Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sessions did a great job. Easy confirmation. Kind of surprised at how weak the opposition was. Booker didn't do himself any favors, especially with all the contradictory sound bites already out there.

The opposition had nothing. Sessions is pretty clean. What you see is what you get.

Except his racism. But that does not concern you white people, apparently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He seems to be doing a great job. His confirmation will sail right through.

What a great day. Our country will be so much better when sessions and others finally fix the h1b fraud. Just today I had to interview another opt to h1b visa fraud. Another person desperate to leave India that bloated his resume. Forced to interview because our company forces us to use the New Jersey h1b contractors to place people. People way low in rates. Forced by mbas looking for short term cost savings . Maybe someday I can hire local college grads again.

No thanks to you Ivy League elites that piss on your fellow citizens

Anonymous wrote:He seems to be doing a great job. His confirmation will sail right through.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you see is someone with a mixed record on race relations who at best will turn things back to the 1980's and at worst to the 1920's.

If you are not of color, you really are not in a position to evaluate.

Those people of color who chose to testify did evaluate. And, many of them found him to be an excellent choice. And, these are the people who have known him for 30+ years. Not Congressmen/Senators who have an agenda.

Anonymous wrote:What you see is someone with a mixed record on race relations who at best will turn things back to the 1980's and at worst to the 1920's.

If you are not of color, you really are not in a position to evaluate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sessions did a great job. Easy confirmation. Kind of surprised at how weak the opposition was. Booker didn't do himself any favors, especially with all the contradictory sound bites already out there.

The opposition had nothing. Sessions is pretty clean. What you see is what you get.

Except his racism. But that does not concern you white people, apparently.

Anonymous wrote:

I hope Booker does this. It will destroy his reputation. He will look like a partisan lefty, which he is.
This will definitely backfire on Booker. Particularly given some of the nice things he has said about Sessions in the past.

It should backfire on him. I'm guessing that is the reason they put this panel last. It was a political stunt. Booker and the chair of the CBC just talked about Sessions' "poor" record on Civil Rights as the reason to deny him the position. Then, one of his AUSA's when he was US ATTY (an African American) gave examples of his record that denied some of their claims--including prosecution of a policeman for excessive force. Another former employee from his time as Attorney General of Alabama talked about other things he had done for Black employees (He was a former investigative officer and held various other law enforcement jobs including US Marshal Service, also an African American). The last speaker was his chief legal counsel for the last twenty years in the Senate--also African American. His "pro' people all cited examples of his behavior and character.

Booker gave no specifics--the main thing they all cited was the Voting Rights case he lost in Perry County prior to being denied the federal judgeship. ACLU guy was skewered by Cruz for leaving out the fact that it was African Americans who brought the case--as they were the victims of the voter fraud. Their case was not successful, but it is ironic that most people assume the case was about helping white voters over black voters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sessions did a great job. Easy confirmation. Kind of surprised at how weak the opposition was. Booker didn't do himself any favors, especially with all the contradictory sound bites already out there.

The opposition had nothing. Sessions is pretty clean. What you see is what you get.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sessions did a great job. Easy confirmation. Kind of surprised at how weak the opposition was. Booker didn't do himself any favors, especially with all the contradictory sound bites already out there.

The opposition had nothing. Sessions is pretty clean. What you see is what you get.

Anonymous wrote:Sessions did a great job. Easy confirmation. Kind of surprised at how weak the opposition was. Booker didn't do himself any favors, especially with all the contradictory sound bites already out there.

Anonymous wrote:It's a thing of beauty - truly. Great job, Sen. Cruz:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p-8MLGHh7g

Anonymous wrote:

I hope Booker does this. It will destroy his reputation. He will look like a partisan lefty, which he is.
This will definitely backfire on Booker. Particularly given some of the nice things he has said about Sessions in the past.

It should backfire on him. I'm guessing that is the reason they put this panel last. It was a political stunt. Booker and the chair of the CBC just talked about Sessions' "poor" record on Civil Rights as the reason to deny him the position. Then, one of his AUSA's when he was US ATTY (an African American) gave examples of his record that denied some of their claims--including prosecution of a policeman for excessive force. Another former employee from his time as Attorney General of Alabama talked about other things he had done for Black employees (He was a former investigative officer and held various other law enforcement jobs including US Marshal Service, also an African American). The last speaker was his chief legal counsel for the last twenty years in the Senate--also African American. His "pro' people all cited examples of his behavior and character.

Booker gave no specifics--the main thing they all cited was the Voting Rights case he lost in Perry County prior to being denied the federal judgeship. ACLU guy was skewered by Cruz for leaving out the fact that it was African Americans who brought the case--as they were the victims of the voter fraud. Their case was not successful, but it is ironic that most people assume the case was about helping white voters over black voters.