Trump - 4 more years of this at least...

[TheDemonLord]

and the fact she has almost three whole years experience as a judge.

She clerked for Justice Scalia....

[pritch]

She clerked for Justice Scalia....

Irrelevant. A clerk is not a judge. The hint is that the words 'clerk' and 'judge' are different.

[TheDemonLord]

Irrelevant. A clerk is not a judge. The hint is that the words 'clerk' and 'judge' are different.

Right...


So being a protege to one of the most influential legal minds in US Supreme Court history is irrelevant.... to being appointed to the Supreme court....

Nevermind her other credentials which MORE than qualify her to be nominated...

I could go on about what a Clerk does and being a court to a sitting Supreme Court Justice is a very big deal - but if you are resorting to that level of sour grapes, there's no hope for you.

[husaberg]

This gives me some slight difficulty, I'm prone to telling people requesting links to use the search engine of their choice. I listen to a number of legal podcasts and none of them have described your version of the law, or the facts as determined by your "research". God knows where you got that, and it seems you aren't saying. Meanwhie I'll assume it's a site such as Infowars.

It has, however, long been apparent that Trump hoped the election would get to "his" Supreme Court, but he needs a case and thus far he does not have one. He is currently mentioning a new business venture so perhaps the message is sinking in.

The reason Kavanaugh's appointment attracted such determined opposition was that there were multiple credible rape or attempted rape allegations against him. None of us were there so we cannot know for certain, but I believe the professor was extremely lucky to have been wearing a swim suit under her clothes that day.

The opposition to Barret was mainly because of her membership of a cult - and the fact she has almost three whole years experience as a judge.

Hes got his info from here
https://shoshonenewspress.com/news/2020/nov/12/courts/
the paper is owned by a Republican property developer with an interest in gold courses....

and who wrote it, because it was basically a letter to the editor


oh this guy, who just happens to be a Canadian meth head.
https://www.thewhig.com/2017/06/28/h...a-09988cab7899

Jeffrey J. Lakins, AKA Jeffrey J.Lish aka Steve Susan White 56, pleaded guilty in Kingston’s Ontario Court of Justice to seven thefts committed in October, November and January this year; four related bail violations; possession of crystal methamphetamine and soliciting for male prostitution in early November; Also failing to attend court at the end of November.
He was given enhanced credit on 127 days of pretrial custody, sentenced to a further 169 days in jail and a free-standing restitution order for $1,500 was issued against him.
What upset the judge, however, was what Lakins did in mid-November.

[TheDemonLord]

Hoh this guy, a Canadian meth head.
https://www.thewhig.com/2017/06/28/h...a-09988cab7899

Except that's a different name....

[pritch]

Right...


So being a protege to one of the most influential legal minds in US Supreme Court history is irrelevant.... to being appointed to the Supreme court....

Nevermind her other credentials which MORE than qualify her to be nominated...

I could go on about what a Clerk does and being a court to a sitting Supreme Court Justice is a very big deal - but if you are resorting to that level of sour grapes, there's no hope for you.

Many people clerk for famous justices and don't even go on to be a judge themselves. Only somebody detached from reality like Trump, or you apparently, would consider three years as a judge to be a suitable qualification to be one of the nine justices of the Supreme Court. Supposedly the most distinguished jurists in the nation.

This appointment is so inappropriate that it may well lead to a complete overhaul of the system. Not before time. There are two of the current justices have been credibly accused of sexual offences, that alone is not a great look.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Irrelevant. A clerk is not a judge. The hint is that the words 'clerk' and 'judge' are different.

Clerk in the Supreme Court over there isn't equivalent to being a clerk here, even in our Supreme Court. (Fascinating at the moment - three decisions recently on quite important areas of law reversing the CA amd reinstating lower Court decisions - quite emphatically too. Personal faourite is the Debut Homes case).

This is a good read, if you're that way inclined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_(book)

also:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/21/u...k-bonuses.html

worth having.

[pritch]

Hes got his info from here
https://shoshonenewspress.com/news/2020/nov/12/courts/

Amazing! Reading that it's like there's an echo in here.

[TheDemonLord]

Many people clerk for famous justices and don't even go on to be a judge themselves.

Some of them Teach Law, Practice Law, Serve as an appellate Judge before going onto the Supreme Court...

Only somebody detached from reality like Trump, or you apparently, would consider three years as a judge to be a suitable qualification to be one of the nine justices of the Supreme Court. Supposedly the most distinguished jurists in the nation.

So, you think John Roberts is unsuitable
or Clarence Thomas
or Elana Kegan
Or even the legendary Justice Scalia?

[mashman]

This gives me some slight difficulty, I'm prone to telling people requesting links to use the search engine of their choice. I listen to a number of legal podcasts and none of them have described your version of the law, or the facts as determined by your "research". blah blah blah

Congress could select the president in a disputed election. There are a fuckloads of legal "interpretations" from around the globe on the subject. Might wanna get that myopia seen to pritch. Might I suggest Infowars to add a little balance.

[husaberg]

Irrelevant. A clerk is not a judge. The hint is that the words 'clerk' and 'judge' are different.

I remember the time that TDL claimed to know more about US law than the US Supreme court.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/s...post1131109834
or the Federal court judges as well
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/s...post1131118602
he probably thinks he's know more than Judge Judy as well


So if that's true why would anyone have any faith in their abilities when they don't even know as much as a pom import IT help desk dewb in NZ.

[TheDemonLord]

I remember the time that TDL claimed to know more about US law than the US Supreme court.
So if that's true why would anyone have any faith in their abilities when they don't even know as much as a pom import IT help desk dewb in NZ.

Except I never did so, that you repeat your own lie is telling - Does it soothe you, as it soothes a nun to clutch her Prayer Beads and recite a Hail Mary?

And I've not done helpdesk in a good number of years.

I refer you to HDCs post, given that he and I often do not see eye-to-eye on Ideiological matters, I'm sure he'd have taken great enjoyment to tear me to shreds on a subject he is professionally familiar with (and I am not), had I been wrong...

[pritch]

Clerk in the Supreme Court over there isn't equivalent to being a clerk here, even in our Supreme Court. (Fascinating at the moment - three decisions recently on quite important areas of law reversing the CA amd reinstating lower Court decisions - quite emphatically too. Personal faourite is the Debut Homes case).

This is a good read, if you're that way inclined.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nine_(book)

also:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/21/u...k-bonuses.html

worth having.

Thanks for that.

One legal podcast I listened to was an interview with a woman who had clerked for Merrick Garland, the name may be familiar. She went from there to the Office of Legal Council in the Justice Dept. It was the from the OLC that the opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted originated.

She was saying that prior to Trump the core OLC business was checking that new legislation did not conflict with existing legislation. Since Trump's inauguration though, most of the business of the OLC has been trying to explain why the illegal thing that Trump was currently doing was not actually illegal.

[R650R]

Meanwhie I'll assume it's a site such as Infowars

In the early days of 911 research (I believed the official account for several years) I used to like Jones, he does cover some interesting stuff.

But it’s well known now in conspiracy circles that he’s a gatekeeper owned by the elite.
After his Jewish wife divorced him (economic ruin stage one) and his prison planet show went tits up after YouTube “banned” him and he lost his ad revenue (stage two economic ruin) the guy is driving around protests in a damn hummer.

All the real truth sites are shoestring operations.
Listen to his radio show when he has someone important on. Every time a coconut, when the person is about to reveal some interesting info they cut to an ad break and return on different topic.

[R650R]

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/...mas-legacy/amp