Ketanji Brown Jackson confirmation hearing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

LOL, if Cruz provided compelling evidence then he better high tail it to the next plane to Texas (of course within the allotted time to board) because many of those books are available at his DCs' school.

[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.

it's the GOP playbook, written by Rove in 1994 when he running a campaign for the AL Supreme Court. He started a whisper campaign about one of the Dem candidates. He was a family court judge who was active in charitable work for organizations focused on child abuse. He flipped it that the guy was a pedophile. The Dem still won, but never ran again.

"Take your opponent's strength and make it a weakness."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm so tired of these male Senators constantly interrupting her as she's trying to answer their questions.

It will look good for them when replayed on Fox News.

+1 here’s Cruz googling himself right after his embarrassing tirade. He’s such a cretin.

[Anonymous]

I don't agree with Lindsey Graham on a lot of things, but when he's right, he's right.

Jackson: "On the internet, with one click, you can receive you can distribute TENS OF THOUSANDS (of child pornographic images). You can be doing this for 15 minutes and all of a sudden you are looking at 30, 40, 50 years in prison—"

Graham: "Good! Good! Absolutely right! I hope you would! I hope you go to jail for 50 years if you're on the internet trolling for children in sexual exploitation – see you don't think that's a bad thing, I think that's a horrible thing."

Mic drop Graham. Totally schooled her

[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.

The questioning is a hate-crime.

Lynching, hate crime and white Dem Senator sitting by and afraid to shut them down.

[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.

I’d love to hear respond to one of Cruz’s dumb questions by saying: “ Senator Cruz, I want to assure that if your good friend and donor Josh Duggar came before me for sentencing, I would have treated him the same way as I treated these other convicted sex offenders.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree with Lindsey Graham on a lot of things, but when he's right, he's right.

Jackson: "On the internet, with one click, you can receive you can distribute TENS OF THOUSANDS (of child pornographic images). You can be doing this for 15 minutes and all of a sudden you are looking at 30, 40, 50 years in prison—"

Graham: "Good! Good! Absolutely right! I hope you would! I hope you go to jail for 50 years if you're on the internet trolling for children in sexual exploitation – see you don't think that's a bad thing, I think that's a horrible thing."

Mic drop Graham. Totally schooled her

All he did was demonstrate he is too dumb to understand the point she made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't agree with Lindsey Graham on a lot of things, but when he's right, he's right.

Jackson: "On the internet, with one click, you can receive you can distribute TENS OF THOUSANDS (of child pornographic images). You can be doing this for 15 minutes and all of a sudden you are looking at 30, 40, 50 years in prison—"

Graham: "Good! Good! Absolutely right! I hope you would! I hope you go to jail for 50 years if you're on the internet trolling for children in sexual exploitation – see you don't think that's a bad thing, I think that's a horrible thing."

Mic drop Graham. Totally schooled her

Look up! It's over your head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ugh. Guess this is what passes for discourse among GenZ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so refreshing that the Democrats (right now it's Feinstein) are letting her talk. You can literally here a change in her voice and see the mannerism go from stress and frustration to a relief she can finally / actually explain herself.

It’s exactly the same situation Barrett faced. The Democrats were attack dogs and the Republicans were respectful and allowed her to speak. It’s amazing that some of you are determined to pretend Jackson is somehow being treated differently. She’s not.

Bad behavior is bad behavior. It's not justifed based on who is doing it or it having been done before. Also Barrett was grossly unqualified compared to KBJ which led to much of the fodder from Dems. Republicans do not have that advantage with KBJ so they're arguing irrelevant points that are outside of her purview. It's not really the same.

BS. Democrats slammed Barrett based on her personal religious beliefs. It was disgraceful.

Because she wants to impose her personal religious beliefs on to the population of the US. THAT is disgraceful.

If she doesn't believe in abortions, then she shouldn't have one. But neither she, nor anyone else, should have the right to deny the same to any woman who wants or needs one.

And has she tried to prevent any woman from having an abortion? Nope. She also said that Roe v Wade is established precedent. So you can STFU with your lies and gaslighting.
DP

[Anonymous]

So sad that Cory Booker had to say this, that we're still here, but he said it well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so refreshing that the Democrats (right now it's Feinstein) are letting her talk. You can literally here a change in her voice and see the mannerism go from stress and frustration to a relief she can finally / actually explain herself.

It’s exactly the same situation Barrett faced. The Democrats were attack dogs and the Republicans were respectful and allowed her to speak. It’s amazing that some of you are determined to pretend Jackson is somehow being treated differently. She’s not.

Bad behavior is bad behavior. It's not justifed based on who is doing it or it having been done before. Also Barrett was grossly unqualified compared to KBJ which led to much of the fodder from Dems. Republicans do not have that advantage with KBJ so they're arguing irrelevant points that are outside of her purview. It's not really the same.

BS. Democrats slammed Barrett based on her personal religious beliefs. It was disgraceful.

Because she wants to impose her personal religious beliefs on to the population of the US. THAT is disgraceful.

If she doesn't believe in abortions, then she shouldn't have one. But neither she, nor anyone else, should have the right to deny the same to any woman who wants or needs one.

And has she tried to prevent any woman from having an abortion? Nope. She also said that Roe v Wade is established precedent. So you can STFU with your lies and gaslighting.
DP

Maybe watch what she does instead of listening to what she says.

[Anonymous]

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?

Who’s punishing her? She’s being treated the way nominees are always treated. Why should she be given the kid-glove treatment?

Not letting her speak when a question is asked is unprofessional. Yelling at her because you don't agree with her is unprofessional.

She will be confirmed. That is a fact. Putting her under duress because of it is a punishment.

If it was wrong for Barrett (and Kavanaugh), and I'm sure you would argue that it was, it is wrong from Jackson.

The fact that it was done before doesn't make it right.

So then, you acknowledge the disgusting behavior of Democrats toward Kavanaugh and Barrett. Thanks for the admission.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's so refreshing that the Democrats (right now it's Feinstein) are letting her talk. You can literally here a change in her voice and see the mannerism go from stress and frustration to a relief she can finally / actually explain herself.

It’s exactly the same situation Barrett faced. The Democrats were attack dogs and the Republicans were respectful and allowed her to speak. It’s amazing that some of you are determined to pretend Jackson is somehow being treated differently. She’s not.

Bad behavior is bad behavior. It's not justifed based on who is doing it or it having been done before. Also Barrett was grossly unqualified compared to KBJ which led to much of the fodder from Dems. Republicans do not have that advantage with KBJ so they're arguing irrelevant points that are outside of her purview. It's not really the same.

BS. Democrats slammed Barrett based on her personal religious beliefs. It was disgraceful.

Because she wants to impose her personal religious beliefs on to the population of the US. THAT is disgraceful.

If she doesn't believe in abortions, then she shouldn't have one. But neither she, nor anyone else, should have the right to deny the same to any woman who wants or needs one.

And has she tried to prevent any woman from having an abortion? Nope. She also said that Roe v Wade is established precedent. So you can STFU with your lies and gaslighting.
DP

Have you paid any attention to the Texas abortion case? She has prevented every woman in Texas from getting an abortion after 6 weeks by letting Texas keep its ban in place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

All I can think of while watching Lindsay Graham berate her, and she stays calm as a cucumber, is that little b i t c h Kavanaugh and his temper tantrum.

OMG same. They simply can't stand a powerful black woman. They can't. It messes with their ego in a way they can't even explain, and threatens their manhood for some strange reason.
I'd really hate to be an old white guy right now. Because American can't stand them.

So you're saying she should not be questioned about the same issues Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh were questioned about - because she's black? Interesting.
DP