Trump nominates another pip as federal judge!

[KissMy]

Trump's Stupid Inexperienced Idealog Judicial Pick STUMPED on Basic Questions. Trump is absolutely the worst judge of character, knowledge & experience. Look how many of his picks were arrested months after he chose them. 10 already resigned his cabinet in 10 months.

 

[miketx]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He should have known about them. He could have boned up on the subject. He clearly is not qualified.

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

Yeah but if that's the case, the liberal who started this thread couldn't bash a conservative. Maybe they'll find a sex scandal on him if the "incompetent" lie doesn't stick? Then the judge can jump off a bridge for fear his career and marriage will be ruined by kangaroo-evidence dumped in the liberal media? I think the widow of the representative should sue whatever media outlets participated in driving her husband to suicide, regardless of the merits of the un-tried accusations. A trial is necessary before the de facto onerous mental spiral of a guilty verdict should be allowed to descend.

He couldn't answer a single question about pretty basic litigation law. Standards of evidence. Basic court procedure. Basic motions.

And he couldn't answer any of them. Yet he's to be a federal judge?

Many judges have never been litigators. Not all lawyers go to court.

Or even taken depositions? He is clearly not qualified.

You say he could have boned up on them, so if he does then he still wont be qualified to you will he? What if he "Came out" in favor of all the lgbtxzy sickos and was all for late term butchery? You'd crawl all over that!

 

[Lewdog]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He should have known about them. He could have boned up on the subject. He clearly is not qualified.

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

Yeah but if that's the case, the liberal who started this thread couldn't bash a conservative. Maybe they'll find a sex scandal on him if the "incompetent" lie doesn't stick? Then the judge can jump off a bridge for fear his career and marriage will be ruined by kangaroo-evidence dumped in the liberal media? I think the widow of the representative should sue whatever media outlets participated in driving her husband to suicide, regardless of the merits of the un-tried accusations. A trial is necessary before the de facto onerous mental spiral of a guilty verdict should be allowed to descend.

He couldn't answer a single question about pretty basic litigation law. Standards of evidence. Basic court procedure. Basic motions.

And he couldn't answer any of them. Yet he's to be a federal judge?

Many judges have never been litigators. Not all lawyers go to court.

Or even taken depositions? He is clearly not qualified.

You say he could have boned up on them, so if he does then he still wont be qualified to you will he? What if he "Came out" in favor of all the lgbtxzy sickos and was all for late term butchery? You'd crawl all over that!

The stuff he was asked is basic law, that he should have known from LAW SCHOOL. You know, the place you go to learn LAW, like when your career is in LAW. Would you go to see a doctor that had to look up where the appendix is located because he didn't know?

 

[miketx]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He should have known about them. He could have boned up on the subject. He clearly is not qualified.

Yeah but if that's the case, the liberal who started this thread couldn't bash a conservative. Maybe they'll find a sex scandal on him if the "incompetent" lie doesn't stick? Then the judge can jump off a bridge for fear his career and marriage will be ruined by kangaroo-evidence dumped in the liberal media? I think the widow of the representative should sue whatever media outlets participated in driving her husband to suicide, regardless of the merits of the un-tried accusations. A trial is necessary before the de facto onerous mental spiral of a guilty verdict should be allowed to descend.

He couldn't answer a single question about pretty basic litigation law. Standards of evidence. Basic court procedure. Basic motions.

And he couldn't answer any of them. Yet he's to be a federal judge?

Many judges have never been litigators. Not all lawyers go to court.

Or even taken depositions? He is clearly not qualified.

You say he could have boned up on them, so if he does then he still wont be qualified to you will he? What if he "Came out" in favor of all the lgbtxzy sickos and was all for late term butchery? You'd crawl all over that!

The stuff he was asked is basic law, that he should have known from LAW SCHOOL. You know, the place you go to learn LAW, like when your career is in LAW. Would you go to see a doctor that had to look up where the appendix is located because he didn't know?

Comparison fallacy fail, fool.

 

[miketx]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

Yeah but if that's the case, the liberal who started this thread couldn't bash a conservative. Maybe they'll find a sex scandal on him if the "incompetent" lie doesn't stick? Then the judge can jump off a bridge for fear his career and marriage will be ruined by kangaroo-evidence dumped in the liberal media? I think the widow of the representative should sue whatever media outlets participated in driving her husband to suicide, regardless of the merits of the un-tried accusations. A trial is necessary before the de facto onerous mental spiral of a guilty verdict should be allowed to descend.

He couldn't answer a single question about pretty basic litigation law. Standards of evidence. Basic court procedure. Basic motions.

And he couldn't answer any of them. Yet he's to be a federal judge?

Perhaps they should have asked him questions he knowed about?

 

[Skylar]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

Yeah but if that's the case, the liberal who started this thread couldn't bash a conservative. Maybe they'll find a sex scandal on him if the "incompetent" lie doesn't stick? Then the judge can jump off a bridge for fear his career and marriage will be ruined by kangaroo-evidence dumped in the liberal media? I think the widow of the representative should sue whatever media outlets participated in driving her husband to suicide, regardless of the merits of the un-tried accusations. A trial is necessary before the de facto onerous mental spiral of a guilty verdict should be allowed to descend.

He couldn't answer a single question about pretty basic litigation law. Standards of evidence. Basic court procedure. Basic motions.

And he couldn't answer any of them. Yet he's to be a federal judge?

Perhaps they should have asked him questions he knowed about?

A qualified judicial nominee could have answered these fairly basic questions on standards of evidence, court procedures or basic motions.

And should.

 

[Lewdog]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He should have known about them. He could have boned up on the subject. He clearly is not qualified.

He couldn't answer a single question about pretty basic litigation law. Standards of evidence. Basic court procedure. Basic motions.

And he couldn't answer any of them. Yet he's to be a federal judge?

Many judges have never been litigators. Not all lawyers go to court.

Or even taken depositions? He is clearly not qualified.

You say he could have boned up on them, so if he does then he still wont be qualified to you will he? What if he "Came out" in favor of all the lgbtxzy sickos and was all for late term butchery? You'd crawl all over that!

The stuff he was asked is basic law, that he should have known from LAW SCHOOL. You know, the place you go to learn LAW, like when your career is in LAW. Would you go to see a doctor that had to look up where the appendix is located because he didn't know?

Comparison fallacy fail, fool.

Wrong. A person's life is in just as much peril when they are in front of a judge that doesn't understand the simple rules of LAW. Innocent people's lives could be put in the hands of a judge that doesn't know what the fuck he is doing.

 

[miketx]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He didn't know the answers to ANY of the questions. Judging by his lack of legal knowledge and inability to answer the questions, I would be a better candidate than him.

God knows which video Mikey was watching.

Those were all questions a second year law student would have aced.

I went to school on GM 6L80 transmissions and woundln't know where the transducer was today if you asked me. I can still fix it though. Has reality ever touched any of you?

 

[miketx]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He should have known about them. He could have boned up on the subject. He clearly is not qualified.

Many judges have never been litigators. Not all lawyers go to court.

Or even taken depositions? He is clearly not qualified.

You say he could have boned up on them, so if he does then he still wont be qualified to you will he? What if he "Came out" in favor of all the lgbtxzy sickos and was all for late term butchery? You'd crawl all over that!

The stuff he was asked is basic law, that he should have known from LAW SCHOOL. You know, the place you go to learn LAW, like when your career is in LAW. Would you go to see a doctor that had to look up where the appendix is located because he didn't know?

Comparison fallacy fail, fool.

Wrong. A person's life is in just as much peril when they are in front of a judge that doesn't understand the simple rules of LAW. Innocent people's lives could be put in the hands of a judge that doesn't know what the fuck he is doing.

So long as they are democrats I don't care, even if your lie is true.

 

[Lewdog]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He didn't know the answers to ANY of the questions. Judging by his lack of legal knowledge and inability to answer the questions, I would be a better candidate than him.

God knows which video Mikey was watching.

Those were all questions a second year law student would have aced.

I went to school on GM 6L80 transmissions and woundln't know where the transducer was today if you asked me. I can still fix it though. Has reality ever touched any of you?

Now THAT is a failure of epic proportions when it comes to comparisons. We aren't talking about a transmission, we are talking about legal processes that require you to know what something is, and be able to recall and understand the concept while in progress.

You don't have to know the name of a part on a transmission as long as you know where it goes, what it does, and how to fix it.

 

[Lewdog]

He should have known about them. He could have boned up on the subject. He clearly is not qualified.

Or even taken depositions? He is clearly not qualified.

You say he could have boned up on them, so if he does then he still wont be qualified to you will he? What if he "Came out" in favor of all the lgbtxzy sickos and was all for late term butchery? You'd crawl all over that!

The stuff he was asked is basic law, that he should have known from LAW SCHOOL. You know, the place you go to learn LAW, like when your career is in LAW. Would you go to see a doctor that had to look up where the appendix is located because he didn't know?

Comparison fallacy fail, fool.

Wrong. A person's life is in just as much peril when they are in front of a judge that doesn't understand the simple rules of LAW. Innocent people's lives could be put in the hands of a judge that doesn't know what the fuck he is doing.

So long as they are democrats I don't care, even if your lie is true.

You took another wrong turn at Albuquerque.

 

[Eaglewings]

Trump's Stupid Inexperienced Idealog Judicial Pick STUMPED on Basic Questions. Trump is absolutely the worst judge of character, knowledge & experience. Look how many of his picks were arrested months after he chose them. 10 already resigned his cabinet in 10 months.

This clown couldn't even answer the basic questions that a 1st year law student would know... Why is he even being considered?

 

[BULLDOG]

He didn't fail to answer, he answered all the questions and some he did not know the answers to.

He didn't know the answers to ANY of the questions. Judging by his lack of legal knowledge and inability to answer the questions, I would be a better candidate than him.

God knows which video Mikey was watching.

Those were all questions a second year law student would have aced.

I went to school on GM 6L80 transmissions and woundln't know where the transducer was today if you asked me. I can still fix it though. Has reality ever touched any of you?

So, if you had a broken transmission that wasn't necessarily a 6L80, would you take it to someone who knew what all the parts were, how they worked, and how they fit together, or someone who didn't know here the transducer was?

 

[KissMy]

Trump's Stupid Inexperienced Idealog Judicial Pick STUMPED on Basic Questions. Trump is absolutely the worst judge of character, knowledge & experience. Look how many of his picks were arrested months after he chose them. 10 already resigned his cabinet in 10 months.

This clown couldn't even answer the basic questions that a 1st year law student would know... Why is he even being considered?

Trump only looks for LOYALTY to Trump & PRAISE Trump. No Experience, Expertise, Talent or Brain Required. Yes Men Only!

 

[Oldstyle]

Trump's Stupid Inexperienced Idealog Judicial Pick STUMPED on Basic Questions. Trump is absolutely the worst judge of character, knowledge & experience. Look how many of his picks were arrested months after he chose them. 10 already resigned his cabinet in 10 months.

This clown couldn't even answer the basic questions that a 1st year law student would know... Why is he even being considered?

The "clown" your describing graduated magna cum laude and was a member of the law review at the University of Virginia Law School. He does not have a background in litigation which he readily admitted. There is no requirement that a judge DOES have such a background nor that he even be a lawyer!

 

[KissMy]

Trump's Stupid Inexperienced Idealog Judicial Pick STUMPED on Basic Questions. Trump is absolutely the worst judge of character, knowledge & experience. Look how many of his picks were arrested months after he chose them. 10 already resigned his cabinet in 10 months.

This clown couldn't even answer the basic questions that a 1st year law student would know... Why is he even being considered?

The "clown" your describing graduated magna cum laude and was a member of the law review at the University of Virginia Law School. He does not have a background in litigation which he readily admitted. There is no requirement that a judge DOES have such a background nor that he even be a lawyer!

He has ZERO real world experience looking a person in the eye in a trial to determine guilt.

 

[2aguy]

Hoo-Boy indeed! Where does Trump FIND these unqualified morons? Trump has the "best people" - ALWAYS the BEST people!

During his confirmation testimony, Matthew Spencer Petersen, a nominee for U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia who currently serves as a commissioner on the Federal Election Commission, appeared ignorant of several legal motions, according to a video Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse posted to Twitter on Thursday. “MUST WATCH: Republican @SenJohnKennedy asks one of @realDonaldTrump’s US District Judge nominees basic questions of law & he can’t answer a single one,” Whitehouse tweeted. “Hoo-boy.”​

“The Best People”: Trump Nominee Fails to Answer Basic Legal Questions

Yeah...no.....you have no idea what you are talking about or who this man is....

Is Ridicule of Federal Judge Nominee Justified?

Matthew Petersen is not a litigator. He is a member of the Federal Election Commission and has expertise with respect to election law:

Matthew S. Petersen was nominated to the Federal Election Commission by President George W. Bush on June 12, 2008, and unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate on June 24, 2008.

From 2005 until his appointment to the Commission, Mr. Petersen served as Republican chief counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. In this capacity, Mr. Petersen provided counsel on issues relating to federal campaign finance and election administration laws as well as the Standing Rules of the Senate.

Prior to this, Mr. Petersen served as counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on House Administration. During his tenure, Mr. Petersen was extensively involved in the crafting of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (“HAVA”) and the House-Senate negotiations that culminated in HAVA’s passage. From 1999 to 2002, Mr. Petersen specialized in election and campaign finance law at the law firm of Wiley Rein LLP in Washington, DC.

The lawyers who have the most thorough understanding of substantive areas of the law–real estate, taxes, corporate governance and so on–are generally not litigators. Do we really want to say that all of these non-litigators–the majority of lawyers–are unfit to be trial judges?

During my career as a lawyer, I took thousands of depositions, argued countless motions, and tried 100 jury cases. Would that experience give me a leg up as a newly-appointed trial court judge? Of course. But does it mean that one of my non-litigator partners would be disqualified from such an appointment, no matter how good a lawyer he or she might be? I don’t think so.

I know what the Daubert standard and motions in limine are, although I have no idea what the difference between the two abstention doctrines mentioned by Senator Kennedy might be. But these are things that come with being a litigator. Newly-appointed judges attend “judge school,” where they are taught the finer points of the rules of evidence. Still, trial judges are like basketball referees. I’ve never met two trial judges who had exactly the same interpretation of the rules.

Most lawyers who are appointed to the bench in both federal and state courts have backgrounds in litigation. No doubt that is appropriate. However, it is by no means rare for non-litigator lawyers to be appointed, or win election, to the bench. In my opinion, that is a good thing. I don’t see why a minority of lawyers–litigators–should have a monopoly on the bench.

I don’t know whether Matthew Petersen will make a good judge or not. But in my view, he doesn’t deserve to be ridiculed because his highly-successful law caree

 

[Oldstyle]

Trump's Stupid Inexperienced Idealog Judicial Pick STUMPED on Basic Questions. Trump is absolutely the worst judge of character, knowledge & experience. Look how many of his picks were arrested months after he chose them. 10 already resigned his cabinet in 10 months.

This clown couldn't even answer the basic questions that a 1st year law student would know... Why is he even being considered?

The "clown" your describing graduated magna cum laude and was a member of the law review at the University of Virginia Law School. He does not have a background in litigation which he readily admitted. There is no requirement that a judge DOES have such a background nor that he even be a lawyer!

He has ZERO real world experience looking a person in the eye in a trial to determine guilt.

You determine guilt by "looking a person in the eye"? Seriously? The truth is...every single one of us has real world experience determining whether or not someone is guilty of things! It's why we're allowed to sit on juries and make that call. If only litigators had the ability to discern guilt or innocence then our system of trial by jury would be a thing of the past!

 

[Political Junky]

Will Donald Trump Destroy the Presidency?

Donald trump is testing the institution of the presidency unlike any of his 43 predecessors. We have never had a president so ill-informed about the nature of his office, so openly mendacious, so self-destructive, or so brazen in his abusive attacks on the courts, the press, Congress (including members of his own party), and even senior officials within his own administration. Trump is a Frankenstein’s monster of past presidents’ worst attributes: Andrew Jackson’s rage; Millard Fillmore’s bigotry; James Buchanan’s incompetence and spite; Theodore Roosevelt’s self-aggrandizement; Richard Nixon’s paranoia, insecurity, and indifference to law; and Bill Clinton’s lack of self-control and reflexive dishonesty.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Now this what Juridical activism looks like.

This is bullshit