• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Trump judge nominee, who's never tried a case, is step closer to lifetime appointment

PhDeac said:
There's a big different between putting people up for appointments and then not pushing them once declared disqualified and putting people up for appointments, pushing them after declared disqualified and accusing the ABA of liberal bias.

Hulka, you were a reasonable Pub a year ago. It's sad to see you've fallen in line.
Click to expand...

I agree that there is a difference, just not that big of one. Also, I can point this out and still not support Trump or his judicial appointment. That is lost on some of you who have a knee jerk reaction to someone who disagrees with you or points out that politics is not one good side vs one bad side. I never expressed any support for Trump or any of his policies on this board, but if I don't "fall in line" with board orthodoxy I am labeled as a Trump supporter or worse.
 
Kagan was not offered up as a comparison. She was a counterpoint to the notion that only someone with experience as a judge should be appointed to the bench. Its happened before and is OK when it's a well qualified legal mind.
 
Sgt Hulka said:
I agree that there is a difference, just not that big of one. Also, I can point this out and still not support Trump or his judicial appointment. That is lost on some of you who have a knee jerk reaction to someone who disagrees with you or points out that politics is not one good side vs one bad side. I never expressed any support for Trump or any of his policies on this board, but if I don't "fall in line" with board orthodoxy I am labeled as a Trump supporter or worse.
Click to expand...

So you agree this guy isn’t remotely qualified, and you have expressed your concerns to your elected representatives?
 
you had the original knee jerk reaction on this thread
 
Deacfreak07 said:
So you agree this guy isn’t remotely qualified, and you have expressed your concerns to your elected representatives?
Click to expand...

No I have not, but I just heard about this yesterday (maybe the day before). Honestly, I will probably not contact my representative because I don't do that for any appointments/legislation. I don't think it has any impact. (rep is John Lewis and he doesn't care/need my vote and same holds true for the two Senators that represent me).
 
Last edited:
Sgt Hulka said:
I agree that there is a difference, just not that big of one. Also, I can point this out and still not support Trump or his judicial appointment. That is lost on some of you who have a knee jerk reaction to someone who disagrees with you or points out that politics is not one good side vs one bad side. I never expressed any support for Trump or any of his policies on this board, but if I don't "fall in line" with board orthodoxy I am labeled as a Trump supporter or worse.
Click to expand...

None of Obama's nominees that were deemed unqualified ended up as judges.

Trump's apparently will.

Isn't that the biggest difference that there can be.

There is a general system in place to ensure that unqualified people are not given these positions. Obama respected that process and Trump hasn't.
 
WFFaithful said:
It doesn't matter if you call or not. There is always that silent majority that agrees with everything they do.
Click to expand...

I disagree that it doesn't matter if you call, one of the lessons of this past year is that public shaming works. Andrew Puzder, Tom Marino, Tom Price, Betsy Devos needed Pence to break a tie. Republicans have been in control of the White House and both houses of Congress for ten months now and have passed nothing of substance. Call, email, fax, show up at events, town halls, in their offices. Especially if you have a senator or rep who has shown the ability to feel shame or is vulnerable in upcoming elections.
 
I've seen a few comments about how calling your Senator or Member of Congress doesn't have any impact. I can personally attest that this belief couldn't be further from the truth.

Yes one call from a constituent won't result in immediate action but a steady wave of calls (coherent calls...not partisan drivel) from multiple constituents will definitely pique the interest of the office and the Member. Sometimes it puts an issue in front of a member that wasn't previously on his/her radar. Other times constituent calls will factor into a decision a Member is about to make on a piece of legislation.

There is a reason why big trade associations spend literally hundreds of millions of dollars on tv and digital ads urging you to call your rep/Senator about a particular issue. Sometimes trade associations will even directly call your home with an offer to transfer you to your member's office so you can voice your support/displeasure about an issue.
 
Last edited:
Yep. Hulka is arguing there's no difference between "My bad. Thanks for the good advice." and "Fuck you. I do what I want."
 
avalon said:
I disagree that it doesn't matter if you call, one of the lessons of this past year is that public shaming works. Andrew Puzder, Tom Marino, Tom Price, Betsy Devos needed Pence to break a tie. Republicans have been in control of the White House and both houses of Congress for ten months now and have passed nothing of substance. Call, email, fax, show up at events, town halls, in their offices. Especially if you have a senator or rep who has shown the ability to feel shame or is vulnerable in upcoming elections.
Click to expand...

Truth.
 
Liquid Karma said:
Kagan was not offered up as a comparison. She was a counterpoint to the notion that only someone with experience as a judge should be appointed to the bench. Its happened before and is OK when it's a well qualified legal mind.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I think you're wrongly conflating district court judges with appellate judges. Reading briefs and deciding appeals requires far different skills and experience than managing a courtroom.
 
the nomination in this case is for the Federal District Court, which is a trial court. Just wanted to make sure that was clear as some of the reporting out there is sloppy and just says "Federal judge".
 
avalon said:
Trump Judicial Pick Did Not Disclose He Is Married to a White House Lawyer

He's married to the White House counsel's chief of staff.
Click to expand...

Ms. Donaldson has emerged in recent weeks as a witness in the special counsel’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice. She was interviewed by investigators recently about her detailed notes about conversations with Mr. McGahn on topics including the firing of the former F.B.I. director James B. Comey

nothing to see here, move along.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top