Ok, I don't like Judge Jackson's answer about the child porn cases

[Seymour Flops]

Here's the appropriate answer to all questions about either "why did you give this offender a light sentence," or "why do you in general give offenders light sentences?"

"All of my sentences were within the minimum and maximum sentence guidelines for the given offense. While they were influenced by recommendations by attorneys for the state and for the defendant, they were my decisions in every case and I take responsibility for them. I'll be happy to recount my deliberations on any specific case, as best as I can remember them, or refresh my memory with any documents available. It won't be a short answer, but you control your time, Senator."

Clearly, the judge was of a mind that downloading and viewing child porn is not on the same immoral plane as being the one abusing the children to produce the porn. We may disagree with that. I certainly do. But it is no more radical opinion than the near universal American belief that buying products made by child/slave labor is not on the same moral plane as employing children in factories or using slave labor to produce.

Clearly, this is a Biden nominee that the right does not like. What should we do, wait for that Biden nominee that the right will like? Conservatives should be happy that Team Biden picked a clearly under-qualified judge because they based their choice on demographics and ideology. She will be no intellectual match for a Justice like Clarence Thomas, chosen first for his qualifications and second for his skin color.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Here's the appropriate answer to all questions about either "why did you give this offender a light sentence," or "why do you in general give offenders light sentences?"

"All of my sentences were within the minimum and maximum sentence guidelines for the given offense. While they were influenced by recommendations by attorneys for the state and for the defendant, they were my decisions in every case and I take responsibility for them. I'll be happy to recount my deliberations on any specific case, as best as I can remember them, or refresh my memory with any documents available. It won't be a short answer, but you control your time, Senator."

Clearly, the judge was of a mind that downloading and viewing child porn is not on the same immoral plane as being the one abusing the children to produce the porn. We may disagree with that. I certainly do. But it is no more radical opinion than the near universal American belief that buying products made by child/slave labor is not on the same moral plane as employing children in factories or using slave labor to produce.

Clearly, this is a Biden nominee that the right does not like. What should we do, wait for that Biden nominee that the right will like? Conservatives should be happy that Team Biden picked a clearly under-qualified judge because they based their choice on demographics and ideology. She will be no intellectual match for a Justice like Clarence Thomas, chosen first for his qualifications and second for his skin color.

The reason is US Republican Senators never let the nominee response to their leading questions. Something people like you can't comprehend.

 

[Seymour Flops]

The reason is US Republican Senators never let the nominee response to their leading questions. Something people like you can't comprehend.

Wow. Talk about a canned response.

How in the world would you get that from the OP?

 

[beagle9]

Here's the appropriate answer to all questions about either "why did you give this offender a light sentence," or "why do you in general give offenders light sentences?"

"All of my sentences were within the minimum and maximum sentence guidelines for the given offense. While they were influenced by recommendations by attorneys for the state and for the defendant, they were my decisions in every case and I take responsibility for them. I'll be happy to recount my deliberations on any specific case, as best as I can remember them, or refresh my memory with any documents available. It won't be a short answer, but you control your time, Senator."

Clearly, the judge was of a mind that downloading and viewing child porn is not on the same immoral plane as being the one abusing the children to produce the porn. We may disagree with that. I certainly do. But it is no more radical opinion than the near universal American belief that buying products made by child/slave labor is not on the same moral plane as employing children in factories or using slave labor to produce.

Clearly, this is a Biden nominee that the right does not like. What should we do, wait for that Biden nominee that the right will like? Conservatives should be happy that Team Biden picked a clearly under-qualified judge because they based their choice on demographics and ideology. She will be no intellectual match for a Justice like Clarence Thomas, chosen first for his qualifications and second for his skin color.

Ted Cruz alledgedly shows Jackson a picture of his cat, and next he ask her "what is this Mrs.Jackson" ? She responds "how the heck should I know"... ROTFLMBO.. kidding but y'all get the point. lol

A judge she should not be. Period.

 

[FA_Q2]

Meh. The details of the case itself are seriously lacking so complaining about the rulings is mostly based of a lack of facts than anything that is particularly egregious. I am unsure what I think of the main case that was covered, it seems like the sentence there was pretty damn light but overall it seems a lot of bitching with little content behind it. Her record of getting overturned is more concerning to me considering that has a direct tie to her new job but it is, again, well outside of what I would call disqualifying.

Essentially this is a left wing judge replacing another left wing judge. It was always a rubber stamp hearing and nothing that has been brought up is worth fighting said rubber stamp. it is all grandstanding.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Wow. Talk about a canned response.

How in the world would you get that from the OP?

QUESTION TO OP: "Ok, I don't like Judge Jackson's answer about the child porn cases"

RESPONSE TO YOU: You are out of touch with the OP and Reallity.

 

[Muhammed]

Ted Cruz alledgedly shows Jackson a picture of his cat, and next he ask her "what is this Mrs.Jackson" ? She responds "how the heck should I know"

How the heck would Token possibly know it's a cat? After all, she's not a biologist.

 

[Seymour Flops]

QUESTION TO OP: "Ok, I don't like Judge Jackson's answer about the child porn cases"

No, that was the title of the OP, not a QUESTION TO OP.

RESPONSE TO YOU: You are out of touch with the OP and Reallity.

Makes even less sense, which I wouldn’t have thought possible.

Use your words. Do you like her answer about the child porn so you disagree with me? Do you dislike them for a different reason, so you disagree with the OP?

 

[Seymour Flops]

How the heck would Token possibly know it's a cat? After all, she's not a biologist.

Of course not. She has little background in zoology, and animal husbandry, sorry spouse-andry as far as I know.

We will never really know what a picture like that shows until we learn to communicate with non-human persons so they can tell us what they identifify as.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Here's the appropriate answer to all questions about either "why did you give this offender a light sentence," or "why do you in general give offenders light sentences?"

"All of my sentences were within the minimum and maximum sentence guidelines for the given offense. While they were influenced by recommendations by attorneys for the state and for the defendant, they were my decisions in every case and I take responsibility for them. I'll be happy to recount my deliberations on any specific case, as best as I can remember them, or refresh my memory with any documents available. It won't be a short answer, but you control your time, Senator."

Clearly, the judge was of a mind that downloading and viewing child porn is not on the same immoral plane as being the one abusing the children to produce the porn. We may disagree with that. I certainly do. But it is no more radical opinion than the near universal American belief that buying products made by child/slave labor is not on the same moral plane as employing children in factories or using slave labor to produce.

Clearly, this is a Biden nominee that the right does not like. What should we do, wait for that Biden nominee that the right will like? Conservatives should be happy that Team Biden picked a clearly under-qualified judge because they based their choice on demographics and ideology. She will be no intellectual match for a Justice like Clarence Thomas, chosen first for his qualifications and second for his skin color.

So she's "under-qualified" because she's black or because she's a woman or both?

 

[beagle9]

So she's "under-qualified" because she's black or because she's a woman or both?

Neither... It's because of her answers period. You want to make it about those two in hopes for a win, but qualifications matter.

 

[Resnic]

Here's the appropriate answer to all questions about either "why did you give this offender a light sentence," or "why do you in general give offenders light sentences?"

"All of my sentences were within the minimum and maximum sentence guidelines for the given offense. While they were influenced by recommendations by attorneys for the state and for the defendant, they were my decisions in every case and I take responsibility for them. I'll be happy to recount my deliberations on any specific case, as best as I can remember them, or refresh my memory with any documents available. It won't be a short answer, but you control your time, Senator."

Clearly, the judge was of a mind that downloading and viewing child porn is not on the same immoral plane as being the one abusing the children to produce the porn. We may disagree with that. I certainly do. But it is no more radical opinion than the near universal American belief that buying products made by child/slave labor is not on the same moral plane as employing children in factories or using slave labor to produce.

Clearly, this is a Biden nominee that the right does not like. What should we do, wait for that Biden nominee that the right will like? Conservatives should be happy that Team Biden picked a clearly under-qualified judge because they based their choice on demographics and ideology. She will be no intellectual match for a Justice like Clarence Thomas, chosen first for his qualifications and second for his skin color.

Viewing child porn isn't the same as the ones doing it?

So you're actually arguing that "child porn isn't as immoral if you're watching it vs the one doing it?"

Child porn either making it or watching it is the most immoral thing a person can do. Either case it's a sick and twisted person that has no place in society. There is absolutely no excuse for it at all. There is no gray area, it's fucking child porn.

Any leniency on it is a step towards normalizing it. And that's one subject there is nothing normal about it, at all.

Disney is opposing desantis bill saying we shouldn't be keeping small children from learning about gay sex in school, schools saying parents shouldn't be allowed to have a say in whether they tell their child they are a tranny, a supreme court judge taking lax judgements against child sex offenders, a professor online saying pedophiles are misunderstood, and you saying watching child porn isn't as bad as performing it. It's all part of a growing problem.

And you tried to rationalize your defense of kiddie porn by comparing it to Chinese slaves.

Maybe I'm overly harsh over something that happened to me as a kid, I don't know, but anyone who comitts it, takes viewership in it or defends it should be taken out back and shot in the head.

 

[Rye Catcher]

No, that was the title of the OP, not a QUESTION TO OP.

Makes even less sense, which I wouldn’t have thought possible.

Use your words. Do you like her answer about the child porn so you disagree with me? Do you dislike them for a different reason, so you disagree with the OP?

She didn't get to explain the questions by the Republican Senators who interrupted her effort to fully respond. Either you are too biased / racist or to dumb to comprehend complex and loaded questioning were answered for her by Cruz, Graham, Lee, Sasse, Hawley, Cotton and Kennedy before she finished her comprehensive response.

 

[theHawk]

The reason is US Republican Senators never let the nominee response to their leading questions. Something people like you can't comprehend.

Ok, groomer.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Viewing child porn isn't the same as the ones doing it?

So you're actually arguing that "child porn isn't as immoral if you're watching it vs the one doing it?"

No.

You misread my post completely. I said that Judge Jackson believed that viewing child porn isn't the same as producing.

Child porn either making it or watching it is the most immoral thing a person can do. Either case it's a sick and twisted person that has no place in society. There is absolutely no excuse for it at all. There is no gray area, it's fucking child porn.

Any leniency on it is a step towards normalizing it. And that's one subject there is nothing normal about it, at all.

Disney is opposing desantis bill saying we shouldn't be keeping small children from learning about gay sex in school, schools saying parents shouldn't be allowed to have a say in whether they tell their child they are a tranny, a supreme court judge taking lax judgements against child sex offenders, a professor online saying pedophiles are misunderstood, and you saying watching child porn isn't as bad as performing it. It's all part of a growing problem.

And you tried to rationalize your defense of kiddie porn by comparing it to Chinese slaves.

Maybe I'm overly harsh over something that happened to me as a kid, I don't know, but anyone who comitts it, takes viewership in it or defends it should be taken out back and shot in the head.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience as a kid. Also sorry that your misreading of my post led you to respond incorrectly.

 

[Resnic]

No.

You misread my post completely. I said that Judge Jackson believed that viewing child porn isn't the same as producing.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience as a kid. Also sorry that your misreading of my post led you to respond incorrectly.

Well what happened happened, and a lot worse has happened to other kids so I count myself lucky. And I was lucky enough to have had an uncle that prepared me for it and what to do in response. I just always regret that I never said anything. And I regret years later when I got older I was unable to find him.

And it was your line "Clearly, the judge was of a mind that downloading and viewing child porn is not on the same immoral plane as being the one abusing the children to produce the porn. We may disagree with that. I certainly do."

And after re reading I see maybe I did misinterpret what you meant. It reads like you're agreeing with her statement that they aren't the same things at all, viewing and doing it

So it was my mistake.

 

[miketx]

All that matters is that she said she does not know what a woman is. For that reason alone she should not be allowed near a court.

 

[beagle9]

All that matters is that she said she does not know what a woman is. For that reason alone she should not be allowed near a court.

She refused to define or clarify what a woman is, and yes that should have been enough to immediately disqualify her on that question alone. I don't care who you are in this world, if you've became afraid to define what a woman is, then you are an idiot that should have been disqualified in wanting to become a judge let alone a S.C.J.

Dam this woke bull crap or politically correct bull crap that is now climbing to the top of the power structure in this country. I don't give a damned what color or gender one is. Have we lost our mind's ??

 

[Likkmee]

Ted Cruz alledgedly shows Jackson a picture of his cat, and next he ask her "what is this Mrs.Jackson" ? She responds "how the heck should I know"... ROTFLMBO.. kidding but y'all get the point. lol

A judge she should not be. Period.

LIAR !
She said "I'm not a veterinarian"