Trump and reshaping the judiciary


arsenal

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
346
Zero experience in ANY courtroom when appointed Solicitor General and then with a little over a year in the job appointed to Supreme Court.

Those who can do, those who can't teach.

Most inexperience Supreme Court Justice in history with pretty much zero experience of a court.
Justice Scalia recommended her and thought Obama should appoint her,when he had his first seat to fill.She was clearly suitable for a supreme court pick and is the more moderate of Obama's 2 justices.
 

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,118
As a practicing attorney in the US and thus an officer of the judiciary that has also done a fair amount of advisory work back home in Ireland, I find the current behaviours regarding stacking the judiciary with controversial hacks for political control of it all part of the breakdown of the US government unless a return to past customs or constitutional reforms occurs.

A key bulwark of any First World advanced nation is an independent judiciary, a key part of which includes experienced balanced POVs and temperaments. For example, I've argued cases on appeals before the Third Circult before Judge Maryanne Trump Barry (she's retired now) and Justice Samuel Alito who is now on the SCOTUS. They're conservatives, but not extreme ideological and/or politically partisan hacks. Alito and Trump Barry were very thoughtful, temperate, experienced jurists. I've argued before moderate and liberal minded ones too. Same thing.

Good appellate courts that write what's called 'en banc' appellate decisions or SCOTUS decisions combine the give-and-take debates that are necessary for quality decisions where you'll see each side try to filter out what's the best call they can collectively make. They also have the temperament and value for the traditions and true purpose of their jobs and a CV that gives them the tools.That's why you'll see someone like Alito or Kagan break 'to the other side'. Demagogues, extremists and/or party partisans in the public scream and holler, but those are the types who have improper motives with the judiciary because they want kangaroo courts to their liking and/or self-interest.

I've warned likewise that 'progressives' very well may look to stock the SCOTUS, but then again, this is what occurs in a breakdown when a democratic framework is abused for autocratic purposes. Mitch McConnell and the current GOP have trashed key traditions on appellate appointments and even flagrantly breached the Constitution to block a well esteemed and highly qualified centrist jurist like Merrick Garland to the SCOTUS and place Gorsuch there.

Is it no wonder then that progressives would want to rectify that theft of the Garland seat by stacking the court to 'cure' the Gorsuch seat the GOP 'stole'? The last time there was a court stocking threat was under FDR, and that's because Robber Baron partisan Republicans that brought in the Great Depression and massive social strife had created the infamous 'Lochner Court'...take a read of them and that if you have time. It's what happens when anyone Fs with the true purpose of the judiciary.

Pick your poison with any extremist and politically partisan kangaroo judiciary. Roland Freisler the infamous Nazi kangaroo jurist that formed the infamous kangaroo 'People's Court' modelled that BS upon Andrei Vyshinsky, the Chief Prosecutor of the Soviet purge trials. Venezuela? The Chavistas, like the Nazis, used democracy to destroy it by abusing key matters of trust in operating a democracy. Their motives? Like the Nazis, they wanted to unfairly control the government and thus the people. The current GOP is engaging in the same temptations. Look how the Nazi and Chavista governments also resulted and the Soviets and other autocratic rubbish like the Islamic theocracies, etc.
Firstly, thanks for that, really good and informative.

You have seen his sister up front in a professional capacity and been reasonably impressed

This prompts me to ask a question that has bugged me for a while

Where the hell did Trump and his personality come from?
His siblings seem pretty normal, relatively bright, and most of all understated?

I have no interest in any conspiracy theories, but has there ever been any suggestion might Trump be adopted or illegitimate?

He neither acts or remotely looks like any of his siblings, or in fact either of his parents
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
23,012
Justice Scalia recommended her and thought Obama should appoint her,when he had his first seat to fill.She was clearly suitable for a supreme court pick and is the more moderate of Obama's 2 justices.
No Court room experience, never sat as a Judge on anything ...................... unsuitable as hell.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,512
Strange how Fact was never important under Obama. Selling guns to criminals was deemed ok, letting Ambassadors die, starting wars.
You're just throwing stuff around here in smear, off topic and a selectively partisan manner.

For example, and I'm speculating here that you're referring to the ATF gunwalking scandal, it had to do with a bad idea that was unfortunately shared by a plethora of federal agents and started under Dubya.
ATF gunwalking scandal - ATF gunwalking scandal - Wikipedia
He didn't let ambassadors die and even the absurd theatrics of the Benghazi investigation didn't conclude so once the ruse device concluded by running its course when his Admin ended. Ambassadors have died under hostile circumstances in prior regimes including many Admins, including even the Dubya Admin before him.
Prior to Benghazi, were there 13 attacks on embassies and 60 deaths under President George W. Bush? - Politifact
Starting wars? Do you really want to go there? He was no warmonger and most certainly didn't contrive an elective, bogus premised and ill-planned war like Iraq. He didn't start Afghanistan and the negligence and half-arsed nature of it was handed to him. He didn't start Syria or Libya, and the latter was a UN and Arab League authorised mission in which he gathered that support and assured international engagement rather than taking the human, political and financial cost solely or mainly upon the US.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,512
No Court room experience, never sat as a Judge on anything ...................... unsuitable as hell.
False. As I explained, she worked directly for the courts as a judicial clerk (they are the researchers and ghost writers of the opinions), including the SCOTUS. Her CV is replete with appellate work on the federal executive and private sector, including before the SCOTUS. Quelle surprise...that expertise and other strong experiences that befit an appellate jurist that I explained led to her being appointed a Justice thereof.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,512
I will take Scalia's opinion on who is suitable to sit on a supreme court over you.
Scalia's background fairly mirrored hers. Here's the facts:
In the last quarter-century and more, no current member of the Supreme Court tried a lawsuit of any kind to a judge or jury. Almost none of the justices has ever tried a civil case to verdict. And before their honors became appellate judges, only one of their number served as a full-time trial judge.
A Trial Lawyer for the Supreme Court? - The Contingency

Attorneys are legal doctors--hence the Juris Doctorate degree. Like any other kind of doctor, they often specialise. You don't go to the podiatrist for dental work and you don't go to the dentist for feet work. Even amongst dentists, it's heavily sub-specialised now from the oral surgeon to the periodontal to the general maintenance guys.

As I explained to odie, she wouldn't be qualified for certain *other kinds* of work. She was a specialist in what she got appointed to do.

A DPP barrister trying criminal cases in Ireland isn't the type you seek for tax advice, a solicitor specialising in planning, family and/or contracts isn't who you seek for criminal cases, etc. Even if you practice in a few areas, you're never going to be a jack of all trades and there's many aspects of the law you'll simply need to refer if it comes across your path regarding area and/or aspect.

A SCOTUS jurist is best suited to be someone that's spent a career focusing on the broad application and interpretation of the varying areas of law that they will face in all the types of appeals they are asked to address on points of law. It's the realm of the lifelong legal bookworm. *They are not trial courts.*

The preparation, wheeling/dealing and stagecraft of litigation is a different animal, including any resulting appeals by such practitioners seeking appellate review of disputed application of law to facts. For example, a DPP barrister may know the criminal law, but how about handling a persnickety legal application and interpretation question in a tax, maritime, planning or patent law dispute? An appellate judge must be prepared for the wide spectrum of legal questions before them.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,512
Firstly, thanks for that, really good and informative.

You have seen his sister up front in a professional capacity and been reasonably impressed

This prompts me to ask a question that has bugged me for a while

Where the hell did Trump and his personality come from?
His siblings seem pretty normal, relatively bright, and most of all understated?

I have no interest in any conspiracy theories, but has there ever been any suggestion might Trump be adopted or illegitimate?

He neither acts or remotely looks like any of his siblings, or in fact either of his parents
Donald is who he is. There's even a legal birth certificate naming time, place and parentage. :)

Just my speculations here of course, but like any family, personalities simply often differ so that's one aspect why he's so different than his sister. His sister Maryanne is a no-nonsense and judicious person. His late brother Fred Jr was an extrovert that unfortunately died from alcoholism-related issues related to that kind of personality.

The key to how Donald's personality came to be lies here as well explained IMO:
Even as a child Trump was a horror: Throwing stones at a toddler in a playpen. Boasting he gave his teacher a black eye. Think the president's a bully now? You should’ve seen him as a boy! - Daily Mail
Read that and you'll see how is natural temperament in conjunction with his reared environment was a case of a fuelled fire.

I'd add to that article that his father was a not only a "dour, authoritarian patriarch" with a ruthless and ethically indifferent attitude towards people and business but also a deep-seated bigot. Fred Trump was arrested in an anti-Catholic immigrant KKK riot in 1927 and was constantly investigated and fined for housing discrimination. Donald's father also always pumped, propped him and covered Donald's arse in his reckless personal and business affairs to promote his image over reality. Donald's paternal Bavarian grandfather was also ethically flexible in business and had been kicked out of Bavaria for draft dodging.

Donald was also the fourth of five children and thus competed for the narcissistic attention he craved.

His mother was indeed originally a poor woman from Tong on the Isle of Lewis, and she lavishly spoiled and hyped Donald as overcompensation for her own poor upbringing.

All these kinds of factors led to the personality you see today.
 
Last edited:

Post-truth

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
924
Donald is who he is. There's even legal birth certificate naming time, place and parentage. :)

Just my speculations here of course, but like any family, personalities simply often differ so that's one aspect why he's so different than his sister. His sister Maryanne is a no-nonsense and judicious person. His late brother Fred Jr was an extrovert that unfortunately died from alcoholism-related issues related to that kind of personality.

The key to how Donald's personality came to be lies here as well explained IMO:
Even as a child Trump was a horror: Throwing stones at a toddler in a playpen. Boasting he gave his teacher a black eye. Think the president's a bully now? You should’ve seen him as a boy! - Daily Mail
Read that and already you see why as to his natural temperament.

I'd add to that article that his father was a not only a "dour, authoritarian patriarch" with a ruthless and ethically indfferent attitude towards people and business but also a deep-seated bigot. Fred Trump was arrested in an anti-Catholic immigrant KKK rally in 1927 and was constantly investigated and fined for housing discrimination. Donald's paternal Bavarian grandfather was also ethically flexible to put it kindly in business affairs and had been kicked out of Bavaria for draft dodging.

Donald was also the fourth of five children and thus competed for the narcissistic attention he craved.

His mother was indeed originally a poor woman from Tong on the Isle of Lewis, and she lavishly spoiled and hyped Donald as overcompensation for her own poor upbringing.

All these kind of factors led to the personality you see today.
Which child were you in the run of things? All kinds of factors made you crazy.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
14,512
Which child were you in the run of things? All kinds of factors made you crazy.
I've one younger brother. We're extremely close, but obviously also different in personality in key respects. I have an extremely large extended family though, not so uncommon for the Irish as we know. My parents chose to take a break from that 'tradition', hehe.
 

valamhic

Banned
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
19,843
Donald is who he is. There's even a legal birth certificate naming time, place and parentage. :)

Just my speculations here of course, but like any family, personalities simply often differ so that's one aspect why he's so different than his sister. His sister Maryanne is a no-nonsense and judicious person. His late brother Fred Jr was an extrovert that unfortunately died from alcoholism-related issues related to that kind of personality.

The key to how Donald's personality came to be lies here as well explained IMO:
Even as a child Trump was a horror: Throwing stones at a toddler in a playpen. Boasting he gave his teacher a black eye. Think the president's a bully now? You should’ve seen him as a boy! - Daily Mail
Read that and you'll see how is natural temperament in conjunction with his reared environment was a case of a fuelled fire.

I'd add to that article that his father was a not only a "dour, authoritarian patriarch" with a ruthless and ethically indifferent attitude towards people and business but also a deep-seated bigot. Fred Trump was arrested in an anti-Catholic immigrant KKK riot in 1927 and was constantly investigated and fined for housing discrimination. Donald's father also always pumped, propped him and covered Donald's arse in his reckless personal and business affairs to promote his image over reality. Donald's paternal Bavarian grandfather was also ethically flexible in business and had been kicked out of Bavaria for draft dodging.

Donald was also the fourth of five children and thus competed for the narcissistic attention he craved.

His mother was indeed originally a poor woman from Tong on the Isle of Lewis, and she lavishly spoiled and hyped Donald as overcompensation for her own poor upbringing.

All these kinds of factors led to the personality you see today.
I don't know much about Trump's father's side because I don't speak Dutch, but I do speak English and Gaelic and I can report that Trump's great grand father wore nothing under his kilt. He had wild red curly hair too and freckles and used heather instead of toilet paper. Aren't we Irish lucky we are not Scotch!
 

Betson

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
16,707
Can anyone confirm if we have any proof that RBG is still alive , for all we know there is a weekend at Bernie's operation afoot from her aides.
 

Jack Walsh

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2015
Messages
9,118
Can anyone confirm if we have any proof that RBG is still alive , for all we know there is a weekend at Bernie's operation afoot from her aides.
I can confirm that she is indeed alive and definitely productive even though recovering from major surgery.
I think we can also be pretty certain that despite being curtailed, she does more productive work than spend 60% of her waking hours on a couch or bed watching cable TV and tweeting,

The irony of Trump cultists squealing for her to stand down due to her lack of productivity/availability to perform all her normal workload, is as usual , breathtaking in its hypocrisy.

Trump spends 60% of his time Monday to Friday effectively doing nothing remotely productive, and then after such a heavy schedule needs a weekly holiday in Florida for 3 days to "unwind" from all the stress of channel surfing.

The guy is a big sick joke Bets, and what's more you know it.
 

roryconnor

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
3,163
Democrats are Now Targeted like Brett Kavanaugh

Posted by Kilbarry1
Julie Swetnick was one of Kavanaugh's 3 main accusers. The first accuser was Christine Blasey Ford. According to the article:

...Ford named three people who were at the high school party where Kavanaugh allegedly pushed her into a room, onto a bed, attempted to remove her clothes, groped her, and covered her mouth when she tried to scream. None of the three remembered a party matching her description. People who knew Ford also told Senate and FBI investigators that she never mentioned the incident or any fear of flying or anxiety involving doors, as she claimed....

The second was Deborah Ramirez
...Ramirez, too, named people who supposedly witnessed Kavanaugh expose himself to her in college, yet these people either denied such an event ever took place or said they weren’t even at the party. The New Yorker, which originally ran Ramirez’s claims, admitted it could not find anyone to corroborate her story. The New York Times later wrote that it passed on the Ramirez story because it couldn’t find anyone to corroborate her account....

And the third, Julie Swetnick AND her lawyer, have been referred for criminal prosecution!
Dr Ford's accusations must also be in doubt given her therapist who helped her 'remember' the 'events' is involved in hypnotherapy and recovered memory. Recovered memory is a highly controversial psyhological technique, and has played a leading role in the Day Care centre trials in the 1980s when many were convicted of child abuse and in later years had their convictions overturned.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/08/second-woman-accuses-virginia-lt-gov-justin-fairfax-of-sexual-assault.html
Second Woman Accuses Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax of Sexual Assault, Calls on him to Resign

A woman said Friday that Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax raped her nearly two decades ago.

Watson's statement claims she was attacked by Fairfax in 2000 in a "premeditated and aggressive" manner while the two were students at Duke University.
"I deny this latest unsubstantiated allegation. It is demonstrably false. I have never forced myself on anyone ever," Fairfax says in response.....


It's happening to the Democrats now. And the reason the LIEUTENANT Governor is being accused is that the Governor may have to resign following a photo of him in blackface in his 1980s High School Yearbook! A High School Yearbook also featured in the hysteria re Brett Kavanaugh. And this guy is not only Democrat but black but it looks like the women are tops in the Victimhood stakes!

In a way it's good that the Democrats are on the receiving end. Will they learn any lessons about using unsubstantiated decades old allegations to demonize an opponent? OR does this just mean that everybody and anybody can be a target of MeToo?
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
51,929
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/08/second-woman-accuses-virginia-lt-gov-justin-fairfax-of-sexual-assault.html
Second Woman Accuses Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax of Sexual Assault, Calls on him to Resign

A woman said Friday that Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax raped her nearly two decades ago.

Watson's statement claims she was attacked by Fairfax in 2000 in a "premeditated and aggressive" manner while the two were students at Duke University.
"I deny this latest unsubstantiated allegation. It is demonstrably false. I have never forced myself on anyone ever," Fairfax says in response.....


It's happening to the Democrats now. And the reason the LIEUTENANT Governor is being accused is that the Governor may have to resign following a photo of him in blackface in his 1980s High School Yearbook! A High School Yearbook also featured in the hysteria re Brett Kavanaugh. And this guy is not only Democrat but black but it looks like the women are tops in the Victimhood stakes!

In a way it's good that the Democrats are on the receiving end. Will they learn any lessons about using unsubstantiated decades old allegations to demonize an opponent? OR does this just mean that everybody and anybody can be a target of MeToo?
The Dems are being hoist on their own petard. It will make it harder for them to play the #MeToo card against Trump in 2020 regard his accusers.
 
Top