mr. amato's client. it's a huge victory for mr. amato's client. he writes a lengthy opinion. mr.mole as he knew he would have to, that feels the opinion, and in large part the court of appeals reverses. and not only reverses but in in one of the more scathing opinion should you ever read, accuses tread one of making up remedies and arguments. baseless, a baseless decision is essentially what the court of appeals views of what george porteous has written. the evidence will also show that at the same time that this illicit relationship is going on with amato and creely it's not the only relationship of its kind going on in the gretna courthouse, the state courthou courthouse. judge porteous also has relationsa relationship with a bail bond company run by louis marcotte. and with respect to the marcottes, lewis and his sister laura, the evidence will show a very similar pattern to the marcottes taking the judge out to probably over the years dozens if not hundreds of meals at expensive places, buying him liquor. more than that, doing repairs on the judges cards, doing repairs at the

ultimately the judge rules in favor of mr. amato quiet. it's a huge victory for mr. amato's client. ly reverses bottom of the more skating opinions you will ever read accuses judge porteous of making up remedies and arguments on whole cloth. baseless, a faceless decision is essentially the court of appeals. views of what judge porteous has written. the evidence will also show that at the same time that this illicit relationship is coming on with amato and creely it's not the only relationship with its kind coming out in the court house in the state court house. judge porteous also has a relationship with a bill bonds company run by louis marcotte. and with respect to the marcotte, lewis and his sister, laurie, the evidence will show a similar pattern. the marcotte's taking the judge out to probably over the years dozens if not hundreds of meals and expensive places, buying and liquor, more than that, doing repairs on the judge's car, doing repairs of the judge's home, and for his part, the evidence will show judge porteous set bonds in a manner that would maximize profits to lois mar

mr. amato's grand jury testimony. it says i made some representation i was having difficulties and that he loaned or gave me some money. question: whether or not you recall asking amato for money during this fishing trip, do you recall getting an envelope with $2,000 shortly thereafter? answer: yeah, manager seems to suggest there may have been an envelope. i don't remember the size of the envelope, how i got the envelope or anything about it. >> yes: wait a second, is it the nature of the envelope? answer: no, money was received in an envelope. question: and had cash in the it. answer: yes, sir. question: and it was from creely and/or -- >> answer: amato. question: and it was used to pay for your son's wedding. answer: yeah. question: and would you dispute the amount was $2,000? answer: i don't have any basis to dispute it. in addition, in the fall of 1999 while judge porteous still had the liljeberg case under advisement, creely and amato paid over $1,000 for a party in honor of judge porteous' fifth year on the benc

he rules for mr. amato in an opinion that is excoriated by the court of appeals as being made out of whole cloth. now why didn't counsel -- counsel asked why didn't he recuse himself? that way his other crony would have gotten $100,000. if he did that, then mr. amato would lose $500,000 to $1 million because that's how much he stood to make in fees on the case. if he lost the case, he made nothing. if he won the case he made $500,000 to $1 million. here the judge had to decide do i favor my one crony who stands to make $100 thousand or my other crony who would make $500,000 or $1 million. article ii. counsel claims article ii 1 about six lunches, the same kind of issue raised with senator johanns. this isn't about six lunches. not even the portion of article ii which deals with federal conduct is about six lunches. it's about a skwrufrpblg recruiting -- a judge recruiting his successor into the same . . te judge, a recruitment that was successful. judge bodenheimer was recuted. he went to work with a market

he rules for mr. amato in an opinion that is excoriated by the court of appeals as being made out of whole cloth. now why didn't counsel -- counsel asked why didn't he recuse himself? that way his other crony would have gotten $100,000. if he did that, then mr. amato would lose $500,000 to $1 million because that's how much he stood to make in fees on the case. if he lost the case, he made nothing. if he won the case he made $500,000 to $1 million. here the judge had to decide do i favor my one crony who stands to make $100 thousand or my other crony who would make $500,000 or $1 million. article ii. counsel claims article ii 1 about six lunches, the same kind of issue raised with senator johanns. this isn't about six lunches. not even the portion of article ii which deals with federal conduct is about six lunches. it's about a skwrufrpblg recruiting -- a judge recruiting his successor into the same corruption scheme that he was engaged in while he was a state judge, a recruitment that was successful. judge

he rules for mr. amato in an opinion that is excoriated by the court of appeals as being made out of whole cloth. now why didn'tse? that way his other crony would have gotten $100,000. if he did that, then mr. amato would lose $500,000 to $1 million because that's how much he stood to make in fees on the case. if he lost the case, he made nothing. if he won the case he made $500,000 to $1 million. here the judge had to decide do i favor my one crony who stands to make $100 thousand or my other crony who would make $500,000 or $1 million. article ii. counsel claims article ii 1 about six lunches, the same kind of issue raised with senator johanns. this isn't about six lunches. not even the portion of article ii which deals with federal conduct is about six lunches. it's about a skwrufrpblg recruiting -- a judge recruiting his successor into the same corruption scheme that he was engaged in while he was a state judge, a recruitment that was successful. judge bodenheimer was recuted. he went to work with a mar

creely and mr. amato, the two witnesses on this allegation, that they have stated unequivocally that they did not give this money to porteous as a bribe or to influence him. indeed, both have testified that they were and continue to be absolutely certain that the wedding gift had no influence on porteous as a federal judge. it was a gift, a wedding gift from long-standing friends. this is not to say, senators, that there is not a conspiracy in this case. there is. however, the real conspiracy involved judge porteous, not as -- sorry, the real conspiracy involved judge porteous not as a beneficiary, but the subject of the conspiracy. you will hear testimony that a large hospital corporation had hired an army of lawyers that succeeded in delaying a lawsuit brought against the corporation by a family of pharmacists. at issue was control of the saint jude hospital, potentially worth hundreds of millions of dollars. when this case came to judge porteous, the case had been bounced from judge to judge for years.

and he was friends with amato and creely and don gardener. and i'll be returning to mr. gardener in a second. he was friends with amato and creely since the 1970's. both amato and creely said they were best they practiced law together, they hunted and fished together, they knew each other's families. timothy testified that they were known as uncle jake and uncle bob. creely taught him how to fish. amato taught him how to cook. they were close friends. so was don gardener. in fact, gardener was even closer. gardener asked porteous to be the godfather to one of his daughters. this uncontested background, i'd like to reexamine article i. first, the house asserts that judge porteous failed to disclose, while he was a state judge, that he engaged -- quote -- "in a corrupt scheme with these attorneys." this is of course predicated on the fact that there is a corrupt scheme. the problem with the house's case is the house's own witnesses who denied a scheme. both at trial and in a senate deposition, bob creely expressly disavowed -- expressly disavowed -- that he had an agreement

the last june, we made clear to mr. amato, the director general of the iaea, that we, the russians and the french, are partners in the so-called vienna group on the trr issue had several concerns that would have to be addressed if the trr is to be a real confidence building measure because circumstances have changed since this was originally proposed last october. >> thank you. you talk about the steps. are they tangible steps? and is there a deadline? are we really providing these deadlines for them to make good on what they supposedly offer or just keep stalin and stalinism in one club? >> know, first in terms of tangible steps, you mentioned the issue of enrichment almost 20%. that's one of the concerns we made clear. they mean, that is something i would have have to be addressed. >> terms of later. i want to ask about the russian entities. any movement and sanction those? >> on inks, which is the question i was asked, we have produced -- the state department has finished its draft of the report for 2008. we're trying quic

the last june, we made clear to mr. amato, the director general of the iaea, that we, the russians and the french, are partners in the so-called vienna group on the trr issue had several concerns that would have to be addressed if the trr is to be a real confidence building measure because circumstances have changed since this was originally proposed last october. >> thank you. you talk about the steps. are they tangible steps? and is there a deadline? are we really providing these deadlines for them to make good on what they supposedly offer or just keep stalin and stalinism in one club? >> know, first in terms of tangible steps, you mentioned the issue of enrichment almost 20%. that's one of the concerns we made clear. they mean, that is something i would have have to be addressed. >> terms of later. i want to ask about the russian entities. any movement and sanction those? >> on inks, which is the question i was asked, we have produced -- the state department has finished its draft of the report for 2008. we're trying quic

creely or mr. amato & creely. yearbefores, which will be talking about later occurrede curr before. that is not the prior and is no fede the current standard. the senate must decide if a federal judge can be removed o n alleged claim of a correct scheme despite the precourt suc ruling appeared to allow such removal would be to sever any b connection between the viability of the o criminal claimed in the basis for the removal of a federal judge.the indeed it would establish thee r federal judge could be removede. for conduct as demonstrably note criminal. and that series so vague it can be used in a federalral court.m the house made a bad gamble in skilling. the senate should not now make a bad gamble into bad law. i like now to turn to the finalt motion before the senate, whiche is a defense request that the r sepate allegpreliminary votes on the numerous and separatef allegations in the four articles ofim impeachment. the house managers in drafting these articles use the tactic called aggregation. often it's not new. been it has often been the subject oe criticismct by both senator

and he was friends with amato and creely and baumgartner and i will be returning to he was mr. gardiner and a second. amato he was friends with amato and creely since the 1970's, both creely said amato and creely said they were best friends. they practiced all together, they went hunting and fished together, they knew each other's families. were timothy testified there were unc j known as akuncle jake and uncle bob. creely taught him how to fish amato taught him how to cook. there were close friends, so was don gone. g in fact, gardiner was even closer. he asked porteous to be the godfather to one of his daughters. background, now this uncontested that robert would like to read an article 1. e port first, the house asserts george di sc porteous failed to disclose while he was a state judge of the quote corrupt scheme with attor these attorneys. this is of course predicated on the the fact that there is fa corrupt scheme.se's the problem with the house case is the house's witnesses who deny the scheme. without trial and in the senate the position bald creely expressly disavowed,

amato as a result of this arrangement. let me show you what one of these orders looks like. as you see here, mr.say i know that it's difficult for some of the senators to see these exhibits. at the conclusion of the