|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Support your local soldiers, even when they lie. |
| 1-9 of 9 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 03-29-22 05:02am - 956 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Support your local soldiers, even when they lie. In today's world, and for many years previous, it was OK for the government to lie to its citizens. This was done on the theory the less citizens know, the more the government can get away with. So when soldiers knew who took student civilians and let those students be killed, the soldiers never told anyone. Better to let the students die and say "We don't know anything" than to admit that maybe they could have saved at least some of the students. -------- -------- Mexican armed forces knew about attack on 43 students, report says Team of international experts deliver a report on the 43 missing students Ayotzinapa By Lizbeth Diaz MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico's armed forces knew that 43 student teachers who disappeared in 2014 were being kidnapped by criminals, then hid evidence that could have helped locate them, according to a report released Monday by special investigation. Evidence obtained by the Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI), an independent panel tasked with investigating the notorious case, revealed that Navy and Army officials kept secret that the students from the Ayotzinapa Rural Teachers' College were under real-time surveillance by the state leading up to and during their abduction. "Security authorities had two intelligence processes underway, one to follow the actions of organized crime in the area and the other to track the students," the investigators said in the report, which was based on declassified documents. The students were under surveillance because their college, which has strong ties to left-wing social movements in Mexico, was viewed as a potential hotbed of subversion, the GIEI said. Neither the Army nor the Navy immediately responded to requests for comment. The kidnapping of the students on the night of Sept. 26, 2014, in the southwestern city of Iguala sparked national and international protests, and remains one of the most infamous incidents in the history of Mexico's struggle with drug gangs. The official documents reviewed by the GIEI included transcripts of conversations between soldiers and their superiors detailing the students' arrival in Iguala. From Iguala, the students had planned to travel to Mexico City to attend a protest, but were instead kidnapped by corrupt local police and handed over to a local gang. The students were then massacred and their bodies incinerated, according to the previous government. The GIEI later picked holes in that version of events and the current government ordered the case to be re-opened. So far the remains of only two of the missing students have been definitively identified. The report did not conclude what happened to the rest of the students. Mexico's armed forces have long denied having information about the crime and the students' whereabouts. Communications intercepts by the armed forces could have been used at the time to locate the students after they were kidnapped, the report found. But the armed forces denied that such intercepts existed and did not hand them over, it said. (Reporting by Lizbeth Diaz in Mexico City; Editing by Cynthia Osterman) | |
|
||
| 03-30-22 03:03am - 956 days | #2 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
US Supreme Court justices are supposed to be above politics. They are supposed to rule based on laws, not on personal opinion or political affiliation. However, that's a myth: it turns out that justices are human. There is no code of ethics for the Supreme Court. All other federal judges are held to a code of ethics: but the Supreme Court doesn't have one. Strange, but true. -------- -------- Clarence Thomas faces growing pressure to step aside from Jan. 6 cases NBC Universal Sahil Kapur and Julie Tsirkin and Haley Talbot March 29, 2022, 12:48 PM WASHINGTON — Democrats in Congress are turning up the heat on Justice Clarence Thomas, with some calling for him to step back from cases involving Jan. 6, after his wife was found to have actively pressured the Trump White House to change the result of the 2020 election based on false claims of fraud. At a closed-door meeting Tuesday, House Democrats raised questions about what they could do to hold Thomas accountable. “It’s up to an individual justice to decide to recuse himself if his wife is participating in a coup,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi told them, according to a source in the room. She noted that under current law, the onus is on justices to hold themselves to account. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., are courting support for the Supreme Court Ethics Act, which would require the creation of a judicial ethics code. And senior lawmakers are publicly pushing Thomas to recuse himself from cases that involve the lobbying activities of his wife, Virginia Thomas, known as Ginni. "I do think he should recuse himself," Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters. "The information we know right now raises serious questions about how close Justice Thomas and his wife were to the planning and execution of the insurrection." He added: "I think there should be some kind of code of ethics for Supreme Court justices." Two dozen congressional Democrats, led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., sent a letter addressed to Thomas and Chief Justice John Roberts calling on Thomas to "promptly recuse himself from any future Supreme Court cases involving efforts to overturn the 2020 election or the January 6th attack on the Capitol." The letter also calls on Roberts to "commit no later than April 28, 2022 to creating a binding Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court" that includes enforceable standards for recusal. "Chief Justice Roberts has often spoken about the importance of the Supreme Court’s 'credibility and legitimacy as an institution.' That trust, already at all-time lows with the American public, must be earned," the lawmakers wrote in the letter. And the House Jan. 6 select committee met Monday evening to discuss whether to call in Virginia Thomas for an interview about her role and knowledge of the attempt to steal the 2020 election on behalf of then-President Donald Trump, who lost. Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the chair of the select committee, said afterward that no decision had been made. The flurry of new calls follows revelations of text messages Virginia Thomas sent to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows pressuring him to keep Trump in office despite his defeat, and to convince the president to refuse to concede the 2020 election. Her messages, first reported by The Washington Post and CBS News, included a variety of false claims and conspiracy theories. Thomas also said she attended the "Stop The Steal" rally in Washington that preceded the violence at the Capitol. Justice Thomas didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment sent to the Supreme Court’s press office on the calls for recusal. Roberts didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawmakers’ letter regarding ethics, also sent to the court’s press office. NBC News has also reached out to Ginni Thomas for comment. The pressure on Justice Thomas has been elevated by the fact that he was the lone dissenter in an 8 to 1 Supreme Court ruling rejecting a request by Trump and requiring the release of White House documents to the Jan. 6 committee. Thomas sided with Trump. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said Thomas should resign — or at least be investigated and potentially impeached. But most Democrats weren't ready to talk about impeachment, which would require a two-thirds majority for removal in the Senate, which is split evenly between the two parties. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said the Judiciary Committee he serves on should consider an investigation. Republicans expressed little desire to join in the pressure campaign involving Thomas, who is seen by many as the most conservative justice on the Supreme Court and is a favorite of the GOP base. One Senate Republican aide said the caucus has "zero" interest in going down that road. No. 3 Republican Sen. John Barrasso, of Wyoming, brushed off the Democrats' calls for recusal when asked about them Tuesday. "They're always looking for something," he said. Would he support the legislation to set up a code of ethics for the Supreme Court? "I haven't read it," he said. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who voted to block the certification of some 2020 electors Jan. 6, dismissed the push as "just the latest attempt by the left to go after Justice Thomas." Although Hawley said Thomas shouldn't be held responsible for texts sent by Virginia Thomas, he didn't rule out the prospect that the justice should step back from deciding cases in which the outcome directly affects his wife. "Well, that'd be different, I mean, if it directly affected her," he said. | |
|
||
| 03-30-22 03:19am - 956 days | #3 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Donald Trump, man of honor. He seeks to remove the dirt from politics. If Joe Biden, or any of Biden's family, have done anything wrong, it must be exposed and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And if Joe Biden or his son have not done anything wrong, let's make up stories about what they did wrong: stories can be entertaining. ----- ------ Trump solicits Putin's help to expose alleged dirt on Hunter Biden Yahoo News David Knowles March 29, 2022, 12:19 PM In what has become a familiar pattern, former President Donald Trump has once again solicited help from a foreign leader in exposing possible dirt to try to wound a political enemy. Trump, who was impeached in 2019 for his request to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that he do Trump a "favor" by investigating Joe Biden's son Hunter, told right-wing television host John Solomon in an interview published Tuesday that he wanted Russian President Vladimir Putin to shed light on unverified reports that Biden's son received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Yelena Baturina, the wife of Moscow's former mayor. “She gave him $3.5 million, so now I would think Putin would know the answer to that,” Trump told Solomon. “I think he should release it. I think we should know that answer.” “How is it that the mayor of Moscow, his wife, gave the Biden family three and a half million dollars?” he continued. “I think Putin now would be willing to probably give that answer. I’m sure he knows.” In a presidential debate with Biden during the 2020 campaign, Trump seized on that claim, which appears in a U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security report authored by the then-Republican majority but has not been verified. During the debate, Biden said of the $3.5 million wire-transfer allegation that it is "simply not true." While Trump has long sought foreign help in uncovering alleged business wrongdoing committed by Hunter Biden, the president's son does remain the center of a federal tax investigation. The New York Times reported that although he paid off outstanding tax liabilities related to his business dealings with foreign countries, he is the subject of an ongoing grand jury probe. After Hunter Biden learned in 2020 that he was under federal investigation, he said in a statement that “a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately.” Whether meant seriously or sarcastically, Trump's outreach to Putin's government is also not new. During the 2016 presidential election, Trump noted that Russian hackers had broken into a Democratic National Committee server and stolen sensitive material, conflating that event with Hillary Clinton's deletion of 33,000 personal emails from her private server. "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press," Trump said at a press conference on July 27, 2016. The FBI declined to bring charges against Clinton in the matter, and though Trump pledged that if he was elected president he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the deleted emails, he never did. At a Georgia rally over the weekend for candidates in the battleground state he has endorsed in the 2022 midterms, Trump indicated that he is considering mounting another run for president in 2024, saying, "We may just have to do it again." | |
|
||
| 03-30-22 03:30am - 956 days | #4 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
This woman probably got her degree in finance from Trump University. That's how she was able to steal $40 million from Yale University. ---- ---- Former Yale administrator stole $40 million, pretending to buy computer equipment for the university. Instead, she bought a fleet of luxury cars, and several houses Last Updated: March 29, 2022 at 11:33 p.m. ET By Lukas I. Alpert Jamie Petrone estimated that 90% of all computer equipment orders she made for Yale’s medical school over eight years were bogus. Jamie Petrone began working for Yale in 1999 and rose to become the director of finance in the emergency medicine department of Yale’s medical school. (Getty Images) A former administrator at the Yale University School of Medicine has pleaded guilty to stealing $40 million from the school in a nearly decade-long computer and electronics purchasing fraud. Federal prosecutors say Jamie Petrone, 42, used the money to buy a fleet of luxury cars including Mercedes, Land Rovers and Cadillac Escalades, numerous properties in several states and to pay for lavish trips. She pleaded guilty on Monday to wire fraud and filing false tax returns and faces up to 30 years in prison when she is sentenced in June. Until then, she is free on a $1 million bond. Her attorney didn’t immediately return a message seeking comment. “90% of her computer-related purchases were fraudulent.” — Criminal complaint filed by the U.S. attorney for Connecticut. Petrone began working for Yale in 1999 and for the medical school in 2008. She had most recently served as the director of finance for its emergency medicine department. As part of her job, she was able to authorize equipment purchases without additional approvals as long as the orders were below $10,000, prosecutors said. Starting in 2013, prosecutors said Petrone began making numerous small orders of tablet computers and other equipment that were billed to the school. She would then sell them to a business in New York state and have them send money to the account of a wedding photography and videography company she controlled. Prosecutors say that in 2021 alone, she purchased more than 8,000 tablet computers, all in orders smaller than $10,000. In one 10-week period that year, she ordered $2.1 million worth of equipment. During the eight years that authorities say she ran the scam, Petrone told investigators that “90% of her computer-related purchases were fraudulent,” according to court documents. To explain the purchases to university officials, Petrone would claim the equipment was needed for certain medical studies being performed at the school, according to court papers. In a statement, Yale said that it initially alerted authorities last year after finding “evidence of suspected criminal behavior.” “Since the incident, Yale has worked to identify and correct gaps in its internal financial controls,” the school said. In all, prosecutors say Petrone caused $40,504,200 in losses to Yale. They also say Petrone never declared any of the income on her taxes, filing false returns for 2013 through 2016, and no returns at all between 2017 and 2020. In total, she defrauded the IRS out of over $6 million, according to prosecutors. As part of her guilty plea, Petrone agreed to forfeit $560,421.14 that was seized from her accounts, two $135,000 Mercedes-Benzes, a $90,000 Range Rover, two Cadillac Escalades and a Dodge Charger. She also has agreed to turn over three properties she co-owns in Connecticut and another in Georgia. | |
|
||
| 03-30-22 06:55pm - 955 days | #5 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
This is terrible. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy forced a fellow Republican to admit that the fellow Republican was lying when he claimed fellow lawmakers were guilty of drug use and sex orgies. Only lies glorifying Republicans are allowed, McCarthy said. A Republican can not try to drag down the reputation of fellow lawmakers, unless they are Democrats or Republicans that President Trump does not like or follow Trump's lead. Trump uber alles. ------ ------ Rep. Madison Cawthorn admits lying about cocaine and orgies after tongue-lashing from GOP leaders NY Daily News Dave Goldiner March 30, 2022, 12:33 PM Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.) Wednesday walked back blockbuster drugs-and-sex claims about fellow lawmakers in a brutal tongue-lashing from GOP leaders. Cawthorn admitted to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy that he made up claims that he saw lawmakers doing cocaine and that they invited him to orgies. “He changes what he tells and that’s not becoming of a congressman,” McCarthy said. “He did not tell the truth (and) that’s unacceptable” Cawthorn, a firebrand supporter of former President Trump, did not immediately comment after the 30-minute dressing-down from McCarthy (R-Calif.) and No. 2 GOP leader Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) McCarthy said Cawthorn could face further disciplinary action. “He’s lost my trust is gonna have to earn it back,”McCarthy told reporters. “And I laid out to everything that I find is unbecoming.” Cawthorn is in hot water because he made the claims without naming names. That left fellow lawmakers facing questions from constituents about whether they could be the culprits. He even suffered rare murmurs of discontent within the far right-wing Freedom Caucus, of which he is a stalwart member. “I think it is important, if you’re going to say something like that, to name names,” Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), the chair of the Freedom Caucus, told Politico. McCarthy took action after he was bombarded with unwanted questions about Cawthorn at Tuesday’s GOP caucus meeting. Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), a straight-laced and usually not outspoken GOP lawmaker, said it was wrong for Cawthorn to “paint them with a broad brush.” The intramural GOP tumult is notable because Republican leaders have stubbornly resisted pressure to take a stand against fellow lawmakers who have glorified violence against Democrats and spewed Islamophobic hate. AOC hits back at 'creepy' GOP lawmaker who posted anime video depicting attack on her Cawthorn’s remarks were particularly damaging because they clearly refer to conservative Republicans, not Democrats, whom some GOP lawmakers regularly deride as degenerates. “I look at all these people, a lot of them that I’ve looked up to through my life,” Cawthorn said in a podcast interview. “Then all of a sudden, you get invited to ... kind of a sexual get-together at one of our homes.” “And then you realize they are asking you to come to an orgy,” he added. Cawthorn, 26, is the youngest member of Congress and is among the most outspoken supporters of former President Trump in Congress. He won election in 2020 in a red-leaning western North Carolina district previously held by Mark Meadows until he quit to become former President Trump’s chief of staff. Cawthorn had planned to seek reelection in a neighboring district amid a feud with more mainstream GOP leaders in the Tarheel State. But has since decided to stick to his current Asheville-based district. | |
|
||
| 04-01-22 10:44am - 953 days | #6 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Is Ukraine invading Russia? This is not right. Has the Ukraine sent an armed missile into Russia? The only reason Russia invaded Ukraine was to keep the peace. If Ukraine people, soldiers and civilians die, it's only because Russia wants to help Ukraine. So if Ukraine resists, or tries to fight back, Ukraine is EVIL. Let us hope that Russia, with the aid and blessings of Donald J. Trump, will triumph. God bless Donald J. Trump, the fightenest US President we've ever seen. And maybe Putin ordered the air strike. There are theories that Putin has ordered Russians to be killed, to help promote Putin's policies. Putin is a genius, as testified by Donald Trump. You can't always trust a genius. ------ ------ Moscow accuses Ukraine of conducting airstrike inside Russia Yahoo News Niamh Cavanagh April 1, 2022, 6:23 AM Moscow accused Ukraine of sending two helicopters to strike a fuel storage depot in the Russian city of Belgorod on Friday. If confirmed, this would be the first attack on Russian soil since the war began on Feb. 24. The governor of the border city said that two Ukrainian helicopters crossed into Russia flying at low altitude before launching airstrikes at an oil storage facility just 25 miles from the border. Footage of the alleged attack shows several missiles being fired at the building before it erupts into flames. The video has not been independently verified. An oil depot on fire. An oil depot on fire in Belgorod, Russia, on Friday. (Russian Emergency Ministry Press Service via AP) “There are casualties,” said Vyacheslav Gladkov, the governor of Belgorod. “Two people. They’re employees of the oil depot. They’ve been given first aid, and their lives are not in danger.” He added, “We are starting to resettle the residents of Pochtovaya, Makarenko and Konstantin Zaslonov streets to a safer location.” The Russian Emergency Ministry said that 170 firefighters battled the enormous fire, which was started around 6 a.m. local time. Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine’s foreign minister, said he could not confirm or deny reports of Ukraine’s involvement in the strike, as he did not have military information. Firefighters work to contain the blaze at the oil depot. Firefighters work to contain the blaze at the oil depot early Friday. (Russian Emergency Ministry Press Service via AP) Russian President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said authorities were working to reorganize the supply chain for fuel to avoid the disruption of energy supplies. He added that Putin had been briefed on the alleged attack. “What has happened is certainly not something that can be perceived as creating conditions comfortable for the continuation of negotiations,” Peskov said, referring to the peace talks being held between Russia and Ukraine. There have been other incidents in Belgorod, which is a major hub for the Russian military. On Thursday there was an explosion at an arms storage facility. Russian media outlet Tass claimed that four military personnel were injured during the attack. _____ How are Ukrainian forces taking out so many Russian tanks? Use this embed to learn about some of the weapons systems the U.S. is sending to the Ukrainian army. More From Yahoo News: | |
|
||
| 04-01-22 10:52am - 953 days | #7 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Rats deserting a sinking ship. Is Joe Biden in trouble? Why is Jen Psaki leaving the White House? What secrets will she reveal, once her loyalty to Joe Biden is put to the test? Can Jen, a redhead with a temper to match, stay silent after suffering the torment and abuse of serving a Democrat who stole the election from Donald Trump? Enquiring minds want to know: how much will MSNBC pay Jen to reveal the dirt on Joe Biden? ----- ----- Psaki leaving White House for MSNBC Yahoo News Alexander Nazaryan April 1, 2022, 9:14 AM WASHINGTON — After serving as White House press secretary for more than a year, Jen Psaki will leave the Biden administration for MSNBC, where she will serve as a host and on-air expert. The departure, first reported by Axios, is expected this spring. Psaki has held near-daily briefings since the start of the Biden presidency, and has generally been praised for her transparency. She had initially said she would stay in her position for a year, but a number of overlapping crises — the coronavirus pandemic, the withdrawal from Afghanistan and, most recently, the war in Ukraine — appear to have extended her tenure. White House press secretary Jen Psaki arrives for a briefing with reporters. White House press secretary Jen Psaki arrives for a briefing with reporters. (Alex Wong/Getty Images) The news outlet Puck had previously reported that Psaki was in talks with both CNN and MSNBC, and there was even speculation that she might replace MSNBC primetime star Rachel Maddow, who is stepping back from nightly hosting duties. Psaki will join a cable news landscape crowded with alumni of high-level Washington politics. CBS recently hired former Trump White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, a decision for which it was criticized by some of the network’s own employees. And Symone Sanders, former top spokesperson to Vice President Kamala Harris, will start hosting her own program on MSNBC in May. | |
|
||
| 04-01-22 11:04am - 953 days | #8 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Jerry Jones is not like Donald Trump. Jerry Jones reportedly paid $3 million to a woman who claims to be his daughter. The woman is suing Jerry Jones to be able to say publicly that she is his daughter. When the woman was 1 year old, her mother signed an agreement that barred the baby daughter from identifying the billionaire as her father. Love is blind. And money talks. Why can't the daughter and Jerry Jones talk to each other about love and forgiveness? ------- ------- Jerry Jones reportedly paid $3 million in 'child support' to woman claiming to be his daughter Yahoo Sports Jack Baer March 31, 2022, 6:38 PM A woman claiming to be Jerry Jones' biological daughter is suing the Dallas Cowboys owner to be able to publicly identify him as her father, and she seems to have interesting financial evidence. According to ESPN's Don Van Natta Jr., Jones has paid nearly $3 million to Alexandra Davis, a 25-year-old Congressional aide, and her mother Cynthia Spencer Davis, who reportedly claims to have met Jones in 1995 when she was working as a ticket-counter agent for American Airlines in Arkansas. Don Jack, the Arkansas lawyer who made the payments, reportedly told ESPN he delivered them on Jones' behalf. He reportedly started with a $375,000 sum followed by monthly "child support" payments and the coverage of other expenses, such as Davis' full SMU tuition, a $70,000 Range Rover on her 16th birthday, $33,000 for her "Sweet 16" party, $24,000 for a trip abroad after her college graduation and $25,000 for a mother-daughter Christmas trip to Paris. When asked if describing such payments as child support was an admission of paternity for Jones, Jack went to some ... interesting lengths to deny it. From ESPN: Jones has not acknowledged that Davis is his biological daughter. Asked why he used the term "child support" in his statement, Jack said, "I used the term child support because that's what the agreement calls it." Asked if the "child support" payments indicate that Jones is Davis' father, Jack paused for five seconds before saying, "I am not going to answer that one. My statement speaks for itself." Asked why Jones paid millions to Davis and her mother if Davis was not his daughter, Jones spokesman Jim Wilkinson declined to comment. Davis, who currently works for U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), filed her lawsuit earlier this month in Dallas County court. Her stated goal was to have the court rule she was not legally bound by an agreement between Jones and her mother, to which the above payments are tied, that barred her from identifying the billionaire as her father. Davis was one year old at the time of the agreement. Her lawyer told ESPN that she was not interested in receiving additional money, but Jack claimed the same lawyer presented a letter to him in a Dallas steakhouse several years ago that claimed a $20 million payment would stop her from bothering Jones in the future. Davis' lawyer disputed that claim and asked if there was proof of the letter. Neither Jack nor Wilkinson could provide proof of a letter or date for the dinner in question. NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA - DECEMBER 02: Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones looks over warm ups before the game between the Dallas Cowboys and the New Orleans Saints at Caesars Superdome on December 02, 2021 in New Orleans, Louisiana. (Photo by Jonathan Bachman/Getty Images) Jerry Jones reportedly shelled out significant money to a woman he has declined to identify as his daughter. (Photo by Jonathan Bachman/Getty Images) | |
|
||
| 04-01-22 11:29am - 953 days | #9 | |
|
LKLK (0)
Active User Posts: 1,583 Registered: Jun 26, '19 Location: CA |
Although many Republicans say that Ketanji Brown Jackson is qualified to serve on the US Supreme Court, they also say that she is not acceptable to serve. I love how Republicans can argue out of both sides of the mouth. Yes, I love you to pieces. And I also know that you are a piece of shit. So go away, you *9()---+++ disgusting person. ------- ------- Why Republicans say they're voting against Ketanji Brown Jackson for Supreme Court NBC Universal Sahil Kapur and Julie Tsirkin and Frank Thorp V March 31, 2022, 3:29 PM WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans are coming out in droves against Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson for the Supreme Court, citing a variety of reasons for their opposition to President Joe Biden's pick ahead of a major vote on her nomination next week. Many of these senators concede that Jackson is qualified for the job, but point to other reasons to justify their resistance — mainly her judicial philosophy, her refusal to denounce Supreme Court expansion, her record in child exploitation cases and Democrats' past treatment of conservative judicial nominees. Jackson remains in good shape to be confirmed due to the 50-vote requirement and strong Democratic support. So far, just one Republican has publicly backed her: centrist Sen. Susan Collins of Maine. It's not clear how many more she'll get. Here's what the bulk of Republicans say is holding them back. Judicial philosophy Many Republicans say Jackson's "judicial philosophy" makes her candidacy unacceptable. That's largely because she refused to limit herself to "originalism" and "textualism" — two connected and narrow approaches to interpreting the Constitution that's popular among conservative lawyers and activists. “I believe that it is appropriate to look at the original intent, original public meaning of the words," Jackson said during her confirmation hearings. Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., said Jackson "refused to claim originalism as her judicial philosophy," saying that the judge appears to believe originalism is "just one of the tools judges use – not a genuine constraint on judicial power." Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who voted to confirm Jackson to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals last year, said Thursday she has a "lack of a steady judicial philosophy" and "will not be deterred by the plain meaning of the law when it comes to liberal causes." The framework splits Republicans from Democrats, who believe judges should have room to read and apply constitutional text in a way that’s relevant for modern realities that the original writers could not have envisioned. When Jackson was questioned about how to apply First Amendment protections to a world with smartphones, she said it's "a process of understanding what the core foundational principles are in the Constitution, as captured by the text, as originally intended, and then applying those principles to modern day." Jackson said there's no simple label that captures her philosophy. She won't denounce 'court-packing' Numerous Republicans fault Jackson for declining to speak out against "court packing" — an effort by progressives to add seats to the Supreme Court to change its ideological balance, which has no viable chance of succeeding in Congress. “Judge Jackson has refused to follow the Ginsburg-Breyer model and denounce court-packing,” Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said when he announced his intent to vote against Jackson. “She testified she’d be, ‘thrilled to be one of however many.’” Jackson said that under the Constitution, the size of the Supreme Court is "a policy question for Congress" and that she's committed to "staying in my lane" as a judge. "I’m just not willing to speak to issues that are properly in the province of this body." Responding to a question from Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., Jackson said she didn’t think it would be “appropriate” to comment on a political matter. Asked if she’d be okay with “28 justices” on the high court, Jackson replied, “If that’s Congress’ determination, yes. The Congress makes political decisions like that.” Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who said he was “impressed” by Biden’s nominee, also said he was “disappointed” she is "reluctant to take a firm public stand" against a "court-packing scheme that represents a fundamental threat to the independence of the federal judiciary." Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., said his "top concern going into our meeting was ascertaining Judge Jackson's position on radical proposals to pack the Supreme Court," and that her answers were unsatisfactory. Democrats have accused McConnell and other Republicans of hypocrisy for demanding that denunciation from Jackson after they didn't hold Justice Amy Coney Barrett to the same standard in her October 2020 hearings. Asked by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah., if the Constitution says anything about the size of the court, Barrett said it "does not. That is a question left open to Congress." Sentencing record in child pornography cases Some Republicans attacked Jackson during her confirmation hearings by claiming that she handed down softer sentences in cases involving child pornography as a district court judge. They pointed to a handful of cases where she ordered sentences that were below recommendations. Sen Ted Cruz, R-Texas, repeatedly pushed Jackson on the issue and later published a report claiming that “in every single child pornography case that she heard; Judge Jackson sentenced the defendant below the sentencing guidelines.” McConnell said, “In the specific area of child exploitation crimes, the nominee was lenient to the extreme.” Jackson defended her record during her confirmation hearing, saying she takes "these cases very seriously as a mother" and considered a range of factors, including the recommendations of the parties involved, the evidence, the stories of the victims and other details. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who spent most of his questioning time on Jackson’s sentencing for such cases, said: “As I’ve said over and over, part of my concern with Judge Jackson is that she has not followed the prosecutors’ sentences.” The White House argued that her approach is firmly in the mainstream, pointing to judges appointed by Republican presidents who adhered to the same sentencing practices. "The truth is that every single one of the specific senators who joined in these bad-faith attacks on her sentencing record with respect to child pornography has voted for numerous Trump-nominated judges who sentenced defendants for the same crimes in the same fashion, below guidelines widely considered to be out of date across the judiciary and below what prosecutors sought, which is also a norm," said White House spokesman Andrew Bates. Democrats have opposed conservative judges For many, it was an unspoken grudge. For some, it was explicit. During the hearings, Graham peppered Jackson with questions about how Democrats treated past conservative judicial nominees, which she responded was outside her lane to address. His insinuation was simple: They treated our judges badly, so don't expect us to vote for theirs. "The people celebrating this nomination are the same people who filibustered and blocked President George W. Bush’s nominee Janice Rogers Brown" to an appeals court, said Graham, who mused last week that if Brown had been confirmed earlier, she could have ended up being the first Black woman on the Supreme Court. | |
|
||
| 1-9 of 9 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
