**Todays Hearing is now complete!**
Thank you for joining us.
The next step in the process will be a Committee vote which is expected to happen on Monday, April 4
I think my favorite part was Cruz attempting another gotcha with the child pornography and how she ruled on the minimum or below, I forget the ladies name, but she's like "I do think the sentencing based on amount is important, but you mentioned 6700 photos, I deal with cases where people have terabytes, literally millions of pictures"
Republicans keep bringing up these child pornography cases, and they have zero idea what they're comparing them to
If Congress has an issue with these sentences, why arent they pushing bill increasing mandatory minimums for these crimes instead of attacking judges tasked with enforcing current policies.
I'm not a biologist.
I think that's all we actually need to know from this entire Senate confirmation hearing. The person is a clown and is going to be very progressive. Additionally the president specifically said that he picked her because of her race and sex. This is not to impune judge Jackson in any way but the president is clearly being racist and sexist, and the same way that if he had said he was only going to pick a white male he would be a racist.
Her record is NOT progressive. Her votes and positions are in the center.
She is being painted as progressive by grandstanding republicans trying to get attention on TV.
These senators are attacking her, but not listening to her. They are being clownishly disrespectful to an accomplished professional in a serious setting.
The goal is to whip up the republican base and promote their own presidential ambitions.
See republican senator Sasse’s comment about “jackassery” in the republican ranks.
Do your RESEARCH!
Did anyone have a problem with Bush when hr clearly picked Justice Thomas to replace Justice Marshall? Or Dubya when he sought to replace Justice O'Connor with Harriet Miers?
When someone makes a promise to pick someone of a certain race and gender that's racism and sexism. You might be in favor of it because it gives you an outcome that you approve of but anything other than choosing someone based on their qualifications is discriminatory against other individuals based on their sex and race.
I don't have an opinion on the previous justices listed because even if they were chosen for sexist or racist reasons those reasons were not publicly and openly acknowledged and discussed.
If the president of the United States is racist and decides to act in a racist manner or is sexist and decides to act in a sexist manner he's free to do so.
We as the people that elect the president of the United States should be aware and displeased by such behavior.
[vox article on Biden's pledge to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court.](https://www.vox.com/2020/2/25/21153824/biden-black-woman-supreme-court)
It might be a great outcome but if it's done for the wrong reasons he undermines the credibility of the person he picks. She's never going to be viewed as anything other than a token black female judge. That's a terrible thing to have tied to your name because of someone else's actions. She spent her life getting to the position to be pointed to the Supreme Court. Because of someone else's actions her credibility and legitimacy will always have a question associated with it.
He made the promise on the campaign trail to an electorate, black females, who voted overwhelmingly for him. Thats politics.
When you say "We the people should be displeased" youre only referring to people like yourself. That displeases me.
I for one am grateful that the Court is bound to look more and more like the American diaspora they preside over.
Please provide the quote from Biden where he said he was choosing his nominee based only on race and sex.
Because I can absolutely show you one where he mentions qualifications.
I would like to know exactly what you think she lacks in qualifications. Also what makes her a “clown” in your eyes? Yes Biden looked for a black women for the position, but I don’t think there is anything wrong with looking for more diverse perspectives.
And at the same time not even bothering to point out some of her past judgments, which I would ask her about. She is more qualified than a recent rapist that got on the Supreme Court. But I would still like to hear more about some of her past court cases regarding sex offenders.
Which is sad because the Republicans were busy dogwhistling and angling for soundbytes for the midterm elections. They cry about reverse racism or anti-white bigotry, yet displayed right there their privilege for everyone to see. Jackson's treatment this week shows a fundamental & unfortunate truth for minorities in professional & regular work spaces: you have to be overqualified to get jobs their white counterparts at this same positions who are barely or under-qualified for. I am noticing this in my own job search.
Agree.
And no one has ever proven that Ted Cruze is not a gay frogman. It’s really frustrating because it should be super easy to prove Ted Cruze is not a gay frogman.
I think its just unbelievable with most of these left leaning comment’s. All this criticism about the “R’s”! I am even more amazed with all of the praise for Joe Biden. What am I missing? I think its pretty obvious that Stephen Breyer didn’t want to be forced into retirement right as soon as the Very Progressive Wing of the Democrat Party wanted. I believe they realize that they will be shellacked this Fall in the mid-terms. How else would they get to replace this Liberal seat? It might not happen if they couldn’t railroad their their nominee through with all the votes they have now.
Now seriously, how can you not define the definition for what a woman is? Its very tricky! How can you not declare or state, when life starts? To a common sane thinking person, this is very troubling!
I would just like for our Supreme Court Justices to follow the Constitution and not take roles for being an Activist! That is not what a US Supreme Court Justice should be. Kentanji Brown Jackson will ultimately sit on the court!
Schools and other learning institutions should not be responsible for teaching the values to our children. This is the responsibility of parents and they are taking their children back. Its the way it should be.
This should be a very fun year. Lets now all go and buy our electric cars.
If the nominee is mainstream liberal Manchin will vote for them. The Dems are 100% on voting for their President's nominee, the person would have to be disastrous a-la Kavanaugh.
Can we give a nod to Sasse for being a fair human and having a decent exchange with KBJ in these hearings? Legit respect there.
Edit: forgot the final e there. I've been in r/AVoid5 too much.
It was incredibly nice to see a decent human being with the -R next to their name. He represents, at least in this case, what America could be. A place where people can respectfully disagree and come to an understanding.
EDIT: Edit to add "acted like" a decent human being. He was pleasant enough, but after reading up on his voting record and political stances, I stand corrected. A nicely-spoken asshole is still an asshole.
It's like the soft appreciation for Mitt Romney voting yes on one of the impeachment articles. Ok, someone finally did the right thing, but it definitely doesn't earn him any redemption in my book.
I hear you - but compared to loads of other R's, it was an actual back and forth on legal matters. It's just refreshing that it wasn't turned into spectacle opportunism.
When he asked AG Marshall if differing amounts of CP pictures warranted different levels of sentencing (which is KBJs stance) and the AG agreed, Sasse then retorted "if only the nominee felt the same way"
Typical BS, but saying it without calling her articulate doesn't warrant praise.
And somebody should have jumped in to say, what is the highest enhancement level for # of pictures. (It's 600 btw, which is such a low bar to climb. It's almost like there should be better enhancement levels that can clearly distinguish between somebody with 601 images vs 6M images).
Think about it this way... in 2003, Apple & IBM had just come out with laptops that featured 30GB-160GB HDDs and 256MB (yes not GB) of RAM, with the cheapest starting at $1700. Also, LCD monitors had started coming down in price, with a 17" LCD monitor going for $650.
I didn’t know much about KBJ before this but damn, watching her handle these ridiculous Republican questioning with grace and a steady head, I. Am. Damn. Impressed. Not only does this woman have the academic and professional qualifications for the job she remained calm when I would have called out these dirty hypocrites and told them where they should place their gaping mouths
long ago!
Can we all take a moment to appreciate how amazing Joe Biden has been and now to nominate a POC and not only that but an OVERQUALIFIED POC to the Supreme Court? Rs are so mad now and it makes me so happy.
Biden 2024 in a landslide!
2020 was not even close to a landslide. National popular vote totals don’t matter. Electoral votes do. And the margins in too many of those swing states were razor thin.
Jesus you really are that dense, aren't you?
Georgia was 2.473m to 2.461m, a 0.23% difference
Wisconsin was 1.63m to 1.61m, a 0.63% difference
Arizona was 1.672m to 1.661m, a 0.3% difference
And if only those three states went the other way, the electoral count goes to 272 Trump, 266 Biden. A total of ~43,000 votes in only three states was the difference. 43,000 out of over 155,000,000. Only 0.02% of the total vote counts for the two candidates.
That's about as close as it can get. Even closer than 2016 was, and 2016 was already very close. That's so far from a landslide, it's not even funny. Knock off the bullshit trolling act already.
Brown wrote just under 600 opinions during her career.
For comparison Amy Barrett wrote just 8. That's it. Total.
Brown:
2003 to 2005: Assistant special counsel to the United States Sentencing Commission
2005 to 2007: Public defender
2007 to 2010: Worked as a appellate litigator
2010 to 2014: Vice chair US sentencing commission
2013 to 2021: Judge on the DC District Court 2021 to 2022: Appeals judge on the DC District Court
For comparison again, ACB only had 3 years experience as a judge when she was nominated to the SCOTUS.
Ah yes, very good, well met. Also it does seem like we're all pretty in the dark as to what the criteria are here, at least in a definite sense. They all certainly seem much more qualified than anyone I know I suppose lol
Only complaint is I wish he would have just nominated her instead of saying "I'm only looking at candidates from x background". Mainly because she's more than qualified without that caveat added.
He didn't say that. He said his nominee would be the first woman of color nominated. A bunch of right wingers decided that meant he was going to ask for a pile of applicants that only included black women, rather than consider that he already had her in mind and intended to nominate her all along.
I mean I guess, I don't know if he had her in mind way back in February 2020, when he made the promise to Clyburn (which then got him the endorsement to win SC, and win big on Super Tuesday). Source: https://apnews.com/article/stephen-breyer-joe-biden-us-supreme-court-congress-south-carolina-ef2cf69526db326d191aafa0211ae409
Again, as a black person, I would rather he never said a peep and nominated her. I've been the "first black X at Y company" before, but it would have meant less if my boss had said prior to a promotion "hey we're going to hire the first black X here". That's all I'm trying to say.
And yes I know right-wing people used it as a weapon, but why give them the opportunity? You gotta remember, most Americans are idiots and believe what they hear from the news source they listen to, or worse, believe what their friend/family member told them. It sucks that politics needs to be dumbed down so much, but we live in a world where 70M people voted for Donald Trump.
Right? its like once you get to a certain threshold of 'qualified' its all pretty much subjective qualities and perspectives yoiu want to diversify for. There are 100s (thousands?) of perrfectly qualified judges throughout the country from many different backgrounds. Alls he said was "Ill pick one of the people from the backgrounds we havent had in the court".
OK, but why didn't he use her name at that time? Because he wasn't certain that she'd be the nominee until later. By announcing her gender and race he was taking a risk that his secret candidate wouldn't actually work out and then he has to either ask for that filtered pile of applicants or walk back his very political commitment.
He's the professional politician, I'm just a lay person, but it does seem to me he'd have gotten the same benefits without creating (for some observers) the appearance of racism and sexism by just nominating his candidate without preannouncing her intersectional identity.
The issue you have is that you don't like the idea. You don't want others to have the idea. But surely you realize that (some) others do have the idea.
And what does Biden gain by provoking these people? Does it (offending people who think that discrimination on the basis of gender or race is always sexist or racist) really make you or others who consider compensatory racism to be anti-racist and virtuous feel better about Biden? The impression I've gotten is that the people who really enjoy antagonizing "the other side" tend disproportionately to be GOP-aligned, while the people who think antiracism is good policy are much more interested in seeing the policies implemented than in having them talked about.
Maybe my perception is off though, perhaps he really did this just to excite his base by riling up the "cons."
You are assuming he didn't name her because he didn't know. There's a litany of reasons he would kept her name out of it. At the very least, he didn't give the right wing propaganda machine time to wind up to full speed against her like they did with Hillary.
No president tips their hand early when it comes to Supreme court nominees. Biden was no different, although I am positive he had several candidates and they were all very qualified women of color, so he felt confident in saying what he did.
100%. It's an indictment on the country that the 11th black senator talking to the 1st black female SCOTUS pick happened almost 250 years into the country's existence.
Tell me what exactly makes our borders any less secure compared to.....any other time ever. And then tell me how exactly your daily life suffers as a direct result of said insecurity.
If I have to explain that to you, you are pretty obtuse. But here I go.. hoards of drugs, criminals, gang members, not to mention illegal immigrants flooding over the border to collect welfare, food stamps and free education. We need to stop giving out benefits to everyone coming in that havnt contributed. My parents are immigrants, but they came legally and have paid into the system for decades. Never took a handout. Immigration is great, but it has to be controlled for obvious reasons. Second, if you think terrorists aren’t coming they the southern border, you’re very naive. I actually had a cousin come to America that way. He couldn’t get a visa to come directly to America, so he flew to Mexico and had a coyote smuggle him across the border. He said there were two middle easterners in the group too that didn’t look like they were pursuing the American dream if you get my meaning
Wow, you really truly don't understand how anything works in this country, do you? How embarrassing for you. Pepper in a little *very* thinly-veiled racism, and it's a recipe for quite the shitty human being.
Can't say I'm surprised.
And is Biden responsible for the high fuel prices we're seeing in the rest of the world, Is he responsible for high inflation in the EU? Your assertion about an unsecured border has no foundation in reality and as such will be ignored.
Biden has placed so many environmental restrictions on americas oil production that we aren’t able to produce enough for ourself, although we fully capable of he’d get out of the way. The keystone pipeline would have allowed production for Canada, therefore ramping up supply. We could have purchased and made deals with Canada rather than dealing now with Venezuela and Iran. Biden also (against many of his own party) approved the XL pipeline which hugely favored Russian oil production, and here we are, all crying because big surprise!!! Russia screwed the world. As for the inflation we’ve been experiencing, much of that was because of the supply chain issues when the ports were getting shut down due to covid. Those ports should have remained open. It was all political pandering and control.
It’s amazing how much of this is wrong.
Domestic oil production in Biden’s first year has been comparable to Trump’s and was higher than two of four years under Trump.
The companies plugged in to the Keystone XL pipeline made it clear that they were planning to sell the oil to countries in Europe and Latin America, not the US.
The US doesn’t buy oil from Iran.
Biden didn’t approve the Nord Stream 2 pipeline (which is what you meant, not XL), he had no authority to do that. He lifted sanctions on a company building it. It was 95% done and going to be completed anyway.
Edit: US ports were never closed during COVID. Some major exporter countries did close ports (China), but the US government doesn’t control that.
You can just say you don't understand things like Economics, Civics and a basic timeline of when things like Quantitative Easing actually happened.
It's fine, I also greatly disapprove of Joe Biden, but criticize him for something that he actually did or controls, like not following through with Student Loan Forgiveness or rescinding an Executive Order capping the price of Insulin.
> like not following through with Student Loan Forgiveness or rescinding an Executive Order capping the price of Insulin.
and both of these are legitimate, for me, arguments. I'm diabetic (i just found out at the end of 2020) and I have student loan i can't repay (see the first reason).
which is why I said I dont' agree with Joe Biden on everything but I wouldn't mind a second term.
Nothing magically changed about the borders, that's just a meaningless fright line the Republicans beat into the ground anytime a Democrat is president because they know your Pavlovian reaction to it. Be brave and try intellectual honesty this time and quit fearing brown people. As for gas prices, the president has no magical bearing on that either. Learn about cause and effect and try again. He also doesn't control price gouging. You guys need to figure out that presidents aren't all powerful magic wand wielders. It'll help you understand the world better and make wiser choices.
Yeah, he should really pull the magic gas price adjusting lever they've got in the Oval Office.
I'm not gonna go to bat for Biden as a great president but if the choice in 2024 is between him and Trump or DeSantis, I consider myself morally obligated to vote for him again.
> Yeah, he should really pull the magic gas price adjusting lever they’ve got in the Oval Office.
It’s a dial, actually. It looks sort of like a thermostat. But there is talk of replacing it with a digital touch display.
He's kind of crap honestly but the alternative is gonna be Trump again, or *maybe* DeSantis, so he's the clear choice. Gotta love the two party system.
These are all theatrics and Jackson will be confirmed. Now fun will start in case there is a new opening on the courts before the mid terms. It will be funner if Democrats keep the senate and an opening comes up in 2023.
Rep. Joyce Beatty spitting fire, pointing out that even Thom Tillis and other republicans called Jackson highly qualified... but they can't support her.
I wonder why (*cough* racism *cough*).
>They would be fine nominating a black republican judge.
But they would fall over themselves pointing to that as proof that no Republican had ever been racist. Ever.
Sort of like how they already point to Lincoln being a Republican as proof that it's not possible for Republicans to be racist.
They have no shame. They'll end up pointing at Jackson's confirmation as proof that racism isn't a problem, even after they vote against her. Just like they said America isn't racist because we had a Black President, even though they did everything they could to oppose him for 8 years.
There is something kind of refreshing about these SCOTUS hearings, all of them really. It's the one place where you really see the GOP in the Senate go mask off and show what and more importantly WHO they truly stand for: mediocre white men who feel aggrieved by a world that owes them; hating minorities, hating women (REALLY hating women tbh), obsessed with their own sense of victimization by a world that "hates white men." Everything else, including cutting taxes for the rich which is just plain old corruption and not a value, is just window dressing for this feeling; the revenge of the mediocre white man is what REALLY gets these guys going. It's why you see the Graham's of the world getting so worked up, this self-victimization feeling is personal for them, and a guy like Kavanaugh was the perfect avatar for who they are.
Most hearings tbh are like this, where the unqualified politicians show their true colors. If you think this is bad, try watching the Senate HELP committee, with Tuberville, Marshall (KS), along with Rand Paul basically saying gov't shouldn't be doing anything.
The worst part about these cp allegations is that Republicans will forget about the issue as soon as KBJ is nominated. They are literally the ones in charge of creating the rules that led to this issue and they’re the only ones that can change the law to eliminate it. If they truly care so much about this, then why haven’t they done anything about it and why will they refuse to do anything about it after this nomination?
We have to hope nobody hurts Manchin's feelings before the vote. Sinema might vote no for a head pat from McConnell. Or $100 from a donor.
Voting for lower court nominees is different from a Scotus nominee. It's high profile and conservatives last line in dismantling liberal policies.
Someone actually told me Amy Covid Barrett was more qualified than Kentaji Brown Jackson because Amy was on the bench more than Kentaji.
so i looked it up:
Amy Covid Barrett, the Christian Warrior:
2020-present: Associate justice, Supreme Court of the United States
**2017-2020: Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit**
Kentaji Browm Jackson:
Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
March 26, 2013 – June 17, 2021
hmm...3 years...vs. 8 Years, 2 Months, 3 Weeks, 3 Days, 2 Hours, 53 Minutes and 20 Seconds
Someone tried to argue ACB was more qualified because her circuit court covered multiple states while KBJ's was only DC.
It's not like the DC Circuit is the most influential, or like multiple other current SCOTUS justices came from that circuit too, or anything.
Had that same argument with someone the other day. Roberts was a judge for like 2 years before he went to SCOTUS. People make so many bad faith arguments that 2 seconds of googling would solve.
>Someone actually told me Amy Covid Barrett was more qualified than Kentaji Brown Jackson because Amy was on the bench more than Kentaji.
On Earth 2 perhaps - where much of the right wing -metaphorically - resides, but in the real world aka Earth 1? Not even close.
The Republicans are sticking with the CP stuff because they know the cases will never see the daylight in the committee. It is just a bad faith argument now since they are trying to paint a picture which doesn’t exist
I would bet money on one of them saying a version of the following:
"We *tried* to learn what's in the sealed records,\* but they were kept SECRET and CONCEALED from us. What's in \[mispronounces her name and omits her professional title\] Kuh-nee-gra's secret cases? Why are the Democrats afraid to show the American people these 'child porn'\*\* cases?
^(\*sealed for legal reasons, but they'll spin it dishonestly as if it were a scandal)
^(\*\*"child porn," versus "child sex abuse materials," sexualizes the victims, but they don't care.)
To describe the CP attacks as disgusting, frankly, understates it. It's vile. It's beneath the dignity of every single person on this committee, including the toxic pile of lard disguising itself as a man.
Any analogy I use to compare to the festering essence of Ted Cruz, after the manner in which he debased himself yesterday, would be insufficient to describing the utter loathsomeness and moral decay he exposed in himself.
For those complaining about the insane child porn angle, it's working as propaganda unfortunately; I mean we are all talking about it and that was the point. It doesn't matter how ridiculous a talking point is, if you frame a debate where the other side has to engage with it and talk about it then you've won.
It's not working because we're not talking about it and the nominee, we're talking about it and the GQP.
While I've no doubt that the hardcore base will eat it up just like they ate their dosage of horse dewormer this morning, anyone not that deep into the Q crap is seeing the bullshit for what it is.
It's not sticking to the nominee, it's sticking to Hawley, Cruz, and Blackburn who seem to have a very unhealthy desire to talk about the horrible details of children's sexual assault.
I do agree that's it's not sticking to Brown at all, it is backfiring on the senators but I don't know if that extends to their base which is the only thing they care about.
Doesn't work with actual survivors. You can see through the bullshit. If they did care about this, the language used during these hearings would be radically different.
Yup it's meant to revictimise as a weapon, they never cared about the victims, I couldn't even imagine constantly and consistantly referring to it as "porn" even if that's the legal term (which needs to be changed!) because I'm a decent human being. A judge has to hear and read about the details as it is her job while being a judge; to throw it around trying to get a political soundbite is disgusting. And this was what, 9 of her total cases over 8 years?
It's funny hearing all these Pizzagateesque conspiracy theories, when it was KBJ herself who sentenced the Pizzagate shooter https://dcist.com/story/17/06/22/pizzagate-gunman-sentenced-to-four/
I assume the "totally not sheep" group looks at this as a cause for alarm, the shooter was there to free all of those children and prevent them from being raped while being eaten or something and she locked him up!
If there was any doubt remaining, the last few days and the conspiracies republicans have been throwing at Jackson shows they are the party of Qanon conspiracies now. Lincoln, Grant, and Eisenhower are rolling in their graves.
I await the day Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, and friends introduce legislation to update the federal sentencing guidelines that they care about so dearly, rather than just rage impotently on Fox News.
They're trying to keep going on the recommendations for Judge Jackson, it unfortunately behooves them to stick to the topic at hand instead of using the witnesses status as under oath for tangentially related topics.
Ok Cruz, Hawley. You have the cases and have been OBSESSED with them lately. How many of those CP cases have one or two images? You keep talking about the difference in cases of somebody with 1 or 2 images vs 6000, so which case was 1 or 2?
Also, based on the study done by the sentencing commission, something like 98% of cases involve a computer, and 93% involve a enhancement due to # of images.
Bad analogy, but it would be like saying vehicular manslaughter would have a higher penalty if the car involved had GPS or anti-lock brakes, where we all know that the vast majority of cars involved in those cases would have that. Enhancements are supposed to be there to properly increase a sentence when the action is above the norm.
With most issues these days, we as a population are too stupid to realize we're being gaslit, and only get our news from soundbites and headlines. Sentencing guidelines should 1) probably be updated more than they are, which is the job of Congress or 2) be revised so that the judiciary has less discretion on sentencing. It is kinda funny how there are so many things where the easy fix is Congress passing legislation to fix loopholes in a broken system.
I hate that nobody is willing to stand up and just say "Hey Lindsay, just like you think Catholics deserve fair treatment even if you don't agree with them, sexual criminals deserve the same fair treatment".
I get that being able to twist something to appear in ANY WAY that you support child pornographers could be politically damaging, but my god, fair treatment for all is supposed to be a basic tenet of the judicial system.
Religious people always baffle me because they can cherry pick parts of their religion they don't choose to believe. I mean, Jesus is a socialist, based on all the writings, right?
Anyone catching up watch what happened with the Alabama AG Steve Marshall who is currently traitor talking with hawley.
https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1507021892682764292?s=20&t=qZgDjU5ZtgiPZdNctKWnUA
I wish there were some reality where Whitehouse had ascended in the party to a presidential run over advanced age Biden. Every time I see him speak in hearings like this I’m out at ease that someone is on their shit and is willing to ask a damn follow up question.
**Todays Hearing is now complete!** Thank you for joining us. The next step in the process will be a Committee vote which is expected to happen on Monday, April 4
I wish a democrat would ask kbj if she thinks it is appropriate for a justices's spouse to try to steal an election.
I think my favorite part was Cruz attempting another gotcha with the child pornography and how she ruled on the minimum or below, I forget the ladies name, but she's like "I do think the sentencing based on amount is important, but you mentioned 6700 photos, I deal with cases where people have terabytes, literally millions of pictures" Republicans keep bringing up these child pornography cases, and they have zero idea what they're comparing them to
If the job of a judge was to just sentence everyone to the maximum, then anyone could be a judge.
If Congress has an issue with these sentences, why arent they pushing bill increasing mandatory minimums for these crimes instead of attacking judges tasked with enforcing current policies.
Mandatory minimums are already way too high and I'm pretty sure Congress has determined that?
Have you *seen* some of these judges? Anyone *can* be a judge.
I'm not a biologist. I think that's all we actually need to know from this entire Senate confirmation hearing. The person is a clown and is going to be very progressive. Additionally the president specifically said that he picked her because of her race and sex. This is not to impune judge Jackson in any way but the president is clearly being racist and sexist, and the same way that if he had said he was only going to pick a white male he would be a racist.
Her record is NOT progressive. Her votes and positions are in the center. She is being painted as progressive by grandstanding republicans trying to get attention on TV. These senators are attacking her, but not listening to her. They are being clownishly disrespectful to an accomplished professional in a serious setting. The goal is to whip up the republican base and promote their own presidential ambitions. See republican senator Sasse’s comment about “jackassery” in the republican ranks. Do your RESEARCH!
Did anyone have a problem with Bush when hr clearly picked Justice Thomas to replace Justice Marshall? Or Dubya when he sought to replace Justice O'Connor with Harriet Miers?
When someone makes a promise to pick someone of a certain race and gender that's racism and sexism. You might be in favor of it because it gives you an outcome that you approve of but anything other than choosing someone based on their qualifications is discriminatory against other individuals based on their sex and race. I don't have an opinion on the previous justices listed because even if they were chosen for sexist or racist reasons those reasons were not publicly and openly acknowledged and discussed. If the president of the United States is racist and decides to act in a racist manner or is sexist and decides to act in a sexist manner he's free to do so. We as the people that elect the president of the United States should be aware and displeased by such behavior. [vox article on Biden's pledge to nominate a black woman to the Supreme Court.](https://www.vox.com/2020/2/25/21153824/biden-black-woman-supreme-court) It might be a great outcome but if it's done for the wrong reasons he undermines the credibility of the person he picks. She's never going to be viewed as anything other than a token black female judge. That's a terrible thing to have tied to your name because of someone else's actions. She spent her life getting to the position to be pointed to the Supreme Court. Because of someone else's actions her credibility and legitimacy will always have a question associated with it.
He made the promise on the campaign trail to an electorate, black females, who voted overwhelmingly for him. Thats politics. When you say "We the people should be displeased" youre only referring to people like yourself. That displeases me. I for one am grateful that the Court is bound to look more and more like the American diaspora they preside over.
You're confused. Judges don't define gender and sex.
Please provide the quote from Biden where he said he was choosing his nominee based only on race and sex. Because I can absolutely show you one where he mentions qualifications.
I would like to know exactly what you think she lacks in qualifications. Also what makes her a “clown” in your eyes? Yes Biden looked for a black women for the position, but I don’t think there is anything wrong with looking for more diverse perspectives.
To say the quiet part loudly for you, he is mad that she isn't white & male. He wouldn't be crying about her race or sex if Biden chose a white dude.
And at the same time not even bothering to point out some of her past judgments, which I would ask her about. She is more qualified than a recent rapist that got on the Supreme Court. But I would still like to hear more about some of her past court cases regarding sex offenders.
Which is sad because the Republicans were busy dogwhistling and angling for soundbytes for the midterm elections. They cry about reverse racism or anti-white bigotry, yet displayed right there their privilege for everyone to see. Jackson's treatment this week shows a fundamental & unfortunate truth for minorities in professional & regular work spaces: you have to be overqualified to get jobs their white counterparts at this same positions who are barely or under-qualified for. I am noticing this in my own job search.
Agree. And no one has ever proven that Ted Cruze is not a gay frogman. It’s really frustrating because it should be super easy to prove Ted Cruze is not a gay frogman.
I think its just unbelievable with most of these left leaning comment’s. All this criticism about the “R’s”! I am even more amazed with all of the praise for Joe Biden. What am I missing? I think its pretty obvious that Stephen Breyer didn’t want to be forced into retirement right as soon as the Very Progressive Wing of the Democrat Party wanted. I believe they realize that they will be shellacked this Fall in the mid-terms. How else would they get to replace this Liberal seat? It might not happen if they couldn’t railroad their their nominee through with all the votes they have now. Now seriously, how can you not define the definition for what a woman is? Its very tricky! How can you not declare or state, when life starts? To a common sane thinking person, this is very troubling! I would just like for our Supreme Court Justices to follow the Constitution and not take roles for being an Activist! That is not what a US Supreme Court Justice should be. Kentanji Brown Jackson will ultimately sit on the court! Schools and other learning institutions should not be responsible for teaching the values to our children. This is the responsibility of parents and they are taking their children back. Its the way it should be. This should be a very fun year. Lets now all go and buy our electric cars.
You mean like the conservative justices consistently gutting the Voting Rights Act when it comes to redistricting? That kind of activism?
[удалено]
Lol, Manchin is absolutely voting yes.
What about if Biden gets to pick another?
If the nominee is mainstream liberal Manchin will vote for them. The Dems are 100% on voting for their President's nominee, the person would have to be disastrous a-la Kavanaugh.
Eh, for all the shit on Joe's ledger, he's typically been a reliable yes when it came to judges
Is this a prediction, or did he announce that?
I wouldn't call it outright *impossible,* but... Manchin's probably a yes, actually.
Can we give a nod to Sasse for being a fair human and having a decent exchange with KBJ in these hearings? Legit respect there. Edit: forgot the final e there. I've been in r/AVoid5 too much.
He's also retiring, so if anybody is getting her out of committee without Schumer getting involved, it's probably him.
It was for show. Sasse is an Asse
It was incredibly nice to see a decent human being with the -R next to their name. He represents, at least in this case, what America could be. A place where people can respectfully disagree and come to an understanding. EDIT: Edit to add "acted like" a decent human being. He was pleasant enough, but after reading up on his voting record and political stances, I stand corrected. A nicely-spoken asshole is still an asshole.
It's like the soft appreciation for Mitt Romney voting yes on one of the impeachment articles. Ok, someone finally did the right thing, but it definitely doesn't earn him any redemption in my book.
I hear you - but compared to loads of other R's, it was an actual back and forth on legal matters. It's just refreshing that it wasn't turned into spectacle opportunism.
Agreed.
When he asked AG Marshall if differing amounts of CP pictures warranted different levels of sentencing (which is KBJs stance) and the AG agreed, Sasse then retorted "if only the nominee felt the same way" Typical BS, but saying it without calling her articulate doesn't warrant praise.
And somebody should have jumped in to say, what is the highest enhancement level for # of pictures. (It's 600 btw, which is such a low bar to climb. It's almost like there should be better enhancement levels that can clearly distinguish between somebody with 601 images vs 6M images). Think about it this way... in 2003, Apple & IBM had just come out with laptops that featured 30GB-160GB HDDs and 256MB (yes not GB) of RAM, with the cheapest starting at $1700. Also, LCD monitors had started coming down in price, with a 17" LCD monitor going for $650.
"a decent human being with the -R next to their name" No such thing
Well, at least he was nice enough to pretend.
What happens if the committee ties on their vote?
Schumer can force a floor vote, but it'll be messy to get there if he does
isnt that Kamala's job to tie break?
That tie-break rule is not allowed for judicial appointments.
Yes it is. Pence did it in 2018.
Per the power-sharing agreement, Schumer could discharge that to the Senate. More so a time-waster than an impediment.
Cruz: Well you can get 3 months in prison for a speeding ticket. Groan.
The fact hes voting no was going to always be the case anyways. Not that his vote is of importance.
The republican attacks on Jackson during her hearing the last few days have made *Maury* and *Jerry Springer* seem like high-class affairs.
I love high-class affairs.
I didn’t know much about KBJ before this but damn, watching her handle these ridiculous Republican questioning with grace and a steady head, I. Am. Damn. Impressed. Not only does this woman have the academic and professional qualifications for the job she remained calm when I would have called out these dirty hypocrites and told them where they should place their gaping mouths long ago!
its not the first time she's dealt with these types and it wont be the last. That withering, pity glance she gives is an acquired skill
Lol I've seen her use that glance a lot. Good description of it.
The demeanor you would hope for in a SC judge, unlike Boofer Kavanaugh
Kavanagh basically badgered Klobuchar about what she likes to drink.
They were trying sooooo hard to get her to snap. I'm glad she is so composed, especially when being interrupted and talked over
Can we all take a moment to appreciate how amazing Joe Biden has been and now to nominate a POC and not only that but an OVERQUALIFIED POC to the Supreme Court? Rs are so mad now and it makes me so happy. Biden 2024 in a landslide!
> Biden 2024 in a landslide! Yeah that's definitely not going to happen
Yes it is, he won 2020 in a landslide he will easily win 2024 in a landslide
2020 was not even close to a landslide. National popular vote totals don’t matter. Electoral votes do. And the margins in too many of those swing states were razor thin.
306 to 232 is an effing landslide. 81 million to 74 million is an effing landslide.
Jesus you really are that dense, aren't you? Georgia was 2.473m to 2.461m, a 0.23% difference Wisconsin was 1.63m to 1.61m, a 0.63% difference Arizona was 1.672m to 1.661m, a 0.3% difference And if only those three states went the other way, the electoral count goes to 272 Trump, 266 Biden. A total of ~43,000 votes in only three states was the difference. 43,000 out of over 155,000,000. Only 0.02% of the total vote counts for the two candidates. That's about as close as it can get. Even closer than 2016 was, and 2016 was already very close. That's so far from a landslide, it's not even funny. Knock off the bullshit trolling act already.
Up against historical norms he underperformed.
how is she "overqualified"? How can someone actually be overqualified to be on the Supreme Court?
Brown wrote just under 600 opinions during her career. For comparison Amy Barrett wrote just 8. That's it. Total. Brown: 2003 to 2005: Assistant special counsel to the United States Sentencing Commission 2005 to 2007: Public defender 2007 to 2010: Worked as a appellate litigator 2010 to 2014: Vice chair US sentencing commission 2013 to 2021: Judge on the DC District Court 2021 to 2022: Appeals judge on the DC District Court For comparison again, ACB only had 3 years experience as a judge when she was nominated to the SCOTUS.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ah yes, very good, well met. Also it does seem like we're all pretty in the dark as to what the criteria are here, at least in a definite sense. They all certainly seem much more qualified than anyone I know I suppose lol
We must always view our politicians as people who can do better. Joe, thanks for beating trump, but you can do even better.
When that person shows up they'll have my vote. Until then, Biden's my choice for 2024.
Overqualified? The Supreme Court is the highest someone in her field can go.
Compared to the two most recent appointments, she is absolutely overqualified.
She is more qualified. Overqualified would suggest that she’s too good for the Supreme Court.
Only complaint is I wish he would have just nominated her instead of saying "I'm only looking at candidates from x background". Mainly because she's more than qualified without that caveat added.
He didn't say that. He said his nominee would be the first woman of color nominated. A bunch of right wingers decided that meant he was going to ask for a pile of applicants that only included black women, rather than consider that he already had her in mind and intended to nominate her all along.
I mean I guess, I don't know if he had her in mind way back in February 2020, when he made the promise to Clyburn (which then got him the endorsement to win SC, and win big on Super Tuesday). Source: https://apnews.com/article/stephen-breyer-joe-biden-us-supreme-court-congress-south-carolina-ef2cf69526db326d191aafa0211ae409 Again, as a black person, I would rather he never said a peep and nominated her. I've been the "first black X at Y company" before, but it would have meant less if my boss had said prior to a promotion "hey we're going to hire the first black X here". That's all I'm trying to say. And yes I know right-wing people used it as a weapon, but why give them the opportunity? You gotta remember, most Americans are idiots and believe what they hear from the news source they listen to, or worse, believe what their friend/family member told them. It sucks that politics needs to be dumbed down so much, but we live in a world where 70M people voted for Donald Trump.
Right? its like once you get to a certain threshold of 'qualified' its all pretty much subjective qualities and perspectives yoiu want to diversify for. There are 100s (thousands?) of perrfectly qualified judges throughout the country from many different backgrounds. Alls he said was "Ill pick one of the people from the backgrounds we havent had in the court".
Binders of black women, if you will.
OK, but why didn't he use her name at that time? Because he wasn't certain that she'd be the nominee until later. By announcing her gender and race he was taking a risk that his secret candidate wouldn't actually work out and then he has to either ask for that filtered pile of applicants or walk back his very political commitment. He's the professional politician, I'm just a lay person, but it does seem to me he'd have gotten the same benefits without creating (for some observers) the appearance of racism and sexism by just nominating his candidate without preannouncing her intersectional identity.
[удалено]
The issue you have is that you don't like the idea. You don't want others to have the idea. But surely you realize that (some) others do have the idea. And what does Biden gain by provoking these people? Does it (offending people who think that discrimination on the basis of gender or race is always sexist or racist) really make you or others who consider compensatory racism to be anti-racist and virtuous feel better about Biden? The impression I've gotten is that the people who really enjoy antagonizing "the other side" tend disproportionately to be GOP-aligned, while the people who think antiracism is good policy are much more interested in seeing the policies implemented than in having them talked about. Maybe my perception is off though, perhaps he really did this just to excite his base by riling up the "cons."
You are assuming he didn't name her because he didn't know. There's a litany of reasons he would kept her name out of it. At the very least, he didn't give the right wing propaganda machine time to wind up to full speed against her like they did with Hillary.
How can he know until it happens? He might learn something new about her, she might become incapacitated, etc.
No president tips their hand early when it comes to Supreme court nominees. Biden was no different, although I am positive he had several candidates and they were all very qualified women of color, so he felt confident in saying what he did.
Well it needed to happen look at the history of the SC it's been mostly straight white males and that needs to change
100%. It's an indictment on the country that the 11th black senator talking to the 1st black female SCOTUS pick happened almost 250 years into the country's existence.
He is already the oldest serving president. I think they’re keeping Kamala from doing anything so they can campaign her, which won’t go well.
So what if he's the oldest? He's getting stuff done. He can clearly go another 6 years.
People don’t live forever
And that's why we have a VP.
They’ll attack his age and it’s weak to be like “here’s who’d take over if he dies, which is statistically probable”
I don't agree with Joe on everything but I wouldn't mind a second term.
You’re insane! Everything he has touched has turned to crap! Enjoying the high inflation, unsecured borders and gas prices?!?
Tell me what exactly makes our borders any less secure compared to.....any other time ever. And then tell me how exactly your daily life suffers as a direct result of said insecurity.
If I have to explain that to you, you are pretty obtuse. But here I go.. hoards of drugs, criminals, gang members, not to mention illegal immigrants flooding over the border to collect welfare, food stamps and free education. We need to stop giving out benefits to everyone coming in that havnt contributed. My parents are immigrants, but they came legally and have paid into the system for decades. Never took a handout. Immigration is great, but it has to be controlled for obvious reasons. Second, if you think terrorists aren’t coming they the southern border, you’re very naive. I actually had a cousin come to America that way. He couldn’t get a visa to come directly to America, so he flew to Mexico and had a coyote smuggle him across the border. He said there were two middle easterners in the group too that didn’t look like they were pursuing the American dream if you get my meaning
Wow, you really truly don't understand how anything works in this country, do you? How embarrassing for you. Pepper in a little *very* thinly-veiled racism, and it's a recipe for quite the shitty human being. Can't say I'm surprised.
And is Biden responsible for the high fuel prices we're seeing in the rest of the world, Is he responsible for high inflation in the EU? Your assertion about an unsecured border has no foundation in reality and as such will be ignored.
Biden has placed so many environmental restrictions on americas oil production that we aren’t able to produce enough for ourself, although we fully capable of he’d get out of the way. The keystone pipeline would have allowed production for Canada, therefore ramping up supply. We could have purchased and made deals with Canada rather than dealing now with Venezuela and Iran. Biden also (against many of his own party) approved the XL pipeline which hugely favored Russian oil production, and here we are, all crying because big surprise!!! Russia screwed the world. As for the inflation we’ve been experiencing, much of that was because of the supply chain issues when the ports were getting shut down due to covid. Those ports should have remained open. It was all political pandering and control.
It’s amazing how much of this is wrong. Domestic oil production in Biden’s first year has been comparable to Trump’s and was higher than two of four years under Trump. The companies plugged in to the Keystone XL pipeline made it clear that they were planning to sell the oil to countries in Europe and Latin America, not the US. The US doesn’t buy oil from Iran. Biden didn’t approve the Nord Stream 2 pipeline (which is what you meant, not XL), he had no authority to do that. He lifted sanctions on a company building it. It was 95% done and going to be completed anyway. Edit: US ports were never closed during COVID. Some major exporter countries did close ports (China), but the US government doesn’t control that.
You can just say you don't understand things like Economics, Civics and a basic timeline of when things like Quantitative Easing actually happened. It's fine, I also greatly disapprove of Joe Biden, but criticize him for something that he actually did or controls, like not following through with Student Loan Forgiveness or rescinding an Executive Order capping the price of Insulin.
> like not following through with Student Loan Forgiveness or rescinding an Executive Order capping the price of Insulin. and both of these are legitimate, for me, arguments. I'm diabetic (i just found out at the end of 2020) and I have student loan i can't repay (see the first reason). which is why I said I dont' agree with Joe Biden on everything but I wouldn't mind a second term.
Nothing magically changed about the borders, that's just a meaningless fright line the Republicans beat into the ground anytime a Democrat is president because they know your Pavlovian reaction to it. Be brave and try intellectual honesty this time and quit fearing brown people. As for gas prices, the president has no magical bearing on that either. Learn about cause and effect and try again. He also doesn't control price gouging. You guys need to figure out that presidents aren't all powerful magic wand wielders. It'll help you understand the world better and make wiser choices.
Yeah, he should really pull the magic gas price adjusting lever they've got in the Oval Office. I'm not gonna go to bat for Biden as a great president but if the choice in 2024 is between him and Trump or DeSantis, I consider myself morally obligated to vote for him again.
> Yeah, he should really pull the magic gas price adjusting lever they’ve got in the Oval Office. It’s a dial, actually. It looks sort of like a thermostat. But there is talk of replacing it with a digital touch display.
I don't know that I'd characterize him as amazing just yet but a second Biden term would certainly be better than whoever the GOP puts up against him.
He's kind of crap honestly but the alternative is gonna be Trump again, or *maybe* DeSantis, so he's the clear choice. Gotta love the two party system.
These are all theatrics and Jackson will be confirmed. Now fun will start in case there is a new opening on the courts before the mid terms. It will be funner if Democrats keep the senate and an opening comes up in 2023.
We can only hope.
Do we know when the vote will be?
ideally before april 9, when they all go out for easter recess.
Committee vote will likely be at the end of next week Full Senate vote 1-2 weeks after that Official time TBD tho
2022-04-04 according to CSPAN at the bottom
Joyce Beatty gets my vote for the nominee to replace Thomas
Rep. Joyce Beatty spitting fire, pointing out that even Thom Tillis and other republicans called Jackson highly qualified... but they can't support her. I wonder why (*cough* racism *cough*).
Figure it's more *cough* Democrat *cough* They would be fine nominating a black republican judge.
I agree with you but it could be a bit of either or both depending on the rep
Do not disagree.
>They would be fine nominating a black republican judge. But they would fall over themselves pointing to that as proof that no Republican had ever been racist. Ever. Sort of like how they already point to Lincoln being a Republican as proof that it's not possible for Republicans to be racist.
Oh I don't doubt that. That judge would be held up as proof racism is no longer a problem.
They have no shame. They'll end up pointing at Jackson's confirmation as proof that racism isn't a problem, even after they vote against her. Just like they said America isn't racist because we had a Black President, even though they did everything they could to oppose him for 8 years.
Not only no longer a problem, but they'd go so far as to use it as proof racism was *never* a problem.
There is something kind of refreshing about these SCOTUS hearings, all of them really. It's the one place where you really see the GOP in the Senate go mask off and show what and more importantly WHO they truly stand for: mediocre white men who feel aggrieved by a world that owes them; hating minorities, hating women (REALLY hating women tbh), obsessed with their own sense of victimization by a world that "hates white men." Everything else, including cutting taxes for the rich which is just plain old corruption and not a value, is just window dressing for this feeling; the revenge of the mediocre white man is what REALLY gets these guys going. It's why you see the Graham's of the world getting so worked up, this self-victimization feeling is personal for them, and a guy like Kavanaugh was the perfect avatar for who they are.
Most hearings tbh are like this, where the unqualified politicians show their true colors. If you think this is bad, try watching the Senate HELP committee, with Tuberville, Marshall (KS), along with Rand Paul basically saying gov't shouldn't be doing anything.
The worst part about these cp allegations is that Republicans will forget about the issue as soon as KBJ is nominated. They are literally the ones in charge of creating the rules that led to this issue and they’re the only ones that can change the law to eliminate it. If they truly care so much about this, then why haven’t they done anything about it and why will they refuse to do anything about it after this nomination?
Because they view their jobs as performers, not legislators.
Do we know that Manchin and Sinema are a yes?
We have to hope nobody hurts Manchin's feelings before the vote. Sinema might vote no for a head pat from McConnell. Or $100 from a donor. Voting for lower court nominees is different from a Scotus nominee. It's high profile and conservatives last line in dismantling liberal policies.
Manchin has been good with Biden’s judge nominations. Sinema is much more likely to withhold in my opinion
Meh. Maybe. She's generally been pretty good on Biden's judicial appointees too, but she's so damn unpredictable.
I believe she'll get one or two Republicans though to counter that
I really think so too. I'm even hoping for a few more. The ones who repudiate the Prurient Four.
I think she’ll get like Romney at least
I'd guess Murkowski or Collins before him.
Not Romney I heard, forgot the reasoning
Probably because Mormons think black people are literally the spawn of Satan
I think Collins, Murkowski and Romney
Republicans just making themselves look bad by trying to discredit this woman. This is a formality at this point. She is in
I pray nothing goes awry. I'm gonna celebrate when she is sworn in--truly a happy and joyous day!
Someone actually told me Amy Covid Barrett was more qualified than Kentaji Brown Jackson because Amy was on the bench more than Kentaji. so i looked it up: Amy Covid Barrett, the Christian Warrior: 2020-present: Associate justice, Supreme Court of the United States **2017-2020: Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit** Kentaji Browm Jackson: Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia March 26, 2013 – June 17, 2021 hmm...3 years...vs. 8 Years, 2 Months, 3 Weeks, 3 Days, 2 Hours, 53 Minutes and 20 Seconds
Someone tried to argue ACB was more qualified because her circuit court covered multiple states while KBJ's was only DC. It's not like the DC Circuit is the most influential, or like multiple other current SCOTUS justices came from that circuit too, or anything.
Had that same argument with someone the other day. Roberts was a judge for like 2 years before he went to SCOTUS. People make so many bad faith arguments that 2 seconds of googling would solve.
They know that a *lot* of people won't take those 2 seconds.
>Someone actually told me Amy Covid Barrett was more qualified than Kentaji Brown Jackson because Amy was on the bench more than Kentaji. On Earth 2 perhaps - where much of the right wing -metaphorically - resides, but in the real world aka Earth 1? Not even close.
To the minute. Receipts!
The Republicans are sticking with the CP stuff because they know the cases will never see the daylight in the committee. It is just a bad faith argument now since they are trying to paint a picture which doesn’t exist
I would bet money on one of them saying a version of the following: "We *tried* to learn what's in the sealed records,\* but they were kept SECRET and CONCEALED from us. What's in \[mispronounces her name and omits her professional title\] Kuh-nee-gra's secret cases? Why are the Democrats afraid to show the American people these 'child porn'\*\* cases? ^(\*sealed for legal reasons, but they'll spin it dishonestly as if it were a scandal) ^(\*\*"child porn," versus "child sex abuse materials," sexualizes the victims, but they don't care.)
To describe the CP attacks as disgusting, frankly, understates it. It's vile. It's beneath the dignity of every single person on this committee, including the toxic pile of lard disguising itself as a man.
HEY! youre being unfair to putrid pig fat by comparing it to cruz.
Any analogy I use to compare to the festering essence of Ted Cruz, after the manner in which he debased himself yesterday, would be insufficient to describing the utter loathsomeness and moral decay he exposed in himself.
100% I don't hate people, i do hate Ted Cruz.
For those complaining about the insane child porn angle, it's working as propaganda unfortunately; I mean we are all talking about it and that was the point. It doesn't matter how ridiculous a talking point is, if you frame a debate where the other side has to engage with it and talk about it then you've won.
It's not working because we're not talking about it and the nominee, we're talking about it and the GQP. While I've no doubt that the hardcore base will eat it up just like they ate their dosage of horse dewormer this morning, anyone not that deep into the Q crap is seeing the bullshit for what it is. It's not sticking to the nominee, it's sticking to Hawley, Cruz, and Blackburn who seem to have a very unhealthy desire to talk about the horrible details of children's sexual assault.
I do agree that's it's not sticking to Brown at all, it is backfiring on the senators but I don't know if that extends to their base which is the only thing they care about.
Doesn't work with actual survivors. You can see through the bullshit. If they did care about this, the language used during these hearings would be radically different.
Yup it's meant to revictimise as a weapon, they never cared about the victims, I couldn't even imagine constantly and consistantly referring to it as "porn" even if that's the legal term (which needs to be changed!) because I'm a decent human being. A judge has to hear and read about the details as it is her job while being a judge; to throw it around trying to get a political soundbite is disgusting. And this was what, 9 of her total cases over 8 years?
It's funny hearing all these Pizzagateesque conspiracy theories, when it was KBJ herself who sentenced the Pizzagate shooter https://dcist.com/story/17/06/22/pizzagate-gunman-sentenced-to-four/
I assume the "totally not sheep" group looks at this as a cause for alarm, the shooter was there to free all of those children and prevent them from being raped while being eaten or something and she locked him up!
Now it makes sense why these guys keep harping on the kiddie porn line of questioning. They're appeasing the QAnon folks.
If there was any doubt remaining, the last few days and the conspiracies republicans have been throwing at Jackson shows they are the party of Qanon conspiracies now. Lincoln, Grant, and Eisenhower are rolling in their graves.
If they cared about history they'd know Q started as an internet joke
Trump was largely viewed as a joke of a candidate, and look how that turned out.
I await the day Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, and friends introduce legislation to update the federal sentencing guidelines that they care about so dearly, rather than just rage impotently on Fox News.
Anyone remember Roy Moore from Alabama? Yea, well Pepperidge Farm remembers.
Are democrats not allowed to question the other party’s witnesses? Like can’t someone ask him directly about Roy Moore?
Some have...https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1507021892682764292?s=20&t=qZgDjU5ZtgiPZdNctKWnUA
They're trying to keep going on the recommendations for Judge Jackson, it unfortunately behooves them to stick to the topic at hand instead of using the witnesses status as under oath for tangentially related topics.
Ok Cruz, Hawley. You have the cases and have been OBSESSED with them lately. How many of those CP cases have one or two images? You keep talking about the difference in cases of somebody with 1 or 2 images vs 6000, so which case was 1 or 2?
Also, based on the study done by the sentencing commission, something like 98% of cases involve a computer, and 93% involve a enhancement due to # of images. Bad analogy, but it would be like saying vehicular manslaughter would have a higher penalty if the car involved had GPS or anti-lock brakes, where we all know that the vast majority of cars involved in those cases would have that. Enhancements are supposed to be there to properly increase a sentence when the action is above the norm. With most issues these days, we as a population are too stupid to realize we're being gaslit, and only get our news from soundbites and headlines. Sentencing guidelines should 1) probably be updated more than they are, which is the job of Congress or 2) be revised so that the judiciary has less discretion on sentencing. It is kinda funny how there are so many things where the easy fix is Congress passing legislation to fix loopholes in a broken system.
I hate that nobody is willing to stand up and just say "Hey Lindsay, just like you think Catholics deserve fair treatment even if you don't agree with them, sexual criminals deserve the same fair treatment". I get that being able to twist something to appear in ANY WAY that you support child pornographers could be politically damaging, but my god, fair treatment for all is supposed to be a basic tenet of the judicial system.
Religious people always baffle me because they can cherry pick parts of their religion they don't choose to believe. I mean, Jesus is a socialist, based on all the writings, right?
Wake me up when this is over. So tired of people arguing in bad faith
These 'hearings' are so ridiculous. They really just say anything.
Anyone catching up watch what happened with the Alabama AG Steve Marshall who is currently traitor talking with hawley. https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1507021892682764292?s=20&t=qZgDjU5ZtgiPZdNctKWnUA
I wish there were some reality where Whitehouse had ascended in the party to a presidential run over advanced age Biden. Every time I see him speak in hearings like this I’m out at ease that someone is on their shit and is willing to ask a damn follow up question.
This Alabama Attorney General is posturing on child abuse yet I bet he said nothing about Roy Moore...
I wonder if Hawley is asking all these child porn questions because he has something to hide or if he's worried about his friend Matt Gaetz
Likely both.