavy coinage and being told to stand while she was pregnant with twins instead of getting a stool or a chair as accommodation, and even her co-workers came to tell me what "fucking bitch" her manager Lynne Oldsen was to her. Here OB-GYN told me he never saw an employee have to go through "so many hoops just to get an appointment" as she did. That's unlawful harassment guys and it's based on sex, last time I seen not too many men bear children. So if that's a frivolous lawsuit there is something wrong in American Jurisprudence. Oh wait..... there IS something wrong with American Jurisprudence, I forgot. Witness Judge McCafferty's back door, down-low recusal.
Well what I didn't forget is the more recent history of Attorney Cullen's peeps found in contempt in this very Court, in addition to the aforementioned Ralph Holder issues. You see for some reason I find it highly relevant that in recent history I prevailed over Kelly Ayotte on First Amendment issues in a racial context when I was NAACP Legal Chair, given that this case is sounding in First Amendment and racial discrimination. Of course it's more relevant, and that is why your little hand-picked Judge Landya B. McCafferty glossed right on over it, by stating merely that "the two had an acrimonious history." You guys want the past to favor you even when it's not remotely related to WTF is going on in the here and now, even when there are more recent events in the past that are definitely related to the here and now. So hear this, now: This is a no-bullshit zone, guys.