Whether the Sixth Circuit applied the wrong legal standard in evaluating the petitioner's judicial misconduct claim

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. WHETHER THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, IN LIGHT OF THE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED HOLDINGS OF : OFFUTT V. UNITED STATES, 348 U.S. 11, 13 (1954), AND UNGAR V. SARAFITE, 376 U.S. 575, 586 (1964), ASKED THE WRONG QUESTIONS WHEN IT REASONED THAT, IN ORDER FOR PETITIONER TO OBTAIN HABEAS RELIEF ON HIS JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT CLAIM, PETITIONER HAD TO PROVE THAT HIS TRIAL JUDGE WAS ACTUALLY BIASED? II. WHETHER THIS COURT'S PRECEDENT CLEARLY ESTABLISHES THAT WHERE A PETITIONER _ _ _ -PRESENTS MULTIPLE MISCONDUCT, A REVIEWING COURT MUST CONSIDER THEM COLLECTIVELY TO DETERMINE IF THE JUDGE'S ACTIONS CUMULATIVELY ESTABLISHES THAT HE WAS BIAS? IIL. WHETHER THE SIXTH CIRCUIT'S APPLICATION OF A.E.D.P.A TO PETITIONER'S JUDICIAL BIAS CLAIM CONFLICTS WITH THE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED HOLDINGS OF CASES SUCH AS JOHNSON V. WILLIAMS, 133 S.CT. 1088, 1097, AND YIST V. NUNNEMAKER, 501 U.S. 797, 803 (1991), WHERE THE STATE COURT NEITHER ADJUDICATED THE CLAIM ON THE MERITS, NOR DISPOSED OF IT BY WAY OF SUMMARY OPINION?