Ketanji Brown Jackson confirmation hearing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that she's not very strong. The fact is, she's telling Senators they can't possibly understand her sentencing, etc. because they don't have the documents she did, yet those documents were somehow (illegally?) obtained by the White House and are being leaked. Since that's going on, Cruz is correct - the Senators should have access to the documents. Durbin keeps interrupting because he covering up.

Holy you know what! You are a stupid you know what.

How about something more substantial. They are stating she relied on those sentencing guidelines so the Senators can't begin to understand why she made the decisions she did. Cruz and 9 other senators asked for those documents, with redactions to protect the victims. Durbin would not say no directly because he didn't want to go on the record as saying that. Instead he stonewalled, interrupted, etc.

[Anonymous]

Do you think the Republican senators on the senate judiciary committee learn from such a powerful heart rendering speech by Senator Booker? If you think they do, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. I bet they don’t have the intellect to even grasp the meaning of what he spoke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you think the Republican senators on the senate judiciary committee learn from such a powerful heart rendering speech by Senator Booker? If you think they do, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. I bet they don’t have the intellect to even grasp the meaning of what he spoke.

They don’t because none of them actually have a soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


A) 1. GDS is not a public school 2. The judge was on the board of GDS, I do not know if she still is. 3. Senator Cruz provided compelling evidence that CRT is being taught from a young age at GDS.


Are private schools not at liberty to teach whatever the hell they feel is appropriate? Or are Catholic schools now prohibited from making religion central to what they teach, too? And what is the judge supposed to do, develop curriculum for the school where her kid goes?

No kidding. Yet the R's would have been the first to yell if the anti-gay, antichoice/anti-birth control teachings of the Catholic schools attended by ACB, Cavenaugh or Gorsuch had been attacked directly during a SCOTUS confirmation hearing.

[Anonymous]

Very interesting that the party of Dennie Hastert, Alex Acosta, Gym Jordan, Roy Moore, Matt Gaetz, Josh Duggar, Anton Lazzaro, have decided to make child sex cases their focus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that she's not very strong. The fact is, she's telling Senators they can't possibly understand her sentencing, etc. because they don't have the documents she did, yet those documents were somehow (illegally?) obtained by the White House and are being leaked. Since that's going on, Cruz is correct - the Senators should have access to the documents. Durbin keeps interrupting because he covering up.

Holy you know what! You are a stupid you know what.

How about something more substantial. They are stating she relied on those sentencing guidelines so the Senators can't begin to understand why she made the decisions she did. Cruz and 9 other senators asked for those documents, with redactions to protect the victims. Durbin would not say no directly because he didn't want to go on the record as saying that. Instead he stonewalled, interrupted, etc.

If you entertain their stupid request, then every judge who comes before the committee, whether Democratic or Republican nominee, can be subjected to similar questioning and request all court records of which they question the nominee. As Chairman DURBIN said, such sealed records were never asked by anyone in any hearing so far. It certainly a bridge too far. Cruz is an a$$. He thinks he can swing Tumpsters in his favor for his Presidential fantasy dream. What he doesn’t know is that he has already risen to his highest level of incompetency. From here, it is only downhill for him in his political career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Republicans (most not all) have been disgraceful during this hearing. They've made this a waste of time. This hearing has been a weird hazing practice for Justice Jackson.

They’re building their sound bites for their future campaigns. Their base will be thrilled to see their representatives doing —what they will likely view as putting an overly educated uppity Black woman in her place. This public nastiness is a total win for them, and even more so if they can get KBJ to stumble publicly and on camera.

Zero self-awareness. Need we remind you AGAIN about the nastiness Democrats displayed to Barrett and Kavanaugh? Take a seat and maybe review *those* hearings, why don’t you.

Irrelevant when we're talking about the current hearing.

Why punish Ketanji for what happened in the past?

She said as board member at GDS she was not aware that they were teaching CRT and is not responsible for setting currriculum. Someone needs to follow up with her and ask her as a board member of GDS now that she has been made aware, what is her opinion on what was being taught at a school where she was on the board?

A) Is GDS a public school? (I don't know the answer to that but, since you're such an expert, I assume you do).
B) CRT is not the same as religiously held beliefs on abortion for Catholics. As another poster explained, and having been raised Catholic, I can tell you that person is correct: There is no gray area on that issue for practicing Catholics.

A) 1. GDS is not a public school 2. The judge was on the board of GDS, I do not know if she still is. 3. Senator Cruz provided compelling evidence that CRT is being taught from a young age at GDS.

The questioning is a hate-crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Very interesting that the party of Dennie Hastert, Alex Acosta, Gym Jordan, Roy Moore, Matt Gaetz, Josh Duggar, Anton Lazzaro, have decided to make child sex cases their focus.

+1 I think I’ve seen photos of every single Republican Senator asking these questions alongside Josh Duggar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that she's not very strong. The fact is, she's telling Senators they can't possibly understand her sentencing, etc. because they don't have the documents she did, yet those documents were somehow (illegally?) obtained by the White House and are being leaked. Since that's going on, Cruz is correct - the Senators should have access to the documents. Durbin keeps interrupting because he covering up.

Holy you know what! You are a stupid you know what.

How about something more substantial. They are stating she relied on those sentencing guidelines so the Senators can't begin to understand why she made the decisions she did. Cruz and 9 other senators asked for those documents, with redactions to protect the victims. Durbin would not say no directly because he didn't want to go on the record as saying that. Instead he stonewalled, interrupted, etc.

If you entertain their stupid request, then every judge who comes before the committee, whether Democratic or Republican nominee, can be subjected to similar questioning and request all court records of which they question the nominee. As Chairman DURBIN said, such sealed records were never asked by anyone in any hearing so far. It certainly a bridge too far. Cruz is an a$$. He thinks he can swing Tumpsters in his favor for his Presidential fantasy dream. What he doesn’t know is that he has already risen to his highest level of incompetency. From here, it is only downhill for him in his political career.

Again, telling Senators they can’t possibly understand but not being willing to show them the documents the democrats clearly have privy to doesn’t fly.

[Anonymous]

Bityom line: No I Democratic nominee for the Supreme Court would’ve been acceptable to the Republican party. The reverse is also true. The hearings are performative, and so is this discussion thread.

[Anonymous]

How can someone who doesn’t know what a woman is defend women’s rights?

Is this how her forms are filled out when asked to provide her sex?

"Judge Jackson, are you a woman? "

"I'll have to ask my biologist"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The hypocrites here find fault with Judge Jackson sending her kids to GDS. what about you? How many of you live in D.C. and send your kids to public schools, especially if you have HHI similar to that of a successful surgeon and Federal Judge couple?

This, for sure. When your mom is a judge that went to Harvard and your dad is a surgeon that went to Harvard and Columbia - where on earth do you think those kids go to school, regardless of race or political association? For the most part, it’s not Wilson.

Yah, but she is a Black woman - regardless of the education, wealth etc... how can she behave like the White men and woman?

.

Please if I had the money you better believe I’d send my kid to a prep school. No hate for her or Obama. It’s not like she’s the governor of Virginia pretending to be a man of the people in his stupid fleece. I have a problem with him sending his kids to private. He’s an elitist jerk though so it’s to be expected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sort of wish they wouldn't televise these hearings. Perhaps politicians would actually ask questions instead of waxing poetic and grandstanding.

Oh, the irony.

Irony is a Republican Senator saying the same exact thing today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How can someone who doesn’t know what a woman is defend women’s rights?

Is this how her forms are filled out when asked to provide her sex?

"Judge Jackson, are you a woman? "

"I'll have to ask my biologist"

Now conservatives can just take away Title IX. Because we can't tell who is a woman and who is not. So how can the Judge tell if there are civil rights violations against women?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Republicans (most not all) have been disgraceful during this hearing. They've made this a waste of time. This hearing has been a weird hazing practice for Justice Jackson.

They’re building their sound bites for their future campaigns. Their base will be thrilled to see their representatives doing —what they will likely view as putting an overly educated uppity Black woman in her place. This public nastiness is a total win for them, and even more so if they can get KBJ to stumble publicly and on camera.

Zero self-awareness. Need we remind you AGAIN about the nastiness Democrats displayed to Barrett and Kavanaugh? Take a seat and maybe review *those* hearings, why don’t you.

Irrelevant when we're talking about the current hearing.

Why punish Ketanji for what happened in the past?

She said as board member at GDS she was not aware that they were teaching CRT and is not responsible for setting currriculum. Someone needs to follow up with her and ask her as a board member of GDS now that she has been made aware, what is her opinion on what was being taught at a school where she was on the board?

A) Is GDS a public school? (I don't know the answer to that but, since you're such an expert, I assume you do).
B) CRT is not the same as religiously held beliefs on abortion for Catholics. As another poster explained, and having been raised Catholic, I can tell you that person is correct: There is no gray area on that issue for practicing Catholics.

A) 1. GDS is not a public school 2. The judge was on the board of GDS, I do not know if she still is. 3. Senator Cruz provided compelling evidence that CRT is being taught from a young age at GDS.

Can you define CRT and explain the compelling evidence?

Dude, I'm not a biologist.